Hello, i hope you are well! i am writing to plead that you keep the resources that are allotted to us Traumatic Brain Injury survivors. They are a useful option because they are most certainly needed! Look at me, for example. I received my TBI when a week before going to start getting my Master‘s Degree l was a passenger in a car that crashed on the passenger side. it luckily only TEMPORARILY killed me because the amazing doctors were able to bring me back to life and I spent the next 13 months in the hospital. At first my outlook was dim. I did not even remember my own mother/best friend at first my TBI was so severe. Yet I was able to use all the state's awesome support and help to rebuild to where i am now, and people seem really impressed with my recovery? I started going back to the community college nearby to rebuild my learning skills, and after a few classes I felt prepared for my Master's again so I took a class at the University of Connecticut and did ok (by everyone else's standards and not mine- I got 3 Bl) Just know, i take all the class's credit because l did not like even needing the help I got sometimes (I was allowed to hand in my work later, etc) yet i certainly needed the help I got outside ofthe class, like just attending the school because my license expired in the hospital and I lost the ability to use my ankles. (Butjust know, I WILL get my license back one day!) I am going to take a breakwith my Master'sjourney for a bit, however, because l'rn sure you can imagine the debt l gained being hospitalized so long and universities are generally rather pricey. i am glad I took the classes though because one day I may feel more ready to finish my Master's degree, and also, even ifl don't, taking the college classes most certainly helped me with dealing with my new Traumatic Brain Injury. Therefore, I believe it is obvious l very much needed the help i received so let me lust thank you SO much for making my life be one with a meaning again! I really appreciate all the help that I need yet luckily receive! i would love if we kept the support there so others going through the journey l was forced to make may also have the help and options lwas/am lucky enough to receive from the state. So again, let me just express my sincere gratitude and appreciation for all the help i had and still have/need. l by no means like needing it, yet feel so thankful i have the options available. So thank you and if you ever want proofthese resources are being used to improve the lives of Connecticut residents, just look up the story of K‘ ' y M -' '. 'l Thank you! With much appreciation, K‘ " M ' To: Appropriation Committee February 18, 2016 Good Afternoon, My name is Velma Williams-Estes and | live in Meriden, CT. I am a member of advocacy groups Our Families Can’t Wait and #PeopIeMatter Coalition. My daughter Deborah Ann is 48 years old with Down syndrome and I/DD (intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. She does not read, write or understand how to independently cope with everyday living situations, therefore, Deborah needs assistant in all aspects of her life at all times. Prior to his death, her father and I provided all the above and much more for her. But now without my husband, Iam her only caregiver doing all of this alone. Deborah will need a home, care and love when I am no longer here or unable to provide these things for her. The State should be that support but says it does not have the funding. I definitely do not support HB 5044. It allows more money to be cut from existing services that are already inadequate. Also, families are so tired of the current DSS glitches. Imagine adding the task of handling Medicaid bills, etc..........??!!!! Not a good idea, Governor. For too long, the Department of Developmental Services (DDS) has been deprived of the funding necessary to provide quality services for E of the state’s residents with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) to live their best lives. The most recent proposed cut of $59 million dollars by the Governor would, if implemented, be devastating for people with I/DD and their families. I urge you to support our efforts to protect our loved ones from such inhumane decisions. I also urge you to support HB 5128. This gives DDS the opportunity to keep funding that was originally designated to that Agency. Please support the following: o DDS - Develop a Workable Plan for All With l/DD 0 Meet & Sustain Full Funding for DDS o FIX that Archaic DDS Wait List 0 Provide & Protect Services and Continuity of Care to Loved Ones 0 Protect the Funding/Wages of All Providers of Services We ask YOU and Governor Mallov to find the courage to stand strong and stop these devastating and unfair cuts that are being proposed!! Our loved ones are people who are just like you but without the ability to support their individual needs. Families are struggling to care for loved ones as best as we can but desperately need help. Remember, any one of you could need this same crucial support at some point in your lives!!!! Think about it, or better yet, PRAYABOUTITll Thank you for your time, Velma Williams-Estes Mother, Legal Guardian and Caregiver of Deborah Ann February 17I 2016 Testimony Lorraine Lazarus-Morley, LMSW 114 Great Hill Road Ridgefield, CT 06877 201-856-6191 State Senator Tony Boucher State Representative Iohn Frey On December 8th, 2013 it became necessary for me to call the Ridgefield Police Department to help me with my son. That night he was hitting me in the head, kicking my legs and beating at my arms. He had reached a point where his weight and strength were beyond anything I could control. I was scared for his safety, my 17 year olds safety, and my own ability to continue living in this unbelievable nightmare. Three days later in a fit of rage, he mistakenly closed my hand in a door. The consequences were dramatic and l subsequently endured two hand surgeries. Bryce has Fragile X Syndrome. Fragile X is a profound developmental disability that includes intellectual impairment, language impairment, and behavioral difficulties. My son will never live an independent life. He will always need 24 hour a day care. We have known this fact since he was diagnosed at the age of two. For the last two years he was living at home Bryce became increasingly violent and aggressive toward me. lfwe had not had the funds to be able to move him into a CRS managed by Ability Beyond 1 am certain that l, or my younger son would have been (at the very least), critically hurt. People with severe challenges are often viewed in a negative light. We are sometimes afraid ofwhat we don’t understand and we are slow to realize that everyone has something to offer his or her community. Everyone has a need to be connected and know they belong. Bryce has taught so many other children and their families, that inclusion has a positive affect on all of us. Learning to accept others who are different from us creates a society that is forgiving, kind, caring, and peaceful. When Bryce is at Foundation High School, living in his CRS on Longmeadow Lane in Bethel, CT, out in the community, or engaged in activities, he is social, happy, empathic and engaging. He is loved by his school and the staff at Longmeadow Lane. Everyone that works with him sees his potential, and knows that with the right guidance and support he will be successful in his life. lfthe funding is cut for young men like Bryce the consequences will be beyond anything you can even imagine. There are hundreds of families living with children they adore but can no longer care for adequately. People with disabilities like Bryce are unable to manage their anxiety. They live with fear and apprehension. They cannot process the typical expectations we all can easily comprehend. They face challenges in their every day lives that most people don’t even know exist. Why does Governor Malloy want to make their lives more difficult? How can he not understand that compromising their lives now will require much more funding in the future? People who are intellectually and developmentally challenged have so much to teach us and so much to offer our communities. lfwe can’t support them financially how will they learn, grow, and join us in our increasingly demanding typical world? Without the initial funding for the DDS VSP program Bryce would not have been considered for placement in a CRS. Without Lisa ]ust’s excellent case management at DDS and Ability Beyond housing, staffing and support, our family would be facing ongoing trauma and challenges we could not possibly meet. PLEASE listen to our story and all the stories of families like ours. Our children’s lives are precious and they cannot survive without financial support from our government. I voted for Dannel Malloy. I supported him when he needed me too. I am now expecting the same support in return. I am submitting testimony in regards to the proposed state cuts of 59 million from the DDS budget to developmental services. 21 years ago I gave birth to a beautiful baby girl named Amanda. Amanda unfortunately sustained a stroke in utero. This event left her both physically and developmentally disabled. For the last 21 years Amanda has required assistance with all activities of daily living. She uses a wheel chair, wears a diaper and has poor communication skills. She has undergone several orthopedic and neuro surgeries. Her father Scott and I have provided all her care whiles both working full time. She currently attends Aces Whitney High East and will be graduating in June. Through this transition process I have received mixed messages. I have been told to proceed like the funding is there for day services; however we should have a plan ”B”. A plan ’B”??!! What plan ”B”. Just the thought of her having nothing after 21 has me up at night. What will I do I need to work; her father can’t physically care for her all day. Several years back my husband was diagnosed with an auto immune disease making it physically difficult for him to continue his career as a carpenter. I have been working 2 jobs to provide for my family and provide care for her. Services for her to continue past her 21St year are necessary not optional. As parents we have been told over the years by DDS that there will be programming after her 21$t birthday, however these budget cuts will directly impact programming for her future .Knowing that she may not have funding for day program is alarming. I can’t even imagine her having to be placed on yet another DDS waiting list! Years ago we placed her on the so called waiting list for residential knowing that she would not be eligible until adulthood. I never thought that I would have to wait for my death or incapacitation for her to receive this. Amanda is an individual who will never go to college, financially support herself or live independently without supports. The impacts of funding cuts on my daughter and us as caregivers will be devastating. She is a young adult who needs structure, social and community interactions with peers, and time to be independent from her family. She has sat back and watched many childhood peers as well as her sister Haley move onto college and adulthood. Doesn’t she have the right to move onto adulthood too? |can’t help but feel that because her needs are greater that she is being discriminated against. I am not only speaking to day on behalf of my family but countless others unable to be here. Families who already have great challenges will suffer emotionally and financially. I am also speaking to you as an outpatient pediatric occupational therapist. My days are spent treating children with developmental disabilities. Many of these children have Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Down syndrome and other diagnosis that will require lifetime supports. Many are being raised by single parents and receiving Medicaid. These are individuals not yet on any waiting list, these families have no idea what lies ahead. Children with disabilities are not going away. There needs to be an end to waiting lists for community residential and day and employment services. The state needs to partner with these individuals and their families, not work against them. Please support legislation to stop the waiting list and provide support to these families. Please stop making cuts to DDS ’s funding. Leslie Bridges-Parent, Clinton Ct Dear Dear Legislators:: In the past three years, the Department of Developmental Services (DDS) has been cut by more than $50 million, with most of the cuts directed at community—based Residential and Day/Employment Services. As a result, the Residential waiting list has increased to more than 2,000 people, with an additional 100 people on the Day/Employment waiting list. Within the Governor's budget proposals for fiscal year 2017, he said "improving services for individuals