March 4, 2011
Senator Stephen Brewer, Chair
Senate Committee on Ways and Means
Representative Brian Dempsey, Chair
House Committee on Ways and Means
Re: FY 2012 Budget
Dear Chairman Brewer, Chairman Dempsey and Honorable Committee Members:
On behalf of the membership of the Association for Behavioral Healthcare (ABH), thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Ways and Means Fiscal Year 2012 budget. As you may know, ABH is a statewide association representing eighty-four community-based mental health and addiction treatment provider organizations. Our members are the primary providers of publicly-funded behavioral healthcare services in the Commonwealth, serving approximately 117,000 Massachusetts residents daily and employing 22,000 people.
As you consider the FY 2012 budget, we strongly urge you to ensure that community-based behavioral health services are held harmless. As we explain below, our priorities for the Fiscal Year 2012 budget are as follows:
· Level fund the Bureau of Substance Abuse Services at $83,485,802.
· Reject the cuts to the Department of Mental Health’s (DMH) Clubhouse Services ($3 million) and DMH’s Children/Flex Supports Services ($2 million) proposed by Governor Patrick.
· Require that the Department of Mental Health develop a specific plan for the state’s mental health system before closing any additional inpatient beds. This should include a plan for how placements in the community system for impacted clients will be funded.
· Preserve vital MassHealth-funded behavioral health services.
Stability for Community Services
ABH strongly supports the philosophy of Community First – that whenever possible, individuals should live and be served in community settings, with minimum lengths of stay in acute and continuing care hospitals, and maximum diversion from inpatient care through use of community-based emergency services and alternative levels of care. To achieve the goal of Community First, however, the Commonwealth must commit the financial resources necessary to allow adults and children with mental illness and/or substance use disorders to live successfully in their own communities. ABH and our members believe that current community resources are not sufficient to truly support recovery and resiliency for clients.
Lack of access to critical health care services remains a significant barrier to preventing and treating health disorders before they intensify and require costlier treatment in more intensive settings. ABH providers know from experience that access barriers to community-based mental health and addiction treatment services can be debilitating or even fatal.
While we have been encouraged by the Legislature’s recognition of the importance of community mental health and addiction treatment services, the community behavioral healthcare system is still struggling with the budget cuts of a few years ago. Thousands of individuals and families are not able to access services and supports for mental health and/or substance use disorders. In light of this unacceptable situation, existing levels of services must be maintained in order to ensure that individuals are able to access needed care and to provide stability for the community behavioral health system to the greatest extent possible.
Fair and adequate reimbursement rates are the cornerstone of a stable community-based behavioral health system. Inadequate rates directly impact the ability of providers to ensure that clients have access to the services they need to live in their communities. Over the years, the erosion of behavioral health rates has forced providers to make the difficult decision to close clinics or reduce access. As the Legislature considers the FY 2012 budget, it must not ignore this critical issue.
Department of Mental Health
ABH believes that the community-based service system needs to be fundamentally strengthened, and better coordinated to appropriately serve Department of Mental Health (DMH) clients. The Governor’s FY 2012 budget proposal reduces funding for the Department of Mental Health by $21 million. These cuts include a $2 million reduction to the Children/Adolescent Flex Support program which will impact approximately 175 children, a $3 million cut to Clubhouse services which will impact approximately 2,000 clients, and a $16.4 million cut to inpatient services which will result in the closure of approximately 160 inpatient beds. ABH is extremely concerned about these cuts to an already eroded community behavioral health system and requests that the Legislature restore this funding.
The Commonwealth cannot continue to reduce DMH inpatient capacity solely as a cost-saving initiative. In addition to maintaining existing services, additional funding for community based services will be required if the Department proceeds with further reductions to DMH inpatient capacity. The final report of the Department of Mental Health Inpatient Study Commission concluded that,
The community system must be strengthened. Community based services have been the heart of the DMH service delivery system for more than 30 years. Previous state hospital closings have succeeded as consumers were transitioned to high-quality services in or near their own communities. The community system, however, experienced significant mid-year “9C” budget cuts in October 2008. An investment of funding for community services is necessary for DMH to replicate the success of earlier hospital closings.#
If the Commonwealth truly believes it can safely meet its public mental health mission with fewer inpatient beds, then increased funding for community services is critical in order to provide the resources necessary to safely and appropriately serve DMH clients in the community. To close inpatient beds as a budget-balancing measure without a corresponding investment in community services adds to the dangerous deterioration of the pubic mental health system resulting from years of budget cuts. The community-based continuum needs additional resources and staffing. Many individuals being discharged from state hospital beds need specially-focused resources to support their acute needs in the community.
