|
By Catherine Robertson Souter
In what could be described as a last-minute reprieve, a nearly-decimated
program overseen by the Massachusetts Department of Mental Health
(DMH) got a stay of execution just before the state legislature
adjourned for winter recess.
In August, the DMH announced it would be forced to deeply cut funding
of its residential programs servicing homeless people who are mentally
ill. Those cuts would have put up to 100 of the residents back on
the streets.
Because of a reduction in the state budget, the residential programs
were slated to lose more than $1.5 million in state money and an
additional $3.5 million in matching federal funds.
However, nearly three months after the original announcement, the
program was not cut as threatened because of the legislature's promise
to restore the money in the state's supplemental budget.
"The governor received assurance from the legislature that the
supplemental budget of $1.5 million would be passed," says DMH Chief
of Staff Lester Blumberg, "so we rescinded the cuts."
With the threat of the cuts looming, staffs at the DMH and at the
agencies who run the residential programs were relieved to hear
in mid November that the supplemental budget plan was approved by
both the House and Senate Ways and Means Committees just one week
short of the legislature's planned Nov. 19 winter break.
The budget was scheduled to be placed on the governor's desk shortly
thereafter.
The Senate and the House did a similar bill, says Charlie Rasmussen,
spokesperson and press secretary for Speaker of the House Thomas
Finneran, and it was expected to easily pass in both places.
If, however, the governor does not pass the bill in its entirety,
there is a possibility that the legislation could be delayed.
"He may veto some pieces," says Rasmussen, "and if that happens,
we would have to schedule another informal session, probably the
week after Thanksgiving. It is impossible to tell."
According to press reports, the $102 million supplemental budget
totals more than twice what Governor Mitt Romney requested, a situation
that could prove problematic.
Still, the DMH sees the initial movements as a positive step.
"It was reported out from the House and Senate in nearly identical
form," says Blumberg. "This included the cuts in the residential
account that was in the original budget and needed to be restored."
If the cuts passed, a number of statewide residential programs
would have had to eliminate or re-classify from 80 to 100 residential
slots. Similar to a budget cut for rape crisis centers that had
been covered in the last issue of New
England Psychologist (and for which the state's Department
of Public Health is also awaiting the finalization of the supplemental
budget), these cuts come at a critical time for the mental health
field. With problems across the nation because of a tough economy,
cuts like these find mental health professionals scrambling to find
alternate solutions for the affected clientele in a world where
there aren't many options.
"We're very grateful that the money got restored," says Lyndia
Downie, executive director for the Pine Street Inn in Boston, which
manages permanent housing for formerly homeless people, including
65 spots for mentally ill people. "We are keeping our fingers crossed
that it will stay in the budget for next year. We've been doing
this for a long time and it gets harder to keep beds open. It gets
harder and harder to come up with alternatives for people," she
says.
In other New England states, the situation for residential programs
is not as dire, but the pressure is still strong to reduce funding
wherever possible.
"In Connecticut," says Wayne Dailey, senior policy advisor and
media spokesperson for the state's Department of Mental Health and
Addiction Services, "since January 1, we have had a 17% reduction
in the number of employees at the DMHAS. This was all due to budgetary
pressures. Residential services have not been affected per se. This
time it was primarily cuts to state-operated services. But the pressure
is there."
Although the agencies that supply these services have not had cuts,
he adds, they have not had increases anywhere near the increased
costs of doing business. "They are de-facto cuts," Dailey says.
In Maine, state mental health administrators must constantly impress
upon legislatures the need for pro-active services for the mentally
ill.
As Jamie Morrill, associate commissioner for the Department of
Behavioral and Developmental Services, explains, "It can be hard
to convince the legislature that it's worthwhile to have a safety
net in place."
So far, he adds, the legislature has not made any major cuts to
their agencies' programs but "the economic storm clouds are hanging
over the entire nation and social and human services are oftentimes
the first place legislatures look to make cuts, in part because
of the enormous budgets."
Housing for seriously mentally ill patients can make all the difference
in their successful treatment. Studies have shown that men and women
with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder fare better when provided
with a safe haven. The constancy of familiar surroundings, regular
meals and medical staff to oversee the administration of medications
can help to keep these patients on track.
"These are the folks in these houses who couldn't live independently,"
says Downie. "They couldn't live independently or with scattered
site support."
It is just such patients who are in danger of losing housing if
the supplemental budget does not pass. And, the longer it takes
to get a final decision, the more difficult it will be to make the
cuts.
"If the budget is not enacted," says Blumberg, "every month we
wait increases the amount that we will have to cut. We are really
assuming that the money will be there by the end of the fiscal year."
"It's been a very slow process," adds Downie. "In another month,
we'll be halfway through the fiscal year."
|