with intellectual disabilities" was one of his top priorities, but then proposed funding cuts plus a 5.75% cut across the board for all state agencies. Unfortunately, his proposed cuts would mean: ? $15 million in cuts to DDS through annualizing of budget lapses and mitigation cuts ? $32 million additional cuts to DDS through the 5.75% across the board proposal If implemented, these cuts would severely impact any individuals needing DDS funded services, especially 2016 graduates. WE can't continue to plan our state's future on short—term solutions, but rather look strategically at building a long—term plan that will not only provide quality affordable services to our most vulnerable citizens, but will also improve the state's economy. As a parent and concerned citizen, I'm asking you to consider: ? STOPPING the proposed $47 million cut to DDS! ? AGREEING on a plan to invest DDS institutional savings and efficiencies into funding for community—based supports for people stagnating on DDS waiting lists. Thank you. Sincerely, Linda Buckheit 65 Andover Dr Testimony of Shelagh McClure, Chair Connecticut Council on Developmental Disabilities Before the Appropriations Committee On House Bill 5044 February 18, 2016 Submitted to: apptestimony@cga.ct.gov Senator Bye, Representative Walker, members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony in opposition to Bill 5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am Chair of the Connecticut Council on Developmental Disabilities, a public agency whose mission is to promote independence and full inclusion of individuals with developmental disabilities in their communities, and to foster capacity building and system change. I am also the parent of a 25-year old son with an intellectual disability who lives at home with my husband and me. Since 2012, the Department of Developmental Services (DDS) budget has been cut over $60 million. Two thousand people are on the Waiting List for residential services, and, beginning in FY 2016, a new waiting list for Employment and Day Services was created clue to funding cuts. Almost 800 people are on the Waiting List for Autism Services. The DDS system is in crusrs. If all of the Governor’s proposed cuts for FY 2017 are adopted, people with I/DD face over $60 million in additional cuts in FY 2017 alone, if you total the proposed cuts to DDS (which build in year-end lapses and deficit mitigation reductions from the current fiscal year), M add the proposed cuts to municipal aid for special education services, cuts to the Office of Early Childhood for early childhood birth to three services, and to DORS eliminating the independent living centers. We are told next biennium budget will be even worse. The Council does not envy you in facing this task of developing a budget in bleak fiscal times. However, it has been bleak fiscal times for people with intellectual disabilities for years, with growing waiting lists and shrinking hope that a solution will be found anytime soon. In the face of this reality, we are looking to the Appropriations Committee to reject the Governor’s one size fits all approach to budgeting, imposing an across the board 5.75% cut. Every budget cut is not created equal, and every individual affected by cuts to an agency budget cannot equally withstand their impact. I have heard Chairman Bye speak passionately about the need to protect the safety net for those in our society who would be most harmed by the loss of state funding. She is right. It is that simple. It is that clear. Those served by DDS are certainly among the people who would be harmed most by an unthinking, across the board cut. We call upon the Committee to preserve the DDS budget at its current level, or at a minimum, do not expose it to the same level of cut as all other agencies. Hard decisions will need to be made about delaying projects, or not offering some services that in better times we all would like to have. But our family members with intellectual disabilities, who have already withstood the years of budget cuts, disproportionate and cruel, are not projects that can be delayed; services not provided have serious long-term impacts. Our Council urges this committee to reflect on the disproportionate impact of the proposed cuts, and stand up for our family members with I/DD by rejecting the Governor’s proposed budget cuts to DDS. The Council also does not support the Governor’s proposal to move to a “block grant" approach to budgeting. The block grant approach was advanced by the Governor as a means to give his Commissioners greater flexibility in how they spend the dollars appropriated by the legislature. The Council’s view is that this approach takes away too much authority from the Legislative Branch in setting spending priorities, and removes critical public input afforded by the public hearing process, since all spending decisions would be vested in the Executive Branch. Under the Governor’s proposal, only after money has been expended by the bureaucrats in the Executive Branch would the public, including the legislature, learn how the dollars were spent. This proposal should receive a resounding rejection from the legislature. Finally, the Governor has proposed to move the entire Community Residential Services line item from DDS to the Department of Social Services (DSS). This proposal was launched with no prior notice to families or advocates, so it is not clear what is intended by the Administration in making this proposal. Into this void, the Council offers the following comments and questions: (1) If we were in the Committee’s shoes, we would have the following question for the Administration: . how will this proposal improve the delivery of services to individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities—which is a budget priority identified by the Governor. Because here is the fear of parents and family members of individuals currently unserved or underserved in the DDS system—that this will be just other way to cut the budget on the backs of people with I/DD, dressed up as system reform. . What is the role of DDS in residential services if this proposal is adopted—who performs case management, quality assurance? . How does this proposal intersect with the proposed Intellectual Disabilities Partnership (SB 17)? (2) This proposal does not address the public residential facilities, where there are high costs, and where great savings (for expanded services) could be achieved by accelerated closure. While there may be savings to be achieved from private providers’ services, multiple sources support the notion that the State must begin to look for savings from its publicly operated facilities. Conversion of public group homes to private providers is a start, but closure of the state operated institutions should also become a priority. (3) D88 has a long and unhappy history of payment and communication problems. Moving over $500 million additional dollars into DSS’ budget with no explanation of how it will be absorbed, how staffing will be handled, how communication with the public/providers/individuals receiving services will be managed should be a huge red flag for the Committee, and should demand detailed information before any action is taken on this proposal. Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony Testimony of THERESA I. MADONNA, ADMINISTRATOR The Eliza Huntington Memorial Home of Norwich, Inc. H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. Department of Social Services Budget- Residential Care Home Funding February I I, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Human Services Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Flexer, Representative Abercrombie and Members of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Human Services, my name is THERESA MADONNA and I am the Administrator of The Eliza Huntington Home located in Norwich and I am a member of the Connecticut Association of Residential Care Homes. The Connecticut Association of Residential Care Home includes the majority of the estimated one—hundred homes in the state. We serve about 3,000 residents with about a 95% Census Level of which about 94% are state funded beds— limiting our ability to cost shift. Over 75% or our residents have behavioral health or mental health diagnoses with the remainder being elderly residents. Residential care homes are not medical facilities nor do we provide medical care. We do, however, serve an important function in providing housing to some of the most vulnerable citizens in Connecticut. Our Home has been in continual operation since 1872 providing housing and services to elderly women in the greater Norwich area. For 144 years we have been challenged by providing services to this specific population amid tough economic times. We are unique in that we were founded by an act of the Connecticut General Assembly and we are a non—profit, 5010(3) charitable organization. Today we find ourselves trying to make ends meet due to the DSS rate freeze on our State Supplement reimbursements for room and board. Residential Care Homes are funded through the Aid to the Aged, Blind and Disabled line items within the Department of Social Services budget. There was a time when our home was supported by private pay residents. However, in today’s environment many seniors are facing poverty and isolation because of their reliance on Social Security as their sole source of income. Our Board of Directors decided to accept State residents in response to the need in our community. Today the Home consists of mostly State recipients and it is a constant struggle to be able to provide services when our costs continue to rise, yet our revenue does not. How do we care for the most vulnerable of our society? All of us as we age want to be assured that we can do so with dignity, as much independence as possible, and in an environment that is safe; the Eliza Huntington Home is such a place. Our biggest challenge is management of our costs of staff. By far our largest budget item is wages and benefits. Our caregivers (Personal Care Attendants) are the mainstay of our business and as such are the most difficult type of person to attract, train and then retain. Our salaries must keep pace with the local economic situation. While it is important that we reduce our state’s unemployment rate, for non—profit businesses, with fixed revenue, the lower the unemployment rate, the tighter the market for staff and the result is higher wages and benefits. Our wage and benefit costs difficulties are further exacerbated by our commitment to provide health benefits to our full time staff. We need our State Supplement reimbursement rates to be adjusted regularly so that we can continue to do the important work we have been doing for 144 years. We need our state reimbursement rates to be adjusted regularly so that we can provide competitive wages and benefits to our staff. If not for Homes such as ours, our residents would be in skilled nursing facilities at a cost of over $10,000+ per month. Our services are cost effective for the state and provide residents with a more independent lifestyle. I understand the difficult decisions that need to be undertaken in the budget but would urge the committee to consider the impact of the budget on residential care homes and some of the most vulnerable in the state. Our industry cannot continue to progress without the full support of the state. Without homes like ours these residents would require greater expenses in nursing homes, hospitals and face higher overall healthcare costs. I urge you to continue to support our most cost effective and appropriate response to providing housing and service to our aging population. Thank you for your time and consideration. Theresa I. Madonna, Esq. Administrator The Eliza Huntington Memorial Home of Norwich, Inc 99 Washington Street Norwich, CT 06360 Appropriations Committee Connecticut General Assembly February 16, 2016 Testimonv related to H.B. 5044 My name is Win Evarts and I reside in New Canaan with my wife and three children. Our oldest son is 25 years old and has a seizure condition and intellectual and developmental disabilities (”l/DD”). We are one ofthe many families that are trying to build meaningful lives for our adult family members with a disability. We do not support H.B. 5044 for the following reasons: 1. The bill proposes $59 million in cuts to the Department of Development Services budget representing a combination of current year expenditure cuts, current year lapses and current year budget savings givebacks. Cutting current year expenditures will only increase the Waiting Lists for Residential and Day/Vocational Services causing individuals with disabilities, their families and the private providers that serve 88% of the state further hardship. Removing lapses and current year budget savings from DDS’s budget will remove the only resources that are being brought to bear on unmet needs. 