Furthermore, the budget reductions of the past few years have eliminated or dramatically reduced many community services that had served DMH clients. The crisis in outpatient services most readily exemplifies this problem. In recent years, there has been a significant reduction in outpatient capacity which has reduced access to vital, cost-effective services for individuals with severe and persistent mental illness. The Commonwealth (DMH and MassHealth) need to provide adequate rates for outpatient mental health as well as sufficient resources to provide the full range of community-based services so that individuals living with mental illness may truly benefit from the Commonwealth’s commitment to Community First.
In summary, adequate funding for the Department of Mental Health (DMH) is essential in order to maintain treatment for individuals across the Commonwealth in need of mental health services. DMH offers individuals with mental illness many critical community-based services that are not available through MassHealth or private insurance. We urge you to restore funding for the DMH community accounts (line items 5042-5000; 5046-0000; 5046-2000; 5047-0001; and 5055-0000) in order to avoid a shift toward more expensive interventions such as emergency rooms, acute inpatient care and homeless shelters.
Bureau of Substance Abuse Services
While we were disheartened by the results of Question 1 in the November election, we are extremely grateful for the support of the Legislature both during and after the campaign. Going forward, we strongly urge you to continue this commitment to addiction treatment and prevention services by maintaining funding for the DPH/Bureau of Substance Abuse Services (line items 4512-0200, 4512-0201, 4512-0202, and 4512-0203). These critical addiction prevention, treatment and recovery support services are an essential part of the Commonwealth’s safety net and we are sincerely grateful for your continued support. If funding for addiction treatment is cut, access to treatment is reduced, and the state will end up paying more to serve these clients in emergency rooms, our court system and prison beds.
MassHealth Behavioral Health
Medicaid finances medically necessary behavioral health services for individuals and families and helps ensure stability for some of the most vulnerable individuals in our society. For example, MassHealth psychiatric day treatment services provide essential services for individuals being discharged from state hospitals and help ensure that individuals are able to remain in their communities. In addition, MassHealth behavioral health services also include vital addiction treatment services for individuals across the Commonwealth.
As you know, service implementation for the Children’s Behavioral Health Initiative (CBHI) is underway. As the state continues to work to develop this new system, funding is necessary to ensure successful implementation of the Rosie D. court order. This funding is essential to strengthen our community-based mental health system to better serve children living with Severe Emotional Disturbance (SED) in Massachusetts.
MassHealth behavioral health services do more than keep ill people off the streets; they keep people alive. As such, the Commonwealth must take steps to ensure that these valuable services continue to be available to the state’s residents.
Human Services Salary Reserve
At the time Chapter 257 of the Acts of 2008 (An Act Relative to Rates for Human and Social Service Programs) was enacted, it was understood that a salary reserve for human service workers would be funded until the law was fully implemented. Due to a number of implementation issues, The Collaborative (ABH, the Association of Developmental Disabilities Providers, and the Providers’ Council) and the Patrick Administration recently agreed to amend Chapter 257 by extending the implementation timetable by 15 months. As it is, the salary reserve has not been funded for the past three years.
We recognize that full implementation of Chapter 257 will, over time, rectify the fact that human service employees are too often among the Commonwealth’s working poor. However, due to the delay of implementation of Chapter 257, we are asking you to fund the human services salary reserve at $28 million until the new law is fully implemented. This is a modest request to assist direct support staff making less than $40,000 per year as they struggle with the condition of our state’s economy.
Access to Health Insurance
Human service providers struggle to provide affordable health insurance to their employees. Enabling human service providers who have contracts with the Executive Office of Health and Human Services to have access to the state’s Group Insurance Commission (GIC) would decrease employer and employee costs, increase choice and access, and reduce staff turnover. The GIC’s buying power may, in many cases, enable providers to purchase health insurance at a lower cost than that which is available to them in the open market. In addition, providers often have limited choice among health care plans for their employees. Access to the GIC will rectify this by enabling providers to choose from multiple plans, thereby increasing both choice and access.
While almost all ABH members offer health insurance coverage for their employers, cost – to both the employer and the employee – is increasingly prohibitive. As health insurance premiums rise, providers are forced to choose between affordability and quality — a decision that goes against the very nature of the state’s health care reform achievements. Access to the GIC will increase the quality of life for our workforce and improve the quality of care provided in the community.
