1 / 45

FLORIDA DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES COUNCIL, INC.

FLORIDA DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES COUNCIL, INC. 124 Marriott Drive, Suite 203, Tallahassee, Florida 32301-2981 Phone (850) 488-4180 ● Toll-Free (800) 580-7801 Fax (850) 922-6702 ● TDD (850) 488-0956/(888) 488-8633. Alternative Residential Options Workgroup PRESENTATION by Celeste Putnam

allegra-lawrence
Télécharger la présentation

FLORIDA DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES COUNCIL, INC.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. FLORIDA DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES COUNCIL, INC. 124 Marriott Drive, Suite 203, Tallahassee, Florida 32301-2981 Phone (850) 488-4180 ● Toll-Free (800) 580-7801 Fax (850) 922-6702 ● TDD (850) 488-0956/(888) 488-8633 Alternative Residential Options Workgroup PRESENTATION by Celeste Putnam December 11, 2009 CELEBRATION HOTEL—ORLANDO 700 Bloom Street * Celebration, FL 407-566-6000 * 888-499-3800

  2. During the 2009 Legislative Session House Bill 371 and Senate Bill 1124 introduced the idea of Planned Residential Communities for persons with developmental disabilities. • The FDDC expressed concern about the potential for this type of community to become isolated and not provide ample opportunity to community interaction and inclusion.

  3. FDDC wants to find a way to: • work constructively with proponents of • Planned Residential Communities, • find ways to work with all stakeholders to • expand residential options. In response, the FDDC decided to convene the Alternative Residential Options Workgroup.

  4. The purpose of this work was to: • develop a common understanding of • residential options, • review different types of residential • models including Planned Residential • Communities, • develop, to the degree possible, consensus regarding the characteristics of Planned Residential Communities.

  5. The meeting focused on consensus building as follows: • meeting one and two were designed to achieve a common understanding of different residential options, • meeting three continued that work, introduced additional detail regarding regulatory requirements, and had a dialogue to delineate the differences.

  6. Meeting four provided the opportunity to: • reach common agreement on definitions of terms that when used in the past had caused significant misunderstandings, • work in small groups to discuss the characteristics of a Planned Residential Community and to design what such a community might look like, • reach as much agreement as possible on the characteristics of a Planned Residential Community.

  7. Outcomes of the First Meeting • Learned about current residential options paid for by the Agency for Persons with Disabilities • Group homes, foster homes, supported living • Created a list of desired characteristics of residential programs.

  8. At this point all participants began to understand that current residential options were NOT providing for: • safety • social connections • full belonging in the community • affordable housing in safe areas • ability to move about their neighborhood freely • continuity & life long commitment

  9. The Workgroup agreed that: • the array of possible living situations do not meet the needs of all persons with developmental disabilities, • the current options do not provide adequate choice for persons with developmental disabilities and their families, and • there is a serious affordable housing shortage in Florida.

  10. Creating a Common Understanding • Had ten presentations on different residential options • Completed Research on other options from around the nation.

  11. Summary of types of options from presentations and research. • The term Planned Residential Community is not well defined. • The terms Co-housing and Intentional Communities are also used to describe similar settings.

  12. Planned Residential Communities that have multi-occupancy homes, work onsite, paid staff providing the support and services. • Loveland Village in Venice, Florida • ARC of Jacksonville- seeking permission to start development • Lambs Farm in Illinois

  13. Planned Residential Communities with paid staff and co-housing with roommates. No paid work is available on site. Regular transportation to the broader community is available. People work in the community. • Bishop Grady Villas

  14. Village based Residential Planned Community with work on site • Volunteers live in the village for two to three years or longer, living and working side by side • Camp Hill Villages

  15. Intentional Community • Designed around a common purpose • Provides for co-housing • May employ paid staff and volunteers such as Americorp • Earthserve (planning stage) • would serve people with all types of disabilities

  16. Independent Living • Own your own home • Choose your own staff • Responsible for all aspects of your life

  17. Life share options from presentations • Life share programs in Florida uses wraparound for youth in the child welfare system • Life share programs implemented through supported living programs with live-in support • McDonald Training Center

  18. Options from the research Programs on one parcel of land owned and operated by one organization for the purpose of providing a full range of services for persons with developmental disabilities. Examples: • Brookwood Community in Texas, • New England Village in Cape Code • L’arche in 14 states in United States