2. The bill proposes an ”I/DD Partnership” to expand supportive housing and develop strategies to fund the Waiting Lists. While these are some ofthe main priorities for Connecticut citizens with disabilities, concrete actions like not cutting DDS’s budget, curbing excessive service costs and overtime in state run facilities, and mandating that DDS budget lapses and budget savings be transparently used to meet system needs would be far more helpful to both citizens and agency performance. 3. The bill does not focus any attention on the estimated $90 million of long-term budget savings that can be realized through closure of DDS- run institutions. Southbury Training School and the Regional Centers represent the most expensive service solutions on per person served basis that DDS funds. When 20% ofthe overall population needing services can’t get them, all the alternatives to generate resources should be evaluated. Thank you for your efforts on behalf of all the citizens and taxpayers of Connecticut. Win Evarts New Canaan, CT 06840 Testimony of Thomas M. Fiorentino on H.B. 5044 Before the Appropriations Committee Submitted via email: aggtestimonvftficgactgov Sen. Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify about HB. 5044. My name is Tom Fiorentino. | live in West Hartford with my wife, Shelagh McClure, and our intellectually disabled adult son Dan. Per the de facto policy of the State of Connecticut- your policy- he will live with us until we have either both died or both become permanently incapacitated. There are two parts of the bill that I would like to address, with an additional comment on the overall budget process. First, I oppose the $59 million cut to DDS. This cut is imposed on top of earlier, disproportionate cuts totaling $60 million since 2012. The effect? The Waiting List for residential services has grown to over 2,000 families and we now have a new waiting list- this one for day programs. There are places you could have cut in the DDS budget that would not have had the effect of adding to one list and creating another. But those places- wildly out of control State employee overtime and the absolutely indefensible (and exorbitant) institutions - have, with limited exceptions, gone untouched in prior years. What did this leave to cut? The vastly more efficient- and equally capable- private providers; along with the programs that directly and most directly affect families and DDS clients. Sadly, I have to acknowledge that history is a great predictor of the future, and that any cuts will once again fall most heavily on the programs that actually work, while sparing those that are ineffective and inefficient. Accordingly, I oppose those cuts as they are destined to further decimate what is indisputably a core government function. This brings me to the second part of the bill, the transfer of $537 million to DSS. It is impossible for me to support or oppose this because no information has been made available that explains anything about the transfer. DDS is having problems that profoundly and adversely affect those with intellectual disabilities. A new way of doing business might be a good idea. But I think that at least some of you will agree with me that until you know the details- until you know, for example, whether the already unresponsive (and maddeningly uncommunicative) DSS can handle this transfer- it is hard to vote either way. We hear that this transfer will be part of a switch to fee for service. I understand that was, overall, a positive thing, for mental health services in Connecticut. But that change was the product of a carefully constructed plan with ample time and competent staff to smooth its implementation. Will that be true this time? Hard to know, given that no one has deigned to share any details. Is there the expertise at DDS and DSS to handle this switch? I acknowledge that there are extremely capable, thoughtful and creative thinkers at DSS, but will they have the time to take this on? Increasing my caution and concern are reports that fee for service has been fraught with problems in other states. Will Connecticut avoid or repeat those mistakes? Again, without a plan, how would one know? Finally, I want to express my opinion on two things about the overall budget process. The first is the idea that every agency should sustain the same percentage cut. This is simplistic and flies in the face of the Governor’s own rhetoric- rhetoric with which I agree- that in these times, we need to focus on our core governmental functions. If every agency is cut the same amount, then either they all equally carry out core governmental functions- which is preposterous- or we just want to avoid deciding which functions are more important than others. Second and related is the idea of block grants for state agencies. If you agree to this, you agree to abdicate your power to the executive branch. It will certain save you time, because there will be no need for any hearings on the budget. No matter what amount you put in the budget, you will have no way of knowing how it will be spent. No matter what your issue- the waiting list, mass transit, vocational technical education- neither you nor your constituents will know whether those programs are going to be funded. The current system is not perfect. But it is, at its beating heart, representative democracy. |t affords the citizenry the basic right- the right that drove so much of our Revolutionary past- to petition the government for the redress of grievances. Our current system, where you vote to fund or not fund certain programs and priorities might be frustrating, but it is far superior to a system where faceless bureaucrats, unchallenged and unchallengeable, make those same decisions. Thank you. My name is Denise King, and my husband and I are the custodial grandparents of a 25 year-old young man with intellectual and developmental disabilities because of a brain injury at 7 months of age. He and his siblings have lived with us since he was 8, his sister 7, and his brother 3. My husband is 70 and I will be 70 next year. We have been here before you for 3 years now because our grandson needs a residential placement, and as you know, we still wait. Our loved ones with ID/DD live in the shadows of society through no fault of their own. They are denied the right to live in the community with their peers because of ”lack of funds.” They are denied the supports they need to hold a job because of ”lack of funds.” If they are unable to hold a job because of their abilities, they are sometimes denied the right to congregate with their peers because of ”lack of funds.” Our grandson is lucky enough to have a job in the kitchen of ECSU with help from a job coach. However, his hours were cut this year due to the funding cuts. Grants have been cut respite and summer camp. This effects both our loved ones who again need peer contact, and it effects the caregivers who really need a break from 24/7 care. In the year 2016, it is time to come out of the shadows. Our loved ones in the ID community have the same hopes, dreams, pride in accomplishments, and need for acceptance as the rest of us. Theyjust need supports. The Department of Developmental Services has been underfunded and mismanaged for years, long before there was a budget crisis. Many people have been waiting for residential placements for 10, 15, or 20 years; our grandson has been on the Wait List for over 10 years. We love our grandson unconditionally, but we are getting older and burned out. It appears that the Department of Developmental Services is being systematically dismantled at the expense of our loved ones. Funding to DDS cannot be cut any further. We need funding for our loved ones to prosper. We need the Wait List to be current, accurate and functional. We need the mismanagement to stop. We have a glimmer of hope both on the state and federal level that we are being heard. Please stand up for our families who have been asking for help for so long. Please show us that the system does work. Stand up against a political system that values special interests at the expense of what is right. As one self-advocate recently asked, ”Where is your courage?” Denise King Lebanon,Ct Testimony to the Appropriations Committee on H.B. No. 5044 — AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 I would like to thank you, Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee for the opportunity to speak in opposition of H.B. No. 5044 — An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 . My name is Collette Bement Langner. My husband and I live in Tolland with our 29 year old son, Scott, who receives employment services from the Department of Developmental Services (DDS). Our family was one of the fortunate Wait List Initiative families that qualified for residential funding in April 2014. However, it will be more than 2 1/2 years of waiting after residential funding was first allocated to Scott before he can realize his dream to move into the community in September, 2016, and the reason —— so few people have been allocated residential funding from DDS that appropriate roommates were impossible to find. In FY 2015, only eleven people, who were not considered to be “Emergencies”, received funding from DDS for residential services. Governor Malloy indicated in his budget address to the Legislature in early February, 2016 that providing community services for the I/DD population is a priority for him, but he has cut more than $50 million from the DDS budget in the past 3 years and H.B. No. 5044 will cut an additional $59 million from the DDS budget! Even more appalling is the fact that most of the cuts to the DDS budget have come from the community—based Residential Services or Day & Employment Services, meaning these cuts directly affect persons with I/DD. There are currently 100 people on the DDS Day & Employment Services Waiting List and more than 2,000 people on the DDS Waiting List for Residential Services, some who have been waiting for decades. The governor’s proposed budget adjustments will result in the lengthening of both of these waiting lists, with no end in sight! How can the Governor possibly think that these additional cuts to the DDS budget show his “priority” concern for the I/DD community? This budget adjustment will likely mean that new high school graduates will be left without any funding for Day & Employments Services when they graduate in June 2016! Instead of further cuts to the DDS budget, Governor Malloy should close the antiquated, outrageously expensive public institutions (five Regional Centers and Southbury Training School) that use up an exorbitant amount of the DDS residential funding. In a review of FY 2015 state expenditures, a parent research group from the Families for Families Leadership Committee at The Arc Connecticut discovered that total expenditures at STS were more than $106 million for 291 residents ($365 ,000/resident), while the total expenditures at the five Regional Centers were $79,229,068 for 177 residents ($447,6l6/resident). The closing of these public institutions could net approximately $90 million to fund additional residential services in private community settings, while also serving all of the current residents of these facilities as well as drastically reducing the size of the Residential Waiting List by providing residential funding for 1,000 individuals. The Governor is already cognizant of the inflated cost of state— operated facilities, as evidenced by his decision to privatize 37 of the 68 public group homes in the state. His decision acknowledges the fact that the highly qualified private providers in our state can deliver quality care at considerably lower cost. If the I/DD community is truly a priority for Governor Malloy, then the inefficiencies in the DDS budget should be eliminated and additional cuts to the DDS budget should be avoided at all costs! Office of The Governor State Capitol 210 Capitol Avenue Hartford, CT. 06106 Dear Legislators & Appropriations Committee, My Name Is Varian Salters. I am an individual with an Intellectual Disability | live in my own Apartment and hire my own staff & Go to Best Buddies & Special Olympics Swim practice & People First of Connecticut Meetings witch is a Statewide Advocacy Group for People with Disabilities. I am also the treasurer for People First of Connecticut. I have a great life! I am Oppose to Bill H.B. No. 5044. Please Don’t Cut $59 million from the DDS budget! There is 2,000 DDS families on the current DDS Waiting List. I have friends on the waiting list that I would like to get the same opportunity has I have of living on their own, or having a real job! Why are we here Year After Year always cutting From the DDS budget? How Come It Seem Like Year After