Community-based provider organizations embrace on a daily basis the opportunity to help individuals return to live in the community and begin to recover with the support of homes, jobs, peers, family and friends. Those same organizations, however, find it extremely frustrating and sometimes very troubling to try to do so without the resources necessary to allow individuals to achieve recovery to the fullest extent possible. For these reasons, we look forward to working with the Commonwealth on the difficult challenges that lay ahead.
If you have any questions or comments, I am happy to address them at your convenience. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Vicker V. DiGravio III
President/CEO
On the Issues, People & Organizations in Behavioral Health in the Commonwealth
Friday, March 4, 2011
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Time to Weigh in on State Budget
With the loss of dedicated funds from the alcohol sales tax and the end of federal stimulus funding, many Bay State behavioral health causes are concerned about looming budget cuts. Though we're all in this budget battle together, there are ways you, and your members can help.
The House and Senate Committees on Ways and Means are holding joint hearings to sort out the state budget for the 2012 fiscal year. As you know, this process will determine funding for mental health and substance abuse treatment (and everything else) for the next year. It is a crucial time to ensure that our programs remain a priority, especially on the heels of Patrick's planned reduction to funding for the Department of Mental Health. We must be involved.
How can you help?
Listen up. There are a number of hearings, that anyone can sit in on.
Be heard. Testify at the public hearing on Friday, March 4th at 10am in the Gardner Auditorium at the State House.
Write in. If you can't be there in person, submit written testimony to your local representative. ABH will be submitting testimony and will provide an advance copy to our members as a potential model for your own testimony.
The House and Senate Committees on Ways and Means are holding joint hearings to sort out the state budget for the 2012 fiscal year. As you know, this process will determine funding for mental health and substance abuse treatment (and everything else) for the next year. It is a crucial time to ensure that our programs remain a priority, especially on the heels of Patrick's planned reduction to funding for the Department of Mental Health. We must be involved.
How can you help?
Listen up. There are a number of hearings, that anyone can sit in on.
Be heard. Testify at the public hearing on Friday, March 4th at 10am in the Gardner Auditorium at the State House.
Write in. If you can't be there in person, submit written testimony to your local representative. ABH will be submitting testimony and will provide an advance copy to our members as a potential model for your own testimony.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Community-based system must undergo review
From The Boston Globe, Feb. 2, 2011
THE TRAGIC killing of Stephanie Moulton affects everyone who provides care and services to men and women with mental illness. Such tragedies are thankfully rare, but as the Globe noted in its editorial, the Department of Mental Health and private providers have an obligation to provide a safe environment for clients and staff (“Murder in Revere group home shows need for criminal checks,’’ Jan. 31).
Tweet Be the first to Tweet this!..
Yahoo! Buzz ShareThis .Both organizations mentioned by the Globe, North Suffolk Mental Health and Bay Cove Human Services, are members of the Association for Behavioral Healthcare. For decades, both have provided high-quality, professional, and compassionate care to individuals with mental illness in residential settings in and around Boston. All ABH members remain committed to providing community-based services to people struggling with mental illness to help them achieve recovery.
ABH and other mental health advocacy organizations have requested that Barbara Leadholm, the state’s mental health commissioner, appoint an independent third party to review systemic issues surrounding the publicly funded community-based mental health system. As our letter to her stated, “We believe DMH needs to forcefully and directly examine all the systemic issues raised by this tragedy, or that task could be assumed by others with an agenda to dismantle rather than to improve the system.’’
Community-based services for individuals with mental illness have improved the lives of countless men and women. The mental health community grieves Moulton’s loss, and we owe it to her, her colleagues, and clients to ensure that the community-based system promotes recovery in a safe environment.
Vic DiGravio
President and CEO Association for Behavioral
THE TRAGIC killing of Stephanie Moulton affects everyone who provides care and services to men and women with mental illness. Such tragedies are thankfully rare, but as the Globe noted in its editorial, the Department of Mental Health and private providers have an obligation to provide a safe environment for clients and staff (“Murder in Revere group home shows need for criminal checks,’’ Jan. 31).
Tweet Be the first to Tweet this!..
Yahoo! Buzz ShareThis .Both organizations mentioned by the Globe, North Suffolk Mental Health and Bay Cove Human Services, are members of the Association for Behavioral Healthcare. For decades, both have provided high-quality, professional, and compassionate care to individuals with mental illness in residential settings in and around Boston. All ABH members remain committed to providing community-based services to people struggling with mental illness to help them achieve recovery.