  19. Co-housing Options • Provides for residential opportunities to live in a planned community or dispersed settings • Housing options are usually inclusive • May build and/or manage the housing only • Creates low income housing options • Examples: Project Freedom in New Jersey and Arboretum Cohousing in Michigan

  20. Intentional Communities • Designed around a common purpose • Can be on one site or dispersed housing • Creates a sense of community and connectiveness • Can be for one type of person or fully inclusive • Examples: Troy Gardens in Wisconsin, Intentional Communities of Washtenaw

  21. Co-ops operated by family members and persons with developmental disabilities • Dispersed and integrated living • Creates a sense of belonging and social connectiveness • Co-housing and supported living • Examples- Toronto Courtyard, Daehaeko Support Network, Federated Human Services Cooperatives and Development Center

  22. Creative Configurations • These different approaches can be combined. • Co-ops may operate intentional communities. • Co-ops may manage residential co-housing. • Intentional communities often provide for co-housing.

  23. Important Lessons Learned from Presentations and Research • Community means social connections and belonging. • Living in a neighborhood does not necessarily result in social connections and belonging. • Safety to move about around ones home and neighborhood and visit friends regularly is important.

  24. We are challenged to move beyond the traditional and what we have known. • We must create sustainable options and partner with families and the full community to achieve this. • We must plan for living environments that can address social connections, safety, freedom to walk around the neighborhood and visit friends on one’s own schedule.

  25. There is promise in new concepts of • Intentional Communities • Cooperatives • Co-housing management • Life Sharing

  26. What is Already Possible There are currently several ways to create Planned Residential Communities. • Supported Living Homes can serve up to three persons and live-in supports are available. • Agency for Persons with Disabilities (APD) no longer has density rules for Supported Living environments.

  27. Chapter 429 F.S. requires facilities be licensed as an Adult Living Facilities (ALF) if they provide through ownership or management (unless specific exemptions are met) • housing, meals, and one or more personal services, • for a period exceeding 24 hours, • to one or more adults who are not relatives.

  28. Supported Living settings with live-in staff don’t have to be licensed if the occupant leases their own home. • Adult Foster Homes with live-in staff are exempt from the 1,000 foot rule.

  29. Persons living in Adult Living Facilities (ALFs) may receive residential habilitation Waiver services. • AHCA will license ALFs of six beds or less that are closer than 1,000 radius feet of another community licensed facility if they have a variance from the local zoning authority.

  30. Therefore Residential Planned Communities are currently possible with Waiver services using: • supported living services with supports, • supported living services with live-in supports, • adult foster homes, and • ALFs under 6 beds with a local zoning variance.

  31. APD licensed group homes are not an option • Rule 65G-2.015 prohibits more than one group home on a parcel of land unless separated by a river or road, • No more than three homes can be included on one parcel, • Administrative Ruling can be sought.

  32. Risk Factors Center for Medicare and Medicaid Service proposed rule: • Focused on residential setting managed or operated by a service provider • Require states to develop requirements approved by CMs

  33. CMS will develop guidelines that : • optimize participant independence and community integration, • promote initiative and choice in daily living, and • facilitate full access to community services.

  34. Workgroup participants were asked to create an image of Residential Planned Communities • Participants were asked to keep in mind the CMS risk factors • Four different models were presented

  35. FLORIDA TRANSPLANTS

  36. DIPLOMATICS VILLAGE

  37. CONFIDENT CONERS

  38. FREE SAILING

  39. Common Characteristics of the Planned Residential Community Designs • Housing options only – no workshops or day training on-site, • Easy access to the broader community, • Business enterprises located with easy access from the broader community,

  40. Encourage the broader community to come into the planned community, • People create their own daily schedules and activity, • People chose their own supports and providers,

  41. Affordable housing, • Choices of types of living environments – apartments, small homes, larger co-housing (six beds), • Special safety features such as security systems or security staff,

  42. Pedestrian oriented, • Designed to have limited traffic, • Encourage use of golf carts and bikes, • All four options included home for persons without disabilities - degree of integration varied.

  43. Remaining issues • Should persons have a choice to live in a community where only persons with developmental disabilities reside? • Should a percentage of integration be required?

  44. Must address the key issues of • safety • social connections • community belonging • affordable housing • freedom to move throughout neighborhood and visit friends • continuity of care

  45. A Range of Creative Options Available • Intentional Communities with a Common Purpose that is not solely focused on serving persons with developmental disabilities. • Cooperatives that provide community within dispersed settings. • Co-housing options that secure affordable housing.

More Related