Year We Have Millions To Spend on other things but Yet when it comes to helping the most needy we are in a budget deficit? . I think it time to stop cutting DDS Funding & Help people in need. Thank you for taking the time to read my letter about these important issues Sincerely, Varian S. Salters (860) 965—1317 va rians ’66 ahoo.com My name is Dr. Lisa Weisinger, | live at 3 Fawn Brook in West Hartford. I would like to thank Committee chairs Senator Beth Bye, Representative Toni Walker and the rest of the committee for reading this testimony. I have a 21 year old son, Jamie, who has Down syndrome who will become Connecticut’s next victim of the governor’s budget if something drastic is not done. Jamie will graduate from his post secondary program this June. If the governor’s budget continues to hammer away at the very core of DDS, there will be a waiting list for Day Services and Job Supports. All of the work he has done for the past 14 years will have been for naught. The weight of this new round of budget cuts is devastating to Jamie, my husband and me. Has Jamie spent the last 14 years learning the maze of social graces and academic achievement just so he can sit at home with his aging parents and be alone? Jamie was accepted into the National Honor Society as a junior in high school and has appeared in countless magazines and newspapers lauding his many accomplishments. No one believed me when I told them that he could read when he was 2 and he has been breaking down barriers since he was born. Some call him the Mayor of West Hartford, we call him the ambassador! He continues to change the world, one person at a time. Are we going to be that kind of society that throws away its most vulnerable citizens? My son loves school and work. He is the first one out of bed each morning. However, Jamie tells me that he is sad and lonely because all of his friends have gone off to college. Can you imagine his despair when he finds out that there is nothing for him after he graduates? What would you do if Jamie were your son? How loud would you scream knowing that the state of CT has chosen to balance the budget on the back of your son? As legislators, you have the power to tell Jamie that he matters and the great state of CT values his life. Please take a stand on the moral and ethical ground of caring for our children and put the money back into DDS. Consider taking the money saved from DDS and allow our children to be served off of the waiting list. Presently, there are 2,000 people waiting for a residential placement and have been waiting for decades. The Governor’s continued $59 million cuts to DDS will almost certainly cause a new waiting list for Day Services. What will happen to those of us who will need DDS funds to help support our young adults in their employment? What about those parents who have to work to support their families? If there is a new waiting list for Day Supports, who will stay home with their children? The choices are an abomination to civilized society. They either choose their child and lose their job or choose their job and their child stays home all day, every day, by him/herself. Many more families will need state assistance because they are no longer able to work. It will end up costing the state more money to cut the budget in DDS. I urge you to continue the great work that you are doing for all of us in Connecticut. We rely on you to make the socially responsible choices that govern this great state. On behalf of Jamie and my entire family, please put the money back into the DDS and support Connecticut’s most vulnerable citizens by stopping the $59 million budget cuts. Thank You, Lisa Weisinger, M.D. February 18, 2016 Dear Members of the Appropriations Committee, My name is Rachel Daley, i am an employee of Community Residences Incorporated, a non—for- profit agency which provides services to children and adults with special needs under contracts with DDS, DCF and D88. In my six years of employment, I have worked as direct care staff in DDS funded Community Living Arrangements (CLAs), a case manager in their Family and Community Ties, an enhanced foster care program (funded by DCF). I currently work as a Behaviorist for the DDS Community Living Arrangement (CLAs). In all of these roles, I have gained a great deal of respect for the importance of serving the disenfranchised populations in our communities and on a larger scale, in our state. I feel strongly that we, as a society, have an obligation to aid our more vulnerable populations in creating the best possible lives they can achieve given their limitations, traumas and life circumstances that have led them to requiring state services. In my previous positions, working in foster care, particularly as a case manager for the Family and Community Ties foster care program, I can tell you that despite the best effmts of foster parents and support of the treatment teams, some children are not appropriate for a foster care setting, or at least may not be at that particular time of referral. The ongoing budget cuts which create the closing of congregate care settings such as group homes and STAR programs leave children with acute needs with no middle ground between foster care or inpatient settings (which is time limited and only utilized in crisis situations). Continued elimination of tthe group home settings without appropriate fiinding to community based services is putting vulnerable children with mental health issues, trauma and strained attachments in settings that are not appropriate for their needs. It is also putting them at risk for falling through the cracks to receive no services at all. Currently, I work as a Behaviorist in the DDS funded Community Living Arrangements. Our agency has a reputation for and is quite skilled at serving some of the most behaviorally involved individuals in the state. We serve individuals who exhibit severe behaviors such as aggression, self— injury, bolting, sexualized behaviors and property destruction. We manage these behaviors inside the home, without the need for calling mobile crisis or 91 1 (unless there is a psychiatric or medical emergency). Many of our individuals have complex needs, for example, non-verbal individuals with profound intellectual disability who engage in severe self—injurious behavior, requiring a staff at arm’s length 24 hours per day. We also work with individuals who have complex trauma histories co-occurring with intellectual disability, mental health, and strained attachments as evidenced by involvement with the Department of Children and Families' We also serve individuals with Autism who are large in stature and become extremely aggressive at times with no clear antecedent, or if a routine is disrupted. To be perfectly frank, the amount of money allotted to pay the direct care staff in the non for profit sector is too low considering the amount of work they put in, the safety risks they take working with aggressive individuals, and the complexity of the behavioral programming they are-expected to execute, in order to meet the needs of these individuals. It can be a challenge to retain staff with the necessary skill required to implement programming needed to treat these individuals because of the low wages they are receiving. In addition, budget cuts from the previous year have made it a significant challenge for us to safely staff many of our high risk individuals, because the Department of Developmental Services has so few funds to provide us with 1:1 staffing for many of our behaviorally challenging individuals. This has the potential to create a significant safety risk for our staff and our individuals. If you are familiar with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, you’ ll know that the most basic needs that must be met first is physiological needs (food, shelter clothing). We have that provided for our individuals. The next step is safety. When we are told that money is not available to provide staffing to safely manage our individuals, we must question if we will be able to? On a larger scale, what quality of life are we really truly giving them? If our state cannot provide us with the budget to meet the most basic need of safety, how then are we supposed to create an environment that can encourage love, belonging, esteem, and improvement of skills and well—being? - I understand that when making budget cuts, difficult decisions have to be made. It is inevitable. In writing this, my hope is to give you a snapshot of how these cuts are impacting people’s lives. It is my strong belief that increasing pay for our non for profit direct care staff to that of state staff would be a much needed and significant morale boost. I also think it is important to revisit the cuts made to the Department of Children and Families, and to not eliminate all congregate care settings, as I do believe they serve a purpose in our system, for those youths who are not yet leady to step back into a home setting. Thank you for taking the time to read this, and I hope you consider some of the points I have made in this testimony. - Respectfully You1s, el K. Daley, 183% Behavior ist f01 Community Residences Incorporated Senator Bye, Representative Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee, my name is Paul Rosin I am the Executive Director of Community Residences Inc. (CRI) which is a large not-for—profit Agency that provides services to children and adults With special needs under contracts With DDS, DCF and D88. We are among the 550+ member agencies of the CT Community Nonprofit Alliance (CT Nonprofit Alliance.) We the 1000 staff strong at CRI are very concerned about what impact the Governor’s 2017 State Budget will have on the hundreds of children and adults that this Agency currently serves on a daily basis and on the thousands that are in need of services but are not currently receiving them. We are particularly concerned about the following: Department of Children and Families (DCF) 0 Group homes provide essential therapeutic services to children removed from their homes due to abuse, neglect, or other high risk circumstances. 0 The DCF federal court monitor warned that the reduction of congregate care capacity without sufficient reinvestment in community based services will jeopardize the well—being of CT’s children. 0 Further eliminating treatment options for children, such as STAR Homes and Therapeutic Group Homes, will only exacerbate the currently strained system. As these programs close, outpatient clinics, which are already at capacity, will be flooded with children who would otherwise require a higher level of care. Or worse, children with nowhere to turn may fall through the gaps, closed off from services that would otherwise improve their well—being. DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES (DDS) o In annualizing the FY 2016 Deficit Mitigation and Lapses, the Governor is cutting millions from Employment Opportunities and Day Services, Behavioral Support Programs and opportunities for people to live in the community. 0 The Transfer of funding for the Community Residential Services line from DDS to the Department of Social Services and a change from grant—funded service provision to fee—for—service billing. a. This change reflects a transfer of $537,111,053 from DDS to DSS, or nearly half of the total DDS Operating Budget in FY17. b. Part of this proposal is the creation of an Intellectual Disabilities Partnership, with a similar model to the Behavioral Health Partnership. We support this aspect of the Governor’s proposal. c. This proposed shift to DSS has the potential to create positive change in the provision of services for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, with two very important caveats: adequate rates inclusive of increased wages for not-for-profit staff and Community nonprofits must be at the table in developing the transition plan. 0 This budget would also transfer DDS’ Autism Division to DSS. This presents concerns in light of recent and ongoing issues with various Waiver services currently administered by D55. 