ABH and other mental health advocacy organizations have requested that Barbara Leadholm, the state’s mental health commissioner, appoint an independent third party to review systemic issues surrounding the publicly funded community-based mental health system. As our letter to her stated, “We believe DMH needs to forcefully and directly examine all the systemic issues raised by this tragedy, or that task could be assumed by others with an agenda to dismantle rather than to improve the system.’’
Community-based services for individuals with mental illness have improved the lives of countless men and women. The mental health community grieves Moulton’s loss, and we owe it to her, her colleagues, and clients to ensure that the community-based system promotes recovery in a safe environment.
Vic DiGravio
President and CEO Association for Behavioral
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Testimony on FY2012 Budget
The Executive Office of Health and Human Services is holding two hearings on the FY 2012 budget (Dec. 13 and December 29 in Northampton).
We strongly encourage ABH members to submit testimony by December 29. I have pasted below a copy of ABH’s testimony. Please feel free to use it as a model for your own comments.
Testimony can be submitted to:
Secretary JudyAnn Bigby, Executive Office of Health and Human Services
One Ashburton Place, Room 1109
Boston, MA 02108
Or emailed to: eohhshearings@massmail.state.ma.us
******************************************************************************
December 9, 2010
Secretary JudyAnn Bigby, M.D.
Executive Office of Health and Human Services
One Ashburton Place, Room 1109
Boston, MA 02108
Re: FY 2012 Budget
Dear Secretary Bigby:
On behalf of the membership of the Association for Behavioral Healthcare (ABH), thank you for the opportunity to comment on FY 2012 budget recommendations for EOHHS and its departments. As you know, ABH is a statewide association representing eighty-nine community-based mental health and substance abuse provider organizations. Our members are the primary providers of publicly-funded behavioral healthcare services in the Commonwealth, serving approximately 117,000 Massachusetts residents daily and employing 22,000 people.
As you consider the FY 2012 budget, we strongly urge you to ensure that community-based behavioral health services are held harmless from further budget cuts.
Stability for the Community Services
Lack of access to critical health care services remains a significant barrier to preventing and treating health disorders before they intensify and require costlier treatment in more intensive settings. ABH providers know from experience that access barriers to community-based mental health and substance use disorder services can be debilitating or even fatal.
While we have been encouraged by the administration’s recognition of the importance of community mental health and substance use disorder services, the community behavioral healthcare system is still struggling with the budget cuts of a few years ago. Thousands of individuals and families are not able to access services and supports for mental health and/or substance use disorders. In light of this unacceptable situation, existing levels of services must be maintained in order to ensure that individuals are able to access needed care and to provide stability for the community behavioral health system to the greatest extent possible.
ABH strongly supports the philosophy of Community First – that whenever possible, individuals should live and be served in community settings, with minimum lengths of stay in acute and continuing care hospitals, and maximum diversion from inpatient care through use of community-based emergency services and alternative levels of care. To achieve the goal of Community First, however, the Commonwealth must commit the financial resources necessary to allow adults and children with mental illness and/or substance use disorders to live successfully in their own communities. ABH and our members believe that current community resources are not sufficient to truly support recovery and resiliency for clients.
Fair and adequate reimbursement rates are the cornerstone of a stable community-based behavioral health system. Inadequate rates directly impact the ability of providers to ensure that clients have access to the services they need to live in their communities. Over the years, the erosion of behavioral health rates has forced providers to make the difficult decision to close clinics or reduce access. As EOHHS considers the FY 2012 budget, it must not ignore this critical issue.
Department of Mental Health
ABH believes that the community-based service system needs to be fundamentally strengthened, and better coordinated to appropriately serve Department of Mental Health (DMH) clients. Providers report serious concerns about their programs’ level of staffing and resulting ability to meet the acute needs of individuals being more rapidly discharged from inpatient care, including for some, following lengthy hospital stays. Issues of medical co-morbidity, forensic involvement, aging, and increasingly complex psychotropic medication needs are further challenges for community services given the limited availability of current resources.
In re-allocating DMH financial resources to open the new DMH hospital, resources must not be taken from already-vulnerable community services. The community-based continuum needs additional resources and staffing. Many individuals being discharged from state hospital beds need specially-focused resources to support their acute needs in the community.
The budget reductions of the past few years have eliminated or dramatically reduced many community services that had served DMH clients. The crisis in outpatient services is perhaps the most high profile example of this problem. In recent years, there has been a significant reduction in outpatient capacity which has reduced access to vital, cost-effective services for individuals with severe and persistent mental illness. DMH and MassHealth need to provide adequate rates for outpatient mental health and sufficient resources to provide the full range of community-based services so that individuals living with mental illness may truly benefit from the Commonwealth’s commitment to Community First.
Adequate funding for the Department of Mental Health (DMH) is essential in order to maintain treatment for individuals across the Commonwealth in need of mental health services. DMH offers individuals with mental illness many critical community-based services that are not available through MassHealth or private insurance. We urge you to maintain funding for the DMH community accounts (line items 5042-5000; 5046-0000; 5046-2000; 5047-0001; and 5055-0000) in order to avoid a shift toward more expensive interventions such as emergency rooms, acute inpatient care and homeless shelters.
Bureau of Substance Abuse Services
While we were disheartened by the results of Question 1 in the November election, we are extremely grateful for Governor Patrick’s commitment to preserve funding for substance use disorder treatment and prevention services for the remainder of FY 2011 which will ensure that 100,000 Massachusetts residents continue to receive the treatment they need to remain in the community and to be productive members of society.
Going forward, we strongly urge you to continue this commitment and maintain funding for the DPH/Bureau of Substance Abuse Services (line items 4512-0200, 4512-0201, 4512-0202, and 4512-0203). These critical substance abuse prevention, treatment and recovery support services are an essential part of the Commonwealth’s safety net and we are sincerely grateful for your continued support. If funding for addiction treatment is cut, access to treatment is reduced, and
the state will end up paying more to serve these clients in emergency rooms, our court system and prison beds.
MassHealth Behavioral Health
Medicaid finances medically necessary behavioral health services for individuals and families and helps ensure stability for some of the most vulnerable individuals in our society. For example, MassHealth psychiatric day treatment services provide essential services for individuals being discharged from state hospitals and help ensure that individuals are able to remain in their communities. In addition, MassHealth behavioral health services also include vital substance use disorder services for individuals across the Commonwealth.
As you know, service implementation for the Children’s Behavioral Health Initiative (CBHI) is underway. As the state continues to work to develop this new system, funding is necessary to ensure successful implementation of the Rosie D. court order. This funding is essential to strengthen our community-based mental health system to better serve children living with Severe Emotional Disturbance (SED) in Massachusetts.
MassHealth behavioral health services do more than keep ill people off the streets; they keep people alive. As such, the Commonwealth must take steps to ensure that these valuable services continue to be available to the state’s residents.
Community-based provider organizations embrace on a daily basis the opportunity to help individuals return to live in the community and begin to recover with the support of homes, jobs, peers, family and friends. Those same organizations, however, find it extremely frustrating and sometimes very troubling to try to do so without the resources necessary to allow individuals to achieve recovery to the fullest extent possible. For these reasons, we look forward to working with the Commonwealth on the difficult challenges that lay ahead.
If you have any questions or comments, I am happy to address them at your convenience. Thank you for your consideration.
We strongly encourage ABH members to submit testimony by December 29. I have pasted below a copy of ABH’s testimony. Please feel free to use it as a model for your own comments.
Testimony can be submitted to:
Secretary JudyAnn Bigby, Executive Office of Health and Human Services
One Ashburton Place, Room 1109
Boston, MA 02108
Or emailed to: eohhshearings@massmail.state.ma.us
******************************************************************************
December 9, 2010
Secretary JudyAnn Bigby, M.D.
Executive Office of Health and Human Services
One Ashburton Place, Room 1109
Boston, MA 02108
Re: FY 2012 Budget
Dear Secretary Bigby:
On behalf of the membership of the Association for Behavioral Healthcare (ABH), thank you for the opportunity to comment on FY 2012 budget recommendations for EOHHS and its departments. As you know, ABH is a statewide association representing eighty-nine community-based mental health and substance abuse provider organizations. Our members are the primary providers of publicly-funded behavioral healthcare services in the Commonwealth, serving approximately 117,000 Massachusetts residents daily and employing 22,000 people.
As you consider the FY 2012 budget, we strongly urge you to ensure that community-based behavioral health services are held harmless from further budget cuts.