0 The budget would convert Residential Community Living Arrangements from Public to Private Nonprofits. We support this shift. The state must pay adequate rates, inclusive of increased wages for not-for-profit staff, in order for services to be delivered effectively. In addition to the above, CR1 is very concerned regarding the Governor’s $60 million cut to the combined block grant “Agency Operations” account at DCF and DDS. There is no assurance that these two agencies would be required to evenly distribute these cuts across all programs. This cut could disproportionately fall on, and in some cases completely eliminate, critical programs that serve some of the neediest children and adults in Connecticut Senator Bye, Representative Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee, I work for a Non-Profit named Community Residences, Inc. We are funded by DCF, DSS and DDS. Below you will find more about our agency and how the proposed budget cuts will effect our company which does great things for the clients we serve. Might I add we do it at a fraction of the price that the state homes do. We have not had a raise is several years due to the fact our budget tends to get cut every year. Mean while we are paying a lot of money for a bus system that people are riding for free or riding to go to bars. I am all for college kids who decide to party in Hartford to be responsible and not drive but I don’t think this should cost the state tax payers what this bus system is costing us. I feel that while our political leaders want Connecticut’s transportation systems to catch up with Boston’s or New Yorks, I feel it’s a waste of money as there are large amounts of people leaving the state due to High taxation and loss of jobs. Now the bus system is costing us a lot and forcing us to pay such high taxes. Instead of cutting budgets for DDS, DCF and DSS why don’t we take it from the DOT and the bus system? Or take it from the State run group homes as they are costing us more Money then organizations such as the one I proudly work for. Another way to save money is to stop giving full health benefits to state workers for life. I get you need to provide benefits just like every other place of employment, but they can offer the same crappy benefits we get. Why should I get crappy Benefits and pay taxes so someone at the state gets awesome benefits. Is that fair. Please remember my benefits are determined on the state budget. My company give us the best Benefits they can, It’s the state budget cuts that effect the level of benefits we get which are crappy. I beg you please stand up and fight for us as we do a lot of good things and just ask to be treated fairly and cutting your budget year after year while other state agencies don’t get the same treatment is not fair. Community Residences Inc. (CRI) which is a large not-for-profit Agency that provides services to children and adults with special needs under contracts with DDS, DCF and DSS. We are among the 550+ member agencies of the CT Community Nonprofit Alliance (CT Nonprofit Alliance.) We the 1000 staff strong at CRI are very concerned about what impact the Governor’s 2017 State Budget will have on the hundreds of children and adults that this Agency currently serves on a daily basis and on the thousands that are in need of services but are not currently receiving them. We are particularly concerned about the following: Department of Children and Families (DCF) 0 Group homes provide essential therapeutic services to children removed from their homes due to abuse, neglect, or other high risk circumstances. 0 The DCF federal court monitor warned that the reduction of congregate care capacity without sufficient reinvestment in community based services will jeopardize the well—being of CT’s children. 0 Further eliminating treatment options for children, such as STAR Homes and Therapeutic Group Homes, will only exacerbate the currently strained system. As these programs close, outpatient clinics, which are already at capacity, will be flooded with children who would otherwise require a higher level of care. Or worse, children with nowhere to turn may fall through the gaps, closed off from services that would otherwise improve their well—being. DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES (DDS) o In annualizing the FY 2016 Deficit Mitigation and Lapses, the Governor is cutting millions from Employment Opportunities and Day Services, Behavioral Support Programs and opportunities for people to live in the community. 0 The Transfer of funding for the Community Residential Services line from DDS to the Department of Social Services and a change from grant—funded service provision to fee—for—service billing. a. This change reflects a transfer of $537,111,053 from DDS to DSS, or nearly half of the total DDS Operating Budget in FY17. b. Part of this proposal is the creation of an Intellectual Disabilities Partnership, with a similar model to the Behavioral Health Partnership. We support this aspect of the Governor’s proposal. c. This proposed shift to DSS has the potential to create positive change in the provision of services for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, with two very important caveats: adequate rates inclusive of increased wages for not-for-profit staff and Community nonprofits must be at the table in developing the transition plan. o This budget would also transfer DDS’ Autism Division to DSS. This presents concerns in light of recent and ongoing issues with various Waiver services currently administered by D55. 0 The budget would convert Residential Community Living Arrangements from Public to Private Nonprofits. We support this shift. The state must pay adequate rates, inclusive of increased wages for not-for-profit staff, in order for services to be delivered effectively. In addition to the above, CR1 is very concerned regarding the Governor’s $60 million cut to the combined block grant “Agency Operations” account at DCF and DDS. There is no assurance that these two agencies would be required to evenly distribute these cuts across all programs. This cut could disproportionately fall on, and in some cases completely eliminate, critical programs that serve some of the neediest children and adults in Connecticut Thank you \\ \§ Testimony Submitted to the Appropriations Committee: H.B. No. 5044: An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending 30 June 2017 Submitted By: James Oliver, Assistant Director of Educational Support Services, Horizons, Incorporated, South Windham, Connecticut Date of Public Hearing: 18 February 2017 Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and honorable members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is James Oliver, and I work with Educational Support Services at Horizons —— a private nonprofit agency located in South Windham. Our agency has been in operation for 37 years and provides individualized supports and services for people with special needs where they live, learn, work, and play. Horizons is among the 600 member agencies of the Connecticut Community Nonprofit Alliance. I speak before you to express concerns with H.B. No. 5044: An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending 30 June 2017. Specifically, I want to express my disapproval of the proposed $56 million cut to DDS’s budget and $53 million cut to special education, after—school programs, reading tutors, and other services in low—performing public schools state wide. DDS and other state agencies helping the underserved populace of Connecticut are seemingly in the cross hairs of the Governor annually. For instance, last year the Governor’s proposed budget sought to cut $110 million from DDS (employment and day services programs by $30 million, residential services by $23 million, and new high school graduates programs by $36 million; in addition, previous cuts were to be annualized — costing private providers $21 million over the two year life of the budget). Likewise, this year the Govemor’s budget seeks to cut $408 million from 14 state agencies that partner with nonprofit providers. These cuts would likely eliminate many critical programs that serve the neediest residents of the state and would have a butterfly effect throughout the economy as a whole. The proposed budget is a reaction a $560 million budget deficit. Given that next year the state faces a $1.7 billion budget deficit, my fear is that funds to human services agencies will continue to be diverted, which will negatively impact people in need. Indeed, Governor Malloy proposes transitioning from a current services approach to a zero—based budgeting strategy. Current services, as defined by the Governor, is based on an expectation of ever growing spending that automatically pays for every line item previously funded — with increases for Horizons, 1 inflation. However, despite this assertion, current services at state agencies have not experienced continued growth, as evidenced by the mere 1 percent COLA for nonprofit employees working in human services in the last eight years. This year’s budget requires the legislature to work with state agencies to identify “core” functions of government within each agency. The purpose of this mandate is to identify discretionary spending essential for “core” programs, presumably so “non—core” programs can be cut. Discretionary spending at state agencies includes programs and services for people with special needs, the poor, and mentally ill. It is my contention that services rendered at agencies associated with DDS, DSS, DMHAS, and the like, are all core services that deserve the same protection from budget cuts that state employees’ retirement packages (i.e. considered a fixed cost) enjoy. The people served by human services agencies require consistent programs to maintain progress, so they can contribute to the economy and be active in the community. I ask this committee to repeat its actions from last year to avert the damaging effects that the proposed budget cuts would have, so the people of Connecticut can maintain their quality of life. Thank you for your time and consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or for additional information. James Oliver Assistant Director, Educational Support Services Work (860) 456—1032 Cell (860) 617-4414 joliver@horizonsct. org ME i: EN N Horizons, 2 Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 - An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the FY 17 February 18‘“, 2016 Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Tina Puziello and I am a registered voter in the town of Branford CT. I am testifying here tonight to oppose any proposed cuts to DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. l have bi-polar illness and have been a member of Options Learning and Socialization Center for 20 years. Peer support through the meeting with other members at Options is very important for me. If I didn’t have the Options Center for support I would become isolated and more depressed which could lead to suicidal thoughts and hospitalization. Hospitalization is more expensive than out-patient services and the support of a place like Options. Thank you. Linda Buchanan 135 Linnmoore Street Hartford, CT 06114 Testimony Submitted to the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044: An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Endinglune 30, 2017 Submitted by: Linda Buchanan, Hartford, CT Mother of Nicholas Harrity, 1981 — 2013, and ]ohn Harrity, 1990 - 2012 February 18, 2016 Senator Bye, Representative Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee, my name is Linda Buchanan. Here we are again, in our annual deliberations on how to keep holding our collective finger in the dike, for all ofthe agencies and programs that support the most vulnerable populations in our State. This is my third appearance before the Committee, as a parent of and advocate for people living with mental illness. Or, in my personal case, people who have lost their battle as a direct consequence of flat-funding, rescissions and cuts. After more than two decades of inadequate investment ("Keep the Promise" has become a hollow, ironic phrase), 10 years of flat-funding and five years of rescissions and cuts, make no mistake — our front-line community behavioral health agencies are bleeding out. If further cuts pass in this budget year, some will not survive, denying critical service to not only clients in desperate need of support and treatment, but sacrificing jobs as well, on the altar of our criminally penny-wise and pound-foolish state budget. I appeal to you, both personally and professionally, to be the champions that we need, that we deserve. I especially want to emphasize three critical areas today: Firstly, Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) programs are demonstrably the most cost- effective approach to enable people with mental illness to live, and even thrive, in the community. ACT Team programs offer intensive outpatient services that allow their clients to not only live with dignity and security, but to even recover. We know this ,- expanding these programs has been high on our wish list for a long time, in order to improve our State’s mental healthcare system, to reach more people in more communities. But the cuts already sustained in the last four years mean that, not only have we not been able to expand these proven, outstanding programs, ACT Teams already in place have had to both reduce the number of people they are able to serve and reduce services available to existing clients. Secondly, frontline staff are also the undeserving victims