Stability for the Community Services
Lack of access to critical health care services remains a significant barrier to preventing and treating health disorders before they intensify and require costlier treatment in more intensive settings. ABH providers know from experience that access barriers to community-based mental health and substance use disorder services can be debilitating or even fatal.
While we have been encouraged by the administration’s recognition of the importance of community mental health and substance use disorder services, the community behavioral healthcare system is still struggling with the budget cuts of a few years ago. Thousands of individuals and families are not able to access services and supports for mental health and/or substance use disorders. In light of this unacceptable situation, existing levels of services must be maintained in order to ensure that individuals are able to access needed care and to provide stability for the community behavioral health system to the greatest extent possible.
ABH strongly supports the philosophy of Community First – that whenever possible, individuals should live and be served in community settings, with minimum lengths of stay in acute and continuing care hospitals, and maximum diversion from inpatient care through use of community-based emergency services and alternative levels of care. To achieve the goal of Community First, however, the Commonwealth must commit the financial resources necessary to allow adults and children with mental illness and/or substance use disorders to live successfully in their own communities. ABH and our members believe that current community resources are not sufficient to truly support recovery and resiliency for clients.
Fair and adequate reimbursement rates are the cornerstone of a stable community-based behavioral health system. Inadequate rates directly impact the ability of providers to ensure that clients have access to the services they need to live in their communities. Over the years, the erosion of behavioral health rates has forced providers to make the difficult decision to close clinics or reduce access. As EOHHS considers the FY 2012 budget, it must not ignore this critical issue.
Department of Mental Health
ABH believes that the community-based service system needs to be fundamentally strengthened, and better coordinated to appropriately serve Department of Mental Health (DMH) clients. Providers report serious concerns about their programs’ level of staffing and resulting ability to meet the acute needs of individuals being more rapidly discharged from inpatient care, including for some, following lengthy hospital stays. Issues of medical co-morbidity, forensic involvement, aging, and increasingly complex psychotropic medication needs are further challenges for community services given the limited availability of current resources.
In re-allocating DMH financial resources to open the new DMH hospital, resources must not be taken from already-vulnerable community services. The community-based continuum needs additional resources and staffing. Many individuals being discharged from state hospital beds need specially-focused resources to support their acute needs in the community.
The budget reductions of the past few years have eliminated or dramatically reduced many community services that had served DMH clients. The crisis in outpatient services is perhaps the most high profile example of this problem. In recent years, there has been a significant reduction in outpatient capacity which has reduced access to vital, cost-effective services for individuals with severe and persistent mental illness. DMH and MassHealth need to provide adequate rates for outpatient mental health and sufficient resources to provide the full range of community-based services so that individuals living with mental illness may truly benefit from the Commonwealth’s commitment to Community First.
Adequate funding for the Department of Mental Health (DMH) is essential in order to maintain treatment for individuals across the Commonwealth in need of mental health services. DMH offers individuals with mental illness many critical community-based services that are not available through MassHealth or private insurance. We urge you to maintain funding for the DMH community accounts (line items 5042-5000; 5046-0000; 5046-2000; 5047-0001; and 5055-0000) in order to avoid a shift toward more expensive interventions such as emergency rooms, acute inpatient care and homeless shelters.
Bureau of Substance Abuse Services
While we were disheartened by the results of Question 1 in the November election, we are extremely grateful for Governor Patrick’s commitment to preserve funding for substance use disorder treatment and prevention services for the remainder of FY 2011 which will ensure that 100,000 Massachusetts residents continue to receive the treatment they need to remain in the community and to be productive members of society.
Going forward, we strongly urge you to continue this commitment and maintain funding for the DPH/Bureau of Substance Abuse Services (line items 4512-0200, 4512-0201, 4512-0202, and 4512-0203). These critical substance abuse prevention, treatment and recovery support services are an essential part of the Commonwealth’s safety net and we are sincerely grateful for your continued support. If funding for addiction treatment is cut, access to treatment is reduced, and
the state will end up paying more to serve these clients in emergency rooms, our court system and prison beds.
MassHealth Behavioral Health
Medicaid finances medically necessary behavioral health services for individuals and families and helps ensure stability for some of the most vulnerable individuals in our society. For example, MassHealth psychiatric day treatment services provide essential services for individuals being discharged from state hospitals and help ensure that individuals are able to remain in their communities. In addition, MassHealth behavioral health services also include vital substance use disorder services for individuals across the Commonwealth.
As you know, service implementation for the Children’s Behavioral Health Initiative (CBHI) is underway. As the state continues to work to develop this new system, funding is necessary to ensure successful implementation of the Rosie D. court order. This funding is essential to strengthen our community-based mental health system to better serve children living with Severe Emotional Disturbance (SED) in Massachusetts.
MassHealth behavioral health services do more than keep ill people off the streets; they keep people alive. As such, the Commonwealth must take steps to ensure that these valuable services continue to be available to the state’s residents.
Community-based provider organizations embrace on a daily basis the opportunity to help individuals return to live in the community and begin to recover with the support of homes, jobs, peers, family and friends. Those same organizations, however, find it extremely frustrating and sometimes very troubling to try to do so without the resources necessary to allow individuals to achieve recovery to the fullest extent possible. For these reasons, we look forward to working with the Commonwealth on the difficult challenges that lay ahead.
If you have any questions or comments, I am happy to address them at your convenience. Thank you for your consideration.
Monday, November 1, 2010
DiGravio and Frangules: Liquor stores don't deserve a tax break
Milford Daily News, October 21, 2010
Massachusetts voters face a critical choice on Election Day, and not just in the campaign for governor. Question One on the ballot will ask voters to create a special tax exemption for alcohol at retail stores - and slash $110 million from a budget already facing a $2 billion deficit. It's a reckless fiscal and public health policy measure that should be voted down.
If approved, Question 1 would change the state's sales tax law to carve out a special exemption for alcohol sold at retail stores. Alcohol would still be taxed at restaurants and bars. The only items that are exempt from the state's sales tax are basic necessities, like food, clothing and prescription medicines. Alcohol is not a basic necessity and doesn't deserve a tax break.
In radio ads currently running in Massachusetts, proponents of Question 1 argue that residents are flocking to New Hampshire and buying tax-free alcohol there. Aside from the dubious financial wisdom of spending time and gas money on a trip to New Hampshire to buy alcohol, the ads are not true. Actually, sales in New Hampshire are down slightly from their 10-year average of 5.1 percent growth. There has been no spike in alcohol sales in New Hampshire.
However, alcohol sales are up in Massachusetts by 4 percent in the past quarter, according to the Department of Revenue.
As public and fiscal policy, it makes no sense to exempt alcohol from the sales tax. Forty-five other states (all the states that have a sales tax) apply it to alcohol. The Massachusetts alcohol tax is clearly in the mainstream for all states.
Every dollar of the tax goes to essential addiction prevention, treatment and recovery and public health services, through the dedicated Substance Abuse Treatment Fund. This fiscal year, it will bring in about $110 million in revenue to support vital health programs.
The Committee Against Repeal of the Alcohol Tax is a group of more than 160 healthcare, human service, community, union and business groups that have banded together to get out the message about the impact of the alcohol tax repeal.
According to a poll conducted this spring by the Committee, 58 percent of voters are opposed to repeal. A State House News Service poll recently found the numbers had climbed slightly to 60 percent and a Boston Globe poll found similar opposition to the alcohol tax break. But proponents of the repeal are spending over $1 million to secure a Yes vote.
So who's behind Question 1? The liquor industry, which stands alone on this crusade. Not one organization outside the industry has endorsed the campaign or even contributed money to it. Even business associations have spurned the liquor industry. They argue that the state cannot afford the lost revenue, and that it would be unfair to give preferential treatment to alcohol in the state's tax code.
The alcohol sales tax, paid only by those who purchase alcohol, goes directly to a fund for treatment of addiction. We can't afford to repeal this tax. That is why people should vote no on Question 1 on November 2.
Vic DiGravio is president and CEO of the Association of Behavioral Healthcare. Maryanne Frangules is executive director of the Massachusetts Organization for Addiction Recovery. They co-chair the Committee Against Repeal of the Alcohol Tax.
Massachusetts voters face a critical choice on Election Day, and not just in the campaign for governor. Question One on the ballot will ask voters to create a special tax exemption for alcohol at retail stores - and slash $110 million from a budget already facing a $2 billion deficit. It's a reckless fiscal and public health policy measure that should be voted down.
If approved, Question 1 would change the state's sales tax law to carve out a special exemption for alcohol sold at retail stores. Alcohol would still be taxed at restaurants and bars. The only items that are exempt from the state's sales tax are basic necessities, like food, clothing and prescription medicines. Alcohol is not a basic necessity and doesn't deserve a tax break.