of our budget ax. Community behavioral health agencies employ thousands of Connecticut residents, dedicated to providing essential services to our most at-risk citizens. Our behavioral health agencies are not able to attract or retain the staff they need — each year every agency loses dozens of dedicated, well-trained staff to other non-profits, healthcare agencies, even (still) state jobs deemed essential that are able to offer better wages and benefits. These are amazing people committed to the mission of serving clients like my son, Nick, but who have their own families to support, their own futures to consider, who cannot sustain pay and benefit freezes year after year. The result is a revolving door of frequent staff vacancies and changes, vacancies that go unfilled for long periods, and cutbacks of critical positions and personnel due to lack of funds. It is important that I emphasize a key element of successful treatment here — in order to succeed, treatment programs for people living with mental illness, who are fighting every day to live independently in our communities, depend on one thing — TRUST. It takes time for staff, for case managers and clinicians, to build Mt with clients, many of whom struggle with paranoia and other disabling symptoms. Frequent staff changes, positions left vacant causing increased caseloads for remaining staff, service reductions, do not only erode this trust, they can destroy it. Non-profit community behavioral health agencies are not only critical treatment programs, they are (ob creators. Ask the many union members that use their own time to come here every year, for their clients, for their families. Thirdly, our short-sighted funding cuts to community behavioral health cost us more money — a LOT more — in far more expensive services. People in need who are precluded from care will result in more homelessness, more people in already overcrowded shelters — people with mental illness are at high risk in our shelters, easily victimized — and a demand for far more costly services, including police, emergency rooms, and other state services. In addition to these tragic and untenable — unconscionable — consequences, inadequate Medicaid reimbursement rates, with more cuts threatened, mean that the ability of community behavioral health outpatient clinics to continue to serve the thousands of state Medicaid recipients that now receive life-saving treatment and care is at grave risk. Some ofyou know my story, have heard my story, my sons’ stories, before. Both of my beautiful sons suffered from serious mental health issues, but my oldest son’s was most severe, starting at an earlier age than his little brother’s, with more devastating effect. Nick was a DMHAS client who received services from Capitol Region Mental Health from the age of 16, qualifying for Social Security’s Supplemental Security Income, Medicaid and State Administered General Assistance (SAGA) at 18. In the last three years of his life, after sustaining his first full psychotic break at 17, with seven years of ensuing repeated in-patient hospitalizations, our whole family lurching from crisis to crisis, followed by six years of stability on the only anti-psychotic medication that ever worked to control his delusions and hallucinations, Nick, as is so very, tragically, common, became non-compliant with his medication when his dosage was not increased while he was still clear enough to partner in his treatment. They missed the window... and Nick returned to darkness and pain. A year later, it was no longer safe for him to live with family, and he was at risk of homelessness, in critical, emergent need of services. One of the best community behavioral health agencies in the state, Gilead Community Services of Middletown, stepped up and accepted the challenge of providing Nick the support and services that he needed through their ACT Team, enabling him, for the first time in his life at the age of 30, to live in his own apartment, to live independently. I will be forever grateful. Nick was so proud ofthat apartment. He hung his paintings on the wall, displayed his collections on shelves (and the top of his refrigerator), set up his "altars,” all so carefully positioned, so important to him. But the budget cuts and rescissions that we have passed since 2012 forced Gilead to reduce ACT client services. Instead of meeting with his case manager every week for 30 minutes, Nick was reduced to 15 minutes every two weeks. The case manager who spent months getting to know him, gaining his trust, left for a better-paying job. The ACT program manager changed three times in the course of a year. Nick died on August 7, 2013, at the age of 31. Nine months after his little brother, who died in 2012, at 21. I am here for Nick, for all the Nicks. As you deliberate, as you make the hard choices before you, remember them. I hate traffic jams as much as the next person, but if] have to choose between people and roads, I will choose people every time. Remember Nick. Honor him. Thank you. Linda Buchanan, Senate Clerk’s Oflfice NICHOLAS DEMAIO HARRITY November 20, 1981 — August 7, 2013 He lived with so much courage and love. 3 - 2012 Little Brother Nick and Johnny 2013 and 1990 1990 J Big Brother . 3 Emil..- 900 Watertown Avenue, Waterbury, CT 06708 Phone/Fax 203 -756-8984 Testimony Submitted to the Appropriations Committee: H.B. No. 5044: An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. Submitted By: Roberta Murtagh, Executive Director, C.N.V. Help, Inc. February 18, 2016 Senator Bye, Representative Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee, my name is Roberta Murtagh, and I am the Executive Director of C.N.V. Help, Inc. with behavioral health programs located in Waterbury, Torrington and Danbury. We are among the 550+ member agencies of the CT Community Nonprofit Alliance (CT Nonprofit Alliance.) I would like to share my concerns with House Bill 5044: An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017.In particular, I wanted to express my sincere concerns to the funding reductions to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. This funding reduction would threaten critical services to individuals and families in our service area. It is a critical time for substance abuse services and providers who are trying desperately to deal with the opiate crisis that is ravaging citizens of this state and nationwide. Deaths from opiate overdoses have increased 300% in a three year period, and it is evident and vital that we do more to assist individuals with substance use issues, not less. Our agency also provides mental health residential and outpatient services. Cuts to mental health services would be devastating for the vulnerable individuals and families that we serve. It is frightening to imagine what that would mean at our programs, particularly our residential programs, where we already underfunded and struggle to meet clients’ needs. Managed Service System and Grants for Mental Health Services funds must be preserved to ensure that critical services are not reduced or eliminated. In addition, I am concerned about the Govemor’s proposed reduction in funding to Behavioral Health Boards and Councils. The vital work that is achieved by these organizations is an integral component of our service system. I hope that you will not approve this consolidation. Thank you for your time and consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions, or for additional information. Contact information: Roberta Murtagh, C.N.V. Help, Inc., 900 Watertown Avenue, Waterbury, CT 06708, (203) 756—8984 x103, rmnrta ’i‘is’fikfll‘v’hfii .orc February 17, 2016 Senator Bye, Representative Walker and Honorable members of the appropriation committee: Hi, my name is James Green, I am in recovery for 22 years now. When I was 23 I went to inpatient treatment program at Blue Hills, at that time they were offering 21 days for treatment, but before that I had been using for crack cocaine for 10 years at that point, and 21 days of treatment was not enough, I ended up staying for 3 months. When I walked through those doors, I thought, ”I want to get clean, and I want the right people to help me do it.” When I was there, I made a connection to a peer counselor who helped me stay focused on my recovery, I said, ”If I went back out there, it would be a waste of money as I would have kept using, I have friends who were still using.” I was not ready to go back home, because I wanted my sobriety, people thought that I was just killing time or wasting state’s money, they gave me a chance, when the last day came, they shook my hand and said that I did a good job, after that I felt like I was a new person. I used to be nervous going outside, I felt paranoid. | used to be outside on a mission when I was using, I had to learn how to be outside again and be calm. It worked out well for me, but people I grew up with are still using and are struggling, my life changed and I felt good about myself. I think that change is possible if you’re willing to put in the work. I told my daughter the other day, I don’t think I would be around today if I hadn’t stopped using, I think it’s a miracle. I burned a lot of bridges when I was using, I was bad, I stole from my family, my mother said she would pray for me. If someone came around me the way I was, I would say don’t come around me. No matter what I did to them, my family had my back. After I got sober, some people were mad that I was clean because I made a lot of guys rich. My family was happy that I was rebuilding my life, it was good. It can be hard because people don’t like giving you a second chance, which is why these programs need to stay around because they help you get that second chance. Any day I’m clean and off of drugs, I’m happy. Recently I came back for outpatient treatment on my own, and I found this helpful, I could learn something from everyone. I was able to apply what I learned to how I can use it in my life. I’ve been in the state of Connecticut my whole life, and I think a lot of people need a lot of help, I think if we don’t help these people a lot of the towns are going to be significantly affected. I think if people are out in the streets using and not in programs, it will be dangerous and we will need more police. I think it’s going to be bad. I can say that because if a judge had not guided me to one of these programs, I would be one of those people. Instead I can say I’ve been clean ever since. Thank you for your time, please make the right decision, James Green Hartford, Connecticut Jay Valentin * 74 Morley Drive * Meriden, CT 06450 Appropriations Committee Hearing - February 18, 2016 Testimony AGAINST House Bill No. 5044, AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Thank you ladies and gentlemen for allowing me to speak tonight. My name is Jay Valentin, | work at DMHAS’ Blue Hills Hospital in Hartford, and l have been working as a mental health and addiction professional for over 25 years. l have a few points to make tonight that I hope will get you to think twice about the proposed cuts. We have a heroin epidemic in the state of Connecticut, claiming the lives of many young people. Our sons and daughters are dying of opiate overdoses because there’s not enough places to get treatment. We are already operating with a diminished capacity to adequately treat addicts and the mentally ill. Folks with severe psychiatric conditions are roaming the streets, sleeping in shelters, not being able to see psychiatrist for long periods of time, stopping their medications, and ultimately ending up in our emergency rooms. 80 | ask: what’s more costly -- a visit to a psychiatrist, or 3-4 nights in an emergency room? The cuts being proposed will be catastrophic. Crime will increase a great deal because that is how addicts survive. We don’t need to criminalize mental illness and addiction, we need to treat it. By the way, the state is not going to save any money with these cuts because the money can go into two places:the prisons, which I believe the cost is $23-25,000 a year per inmate, or you put it to a services. Either way the money will be spent. 