In radio ads currently running in Massachusetts, proponents of Question 1 argue that residents are flocking to New Hampshire and buying tax-free alcohol there. Aside from the dubious financial wisdom of spending time and gas money on a trip to New Hampshire to buy alcohol, the ads are not true. Actually, sales in New Hampshire are down slightly from their 10-year average of 5.1 percent growth. There has been no spike in alcohol sales in New Hampshire.
However, alcohol sales are up in Massachusetts by 4 percent in the past quarter, according to the Department of Revenue.
As public and fiscal policy, it makes no sense to exempt alcohol from the sales tax. Forty-five other states (all the states that have a sales tax) apply it to alcohol. The Massachusetts alcohol tax is clearly in the mainstream for all states.
Every dollar of the tax goes to essential addiction prevention, treatment and recovery and public health services, through the dedicated Substance Abuse Treatment Fund. This fiscal year, it will bring in about $110 million in revenue to support vital health programs.
The Committee Against Repeal of the Alcohol Tax is a group of more than 160 healthcare, human service, community, union and business groups that have banded together to get out the message about the impact of the alcohol tax repeal.
According to a poll conducted this spring by the Committee, 58 percent of voters are opposed to repeal. A State House News Service poll recently found the numbers had climbed slightly to 60 percent and a Boston Globe poll found similar opposition to the alcohol tax break. But proponents of the repeal are spending over $1 million to secure a Yes vote.
So who's behind Question 1? The liquor industry, which stands alone on this crusade. Not one organization outside the industry has endorsed the campaign or even contributed money to it. Even business associations have spurned the liquor industry. They argue that the state cannot afford the lost revenue, and that it would be unfair to give preferential treatment to alcohol in the state's tax code.
The alcohol sales tax, paid only by those who purchase alcohol, goes directly to a fund for treatment of addiction. We can't afford to repeal this tax. That is why people should vote no on Question 1 on November 2.
Vic DiGravio is president and CEO of the Association of Behavioral Healthcare. Maryanne Frangules is executive director of the Massachusetts Organization for Addiction Recovery. They co-chair the Committee Against Repeal of the Alcohol Tax.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Monday, August 2, 2010
Massachusetts passes criminal offender record reform law
On the final day of the 2010 legislative session, the House and Senate approved a criminal records reform bill that had been near the top of ABH”s agenda. When signed by the Governor, the new CORI law will limit access to criminal record information and give first-time offenders a chance at rehabilitation.
“This is for people who made one mistake, who have shown they rehabilitated themselves, to be able to go on with their life,” said Lew Finfer, leader of a coalition lobbying for the changes.
Under the new law, when a defendant is found not guilty, or the case is continued without a finding, the charge will not show up on an employer’s criminal background check. Offenders will have a chance to seal their criminal records with five years of good behavior for a misdemeanor, and 10 years after a felony. Law enforcement agencies will have access to an unedited criminal record, and a sex offender’s records cannot be sealed.
ABH sought the changes to enable persons who have had trouble finding work because of one mistake to get their lives back on track. Many individuals with mental health and/or substance use disorders have criminal records because of the way their illnesses manifest themselves, and the old CORI system impeded their ability to live and work in the community.
In testimony to the Judiciary Committee last year, I stated:
“Access to substance abuse and mental health services, employment opportunities, and the ability to live and thrive in the community are fundamental to the recovery process.”
The Legislature did the right thing in reforming the CORI laws. This was a major step forward for individuals in recovery.
“This is for people who made one mistake, who have shown they rehabilitated themselves, to be able to go on with their life,” said Lew Finfer, leader of a coalition lobbying for the changes.
Under the new law, when a defendant is found not guilty, or the case is continued without a finding, the charge will not show up on an employer’s criminal background check. Offenders will have a chance to seal their criminal records with five years of good behavior for a misdemeanor, and 10 years after a felony. Law enforcement agencies will have access to an unedited criminal record, and a sex offender’s records cannot be sealed.
ABH sought the changes to enable persons who have had trouble finding work because of one mistake to get their lives back on track. Many individuals with mental health and/or substance use disorders have criminal records because of the way their illnesses manifest themselves, and the old CORI system impeded their ability to live and work in the community.
In testimony to the Judiciary Committee last year, I stated:
“Access to substance abuse and mental health services, employment opportunities, and the ability to live and thrive in the community are fundamental to the recovery process.”
The Legislature did the right thing in reforming the CORI laws. This was a major step forward for individuals in recovery.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)