80 why not spend it in services where there is a chance to rehabilitate someone, rather than locking them up like animals because they have an illness. In my years as the clinician, I’ve seen many successes and Page 1 of 2 people become productive members of society they just need a break. In fact I’m going to share this with you, I wouldn’t be here today if it wasn’t for services I received when I needed a helping hand and this is why I feel so strongly about care for those who desperately needed. Now I am a strong contributor to my community and state. Lastly, what is it going to take for folks to realize how critical having treatment facilities available for folks is? In our facility, we hear how families are torn apart when there’s an overdose in a family or they don’t know what to do with a mentally ill child or adult. I urge you to reconsider these cuts. Treatment works, not prison. In fact you know this too and because there are initiatives to reduce incarceration and have police officers bring people to facilities when they’re caught with drugs on them or highly intoxicated. These are great changes, but they require more funds, not less. I urge you to help make our communities stronger not weaker and do not support Bill No. 5044. Thank you Page 2 of 2 Testimony Before the Appropriations Committee on Governor’s proposed Midterm Budget adjustments FY 2017 IN OPPOSITION H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Re: Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) Budget February 18, 2016 TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM ACOSTA Bridgeport, CT Good evening Sen. Bye, Rep. Walker and members of the committee. My name is William Acosta and I am from Bridgeport. I come before you today to address Governor’s Bill No. 5044, “An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for Fiscal Year 2017, Regarding the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services Budget.” I would like to take just a moment to say “thank you” to you, madams chair and the members of this committee for all of the hard work that you do day after day to do right by your constituents and the citizens of this state who represent so many varied interests and agenda. I am a proud voter and I plan to continue to be a proud voter. I come before you today to address the proposed reductions in the state budget through this bill that cuts millions of dollars earmarked for mental health and substance abuse treatment and services for the fiscal year that begins in July of this year. I serve as Housing and Advocacy Coordinator at Bridge House in Bridgeport. Bridge House is a nonprofit psychosocial rehabilitation day program—or more commonly known as a Clubhouse program—that serves adults, or clubhouse members, living with mental health conditions. The cuts could very likely affect funding for all Clubhouse programs across our state . Beyond the title that I carry at Bridge House, my personal passion for this work comes from my own humble lived experience as the parent of a young adult son who has had a lifelong mental health condition. There is an intense personal emotional pain that comes with witnessing loved ones in despair—and we can’t personally help them. Truth be told, not w of us is completely free of being at least relatively close to someone with a disability and a l story to tell. But for me and many others, that translates into a relentless energy to serve daily and make a difference in the life of someone WhO might not otherwise be able to help him or herself. Over the past 8 years, my son has very heavily relied on and benefitted from the employment, education, housing, involvement in local and state advocacy and becoming an active voter himself, young adult programming and socialization supports that Bridge House gives him and some 250 active clubhouse members diily. Day after day, Bridge House, numerous other clubhouse programs like it, Regional Mental Health Boards and services like the CT Legal Rights Project provide assistance that honors the value, the integrity, the respect, the honor that so many of our people living With mental health conditions so sorely deserve, have earned and must receive every day. Lives truly do matter, and I appeal to your conscience; to your vision; to your compassion, and I respectfully request that these proposed cuts in funding to Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services programs and services—be challenged and avoided. Thank you again, madam chair and members of the committee. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee Victor Buchelli February 18, 2016 Waterbury, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and esteemed members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Victor Buchelli and I am a registered voter and live in Naugatuck, CT. I am here to testify on H.B. No. 5044 and I oppose any cuts to mental health services and supports. lam a survivor of Connecticut’s mental health and addiction services. In the late 1970’s l was a graduate of Fairfield Hills. My diagnosis is manic depression or Bipolar Disorder. I also suffer from a physical disability- COPD and asthma. From being in the system l have become an empowered consumer. lam another voice for the disabled, homeless and addicted. It is senseless for any cuts to be made in mental health, when there are thousands people benefitting from services in the community. Please continue to fund our preventative, early intervention, supportive housing and mental health services in Connecticut, these program are an important part of our community. Thank you, Victor Buchelli Testimony for the Appropriations Committee, Vinod H. Srihari, M.D., Attending Psychiatrist, Connecticut Mental Health Center Director, Program for Specialized Treatment Early in Psychosis (STEP), Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine February 18, 2016 Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and Members of the Appropriations Committee, thank you for this opportunity to offer my views about HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending .June 30, 2017. It is a privilege to speak to you this evening on behalf of the treatment and educational programs at the Connecticut Mental Health Center and the vital importance of protecting budgetary support to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS). | first came to New Haven in 1999 as a trainee and CMHC had a formative experience on my choice to become a psychiatrist in the public sector. l was attracted to the unique environment of the Center, which allowed for real engagement with underserved populations while also encouraging the development of novel, innovative programs to relieve suffering — all in a setting that prided itself on training the next generation of psychiatrists, psychologists and social workers. This unique public-academic collaboration would not be possible without the consistent support of the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS). For the past 10 years l have had the opportunity to develop and expand a clinical program that seeks to improve outcomes for youth with new onset psychotic disorders. DMHAS support and leadership has been vital to the birth and growth of the clinic for Specialized Treatment Early in Psychosis (STEP) and contributed to the growing national focus on the care of this vulnerable group. STEP has since been recognized in guidance from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to states, and has been cited as a model of care in communications from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and the Cassidy-Murphy Mental Health Reform Act, currently under consideration in the U.S. senate. The investment by DMHAS leadership in this work as far back as 2006, led to the development of a cost-effective clinical program that has demonstrably improved outcomes while also reducing costs related to unnecessary inpatient care, emergency room use and incarceration. As one of the training directors of the Yale Psychiatry Residency, I understand the unique and vital role that CMHC plays in developing the next generation of psychiatrists. The training program last year attracted more than 1,000 applications for a mere 16 positions and several applicants specifically cited clinical programs at CMHC as crucial to their reason for choosing to relocate to Connecticut. Aside from physicians, the Center plays a vital role in exposing a wide variety of trainees — from nursing, social work and psychology — to the rewards of caring for our patients, and this educational mission adds irreplaceable value that pays for itself many times over as many of these trainees choose to take up staff positions at CMHC and arrive at their first day of work, as I did, already well oriented to the system of care and personally invested in its health and success. In summary, the proposed DMHAS budget cuts threaten the vital clinical and educational missions of the Connecticut Mental Health Center. I believe that further cuts to an already stretched system of care will adversely impact the lives of those patients whom we serve: in the short term, by crippling programs that provide care, and in the longer term, by weakening the training experiences that are vital to the health of the mental health workforce. Stacey McHenry 109 Aspen Drive South Glastonbury, CT 06073 Appropriations Committee Hearing - February 18, 2016 Oppose House Bill No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Good afternoon, Co-Chairs Senator Bye and Representative Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Stacey Moody McHenry, Ph.D. and I am a psychologist at Connecticut Valley Hospital, the DMHAS-run mental health hospital in Middletown. Over the years, I have witnessed a decline in the abilitv to provide services to individuals as a result of monetary challenges, and I believe that the Droposed budget cuts to DHMAS and (DDS) will cause harm to the most vulnerable citizens of this state. I would like to provide some concrete examples of the impact budgetary issues are already having on mental health care and believe these are cautionary examples for the future. 1. On any given day on the unit I work on, choices are being made about which services should be provided due to inadequate staffing. For example, patients have medical appointments every day including cancer treatments, follow up for treatment of HIV, hepatitis, heart disease, diabetes, etc. In addition, patients have psychiatric appointments for ECT and neurology and once staff are assigned to transport individuals to these appointments, there are seldom enough staff remaining on the unit to assist with showers and other tasks of daily living in order to assign staff to transport patients to the therapeutic appointments like the clinical groups or implement interventions under the behavioral programs for which they are in the hospital. We are making choices to provide the kind Page 1 of2 of active treatment that the Dept. of Justice required when CVH was under their scrutiny! Budget cuts that result in layoffs will surely make this problem worse. . Several positions for psychologists have not been filled at CVH and some are destined not to be filled leaving less than one psychologist per unit. I personally see patients on three different units. There are approximately 23 patients per unit and when one considers me as an example, I personally run three therapeutic groups, see five patients in individual therapy, write and implement more than one behavioral plan and perform psychological testing, am responsible for program development and numerous administrative tasks--- there is not enough of me to go around. There are many more patients that require the kind of services I can provide—the kind of services that help patients succeed in the community---but many of our patients do not have access to the quantity of psychological services they need due to budgetary constraints. . Based on my past and present experiences working at DHMAS and DDS, I have encountered multiple patients who could not be discharged from expensive inpatient settings due to the fact that money was not available to create the type of outpatient housing and programming needed to sustain them in the community. Recent budget cuts and the proposed budget cuts will surely make this problem worse and will ultimately lead to waiting lists in both inpatient and outpatient programs generating costs for patients to remain at the wrong and possibly more expensive level of care. Page 2 of2 Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Teresa Doudera, Willington CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Teresa Doudera and I live in the town of Willington. I am writing this testimony concerning H.B. No. 5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 I am opposed to any cuts to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services and any mental health services and supports. I go to United Services in Willimantic to see my Psychiatrist and my Therapist. I regularly attend both a Wellness and Interpersonal Skills group. With this help I am healing, connecting, learning to grow and become empowered to make decisions for myself. I go to a Vocational Counselor at United Services to help me figure out my strengths and weaknesses enabling and supporting me to find a job. I go to the Lighthouse Program weekly to eat a healthy lunch, do volunteer work and connect with members there. I learn about wellness and support other members there. It feels safe and welcoming at the clubhouse. The Lighthouse has a group membership to Super Future Fitness. I work out at this gym with the Lighthouse group twice a week. This keeps me motivated and improves my self—esteem and wellness. When a person with a mental illness is in crisis he or she can call Emergency Services at United Services to get help. Emergency Services saves lives. In addition keeping all these services funded and available provides needed supports and opportunities for people to overcome depression and plans to attempt suicide. Many people with a mental illness go through a lot of stress when they hear a budget cut is going to happen. Many are fragile and the added worries of not receiving services makes them depressed. We are in recovery and want to learn to overcome our mental illness. Many of us don’t fight it when we hear about budget cuts, but we are still entitled to good housing, medical care and enough income to buy good food. Everyone is important and should be treated equally. Treatment for mental illness is important and it is just as necessary as medical treatment. It should therefore be funded just like any other medical care is funded. Thank you for your attention to my testimony and please work to preserve these necessary supports and services in my community. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 - An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the FY 17 February 18‘“, 2016 Zane Olmer, New Haven Hello, my name is Zane Olmer from Fellowship Place in New Haven. I am a registered voter. Please don’t cut any services, supports or funds for mental health. l have been at Fellowship Place for 50 years. l have learned some things at Fellowship. Fellowship is a social place. l have learned art, clowning at workshops. Thank you. Testimony before the State of Connecticut Appropriations Committee February 18‘“, 2016 Good evening, Senator Bye and Representative Walker, & esteemed members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Thomas Burr, from Glastonbury, CT. I am a current Board Officer and past president of the nonprofit Manchester Affiliate of the National Alliance on Mental Illness. I am also the parent of an adult child who is in recovery from bipolar disorder, after 8 years’ worth of repeated hospitalizations, incarcerations, and homelessness. Currently he is living on his own; he is in recovery, working full time, and doing very well. Some of the best care he received during his illness occurred right here in Hartford, at the Capital Region Mental Health Center. You need to know that about 1 in 5 youth and adults in the United States will experience mental health conditions in any given year. These conditions can impact quality of life in numerous ways, including relationships with friends and families and participation in one’s community, education and work. I am here today to speak in opposition to the proposed cuts to our Mental Health safety net. I have attached to my testimony the NAMI Connecticut Legislative Priorities, which outline areas which where we should be making INVESTMENTS, not CUTS. As you no doubt aware, cuts which were part of previous deficit mitigation deals, are now proposed to be annualized and include crucial core services such as housing supports and services, young adult services, discharge and diversion services, home and community based services and employment opportunities. Newly proposed specific cuts impact essential areas such as: Mental Health and Substance Use Grants Community Care Teams Consolidating Mental Health Boards and Regional Action Councils School Based Health Centers (SBHC’s) Our NAMI Manchester Affiliate strongly opposes any cuts to the safety net in regards to mental health and behavioral health services and supports. We CLEARLY should be investing MORE into our states Mental Health System, and not LESS. Please be aware that adding additional barriers to supporting people to live in the community with relevant services and supports will not address our citizen’s needs AND make budget issues worse, by adding over a $1,000 PER day PER person to the state’s expenses*; as people with mental health challenges who cannot access care in their communities will often wind up using expensive crisis-based services, such as the ER, inpatient psychiatrict hospitals; or worse, ending up in ourjails and/or prisons. IN SUMMARY: Cutting these core services and supports is bad policy for our citizens, AND bad policy for our budget, so I urge you to protect the health and wellbeing of our Connecticut residents by supporting these essential and core services and supports. Prevention Works, Treatment is Effective, and People Recover. My son is just one of countless examples of people who have recovered, and who are now leading meaningful lives, working, and paying taxes! Thank you. I will now gladly answer any questions you have. Respectfully submitted, Thomas Burr, Treasurer NAMI-Manchester Affiliate P. O. Box 1611 Manchester, CT 06045 Enclosed: NAMI Connecticut 2016 Legislative Priorities * Typical per diem costs for ER ($2,152), inpatient psychiatrict ($1,157), or hospitalization ($1,089) costs; data courtesy of the Connecticut Legal Rights Project. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee on Governor’s proposed Midterm Budget adjustments FY 2017 IN OPPOSITION H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30,2017 Re: Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) budget February 18, 2016 Ralph Oriola; Killingly Connecticut Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Ralph Oriola and I am a registered voter in Killingly Connecticut Why are we still talking about severe cuts for mental health services? Why haven’t we progressed to providing more benefits for the individuals with mental health issues? As you know, one in five individuals suffer from a mental illness. I would imagine that the increased rate of suicide of those suffering from mental illness concerns many legislators. I am greatly troubled by the huge proposed cuts to mental health and behavioral health services. My daughter, Linda (not her real name) age 40, has suffered with mental illness for over 20 years. During all of 2015, her community services have decreased to the lowest point even to suggest she has recovered from her mental illness because she was able to hold a part time job paying less than poverty wages. Linda has no case manager, no therapist and a psychiatrist who sees her every 6 weeks for 15 minutes. Also, many providing services are overloaded with their case loads and don’t give the time required to follow through on prescribed programs. Linda had 4 hospitalizations during 2015 for psychosis and has had difficulty getting her medication because of changes with her insurance. Last week she called me to say things are so bad that the only recourse left is “get in my car and drive it into a tree.” Fortunately her mother was able to talk her out of this attempted suicide. What is the answer to this and so many individuals we have not heard about? Is it enough to say the problem will just go away? I implore you to continue to provide the necessary community based services which support the health of all of our citizens here in Connecticut, including outpatient services (through mental health and substance use grants), Regional Mental Health Boards and continued investments into proven and cost effective solutions such as Supportive Housing and Community Care Teams. Thank you for your time and PLEASE consider my plea and act responsibly as if your loved one, daughter, son or grandchild was in need of our help! Ralph Oriola Past President NAMI Connecticut Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 - An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the FY 17 February 18‘“, 2016 William Schmidt, Branford, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is William (Billy) Schmidt. | feel like I don’t agree at all with any of the cut backs to Mental Health Funds. That will completely disrupt the medicine and great activities at the Clubhouses around the state of Connecticut. Medicine compliance and social interaction are the very key to good mental health. Also, good groups for growth from mental health and addiction services. Thank you. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee on Governor’s proposed Midterm Budget adjustments FY 2017 IN OPPOSITION H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Re: Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) budget February 18, 2016 Claire Bien, Hamden, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Claire Bien. I’m a registered voter in the town of Hamden and work full—time at The Connection as a writer and grant writer. I’m immediate past president ofthe board of directors of NAMI Elm City and facilitate a Hearing Voices Network support group at Yale—New Haven Psychiatric Hospital. I’m also a person in recovery from hearing voices. I’m here this evening to testify on the Governor’s proposed mid—term budget adjustments. In addition to the specific proposed cuts, the proposed 5.75% cut across DMHAS’ budget will have a devastating impact upon the ability of community agencies to provide quality clinical services to people who are struggling with mental health conditions and addiction. In the New Haven area, the clinical services that agencies like the Connecticut Mental Health Center and The Connection provide are critically important to some community members with the highest health care needs. Similarly, the residential programs and scattered—site supportive housing programs provided by The Connection are vitally necessary in helping people with mental health conditions and addictions move from crisis—and high—cost emergency room and inpatient services, to stability, and back into the community with low—cost outpatient care. You have heard this evening the testimony of many clinicians and providers who chose to enter the mental health profession because it offered the opportunity to help people build, or re— build their lives. We—individually and collectively—can share many success stories about the difference our efforts have made on the lives of individuals and the community as a whole. But all of this is greatly threatened by the proposed cuts to the DMHAS budget. As I said, I am a person in recovery from hearing voices. I learned to find my way toward substantial recovery because I had good private insurance that provided excellent coverage for mental health services—often not the case today—access to the excellent psychiatric staff at Yale—New Haven Hospital, and a habit of self—guided and professional therapy. I was also embraced by a loving family and community of friends who knew who I was and what I am capable of being, and who helped support and guide me through crisis, toward recovery. I was lucky. The industry standard for quality care is person—centered—the ability for a clinician or case manager to see the client or patient not as a diagnosis or set of behaviors, but as an individual. But the ability to see the person behind the diagnosis or behavior, and to establish the trust necessary to begin to effect change, takes time. And sadly, due to lack of funding, time appears to have become an unattainable ”luxury.” |—and tens of thousands of others in Connecticut—are living proof that with proper support, significant recovery from mental health conditions is not only possible, but likely. Medication, which can certainly be very efficient, is often a critical part of the solution. Equally, if not more important are the principles and interventions at the core of the community mental health movement: Person—centered therapy, the use of peers, meaningful work, and the clear understanding that true acceptance by, and full integration within, the broader community is critical to the recovery process. I urge you to protect the health and well—being of ALL of our Connecticut residents and protect services such as outpatient services, Regional Mental Health Boards and invest in effective and cost—effective solutions such as Supportive Housing and Community Care Teams. There appears to be greater political will to provide the level and quality of mental health care needed to ensure that every citizen in every community is safe, well cared for. I hope that is true and hope you will work together to identify and secure the funding needed to allow our dedicated staff the time and opportunity to see people in the throes of crisis, or struggling toward recovery, as the individuals they are, and to work with them toward becoming the citizens they are destined to be. Thank you for your attention. Claire Bien Hamden, CT 06517 TESTIMONY 0F CHARLES HERRICK, MD CHAIR OF PSYCHIA \. -.§ .§ . x" x ' \ \\‘ k . .. \i \ x \ ~ \. . u ?\.~O ‘\ Ls M m: it A} Lawless Ox“ SUBMITTED TO TH APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Thursday, February 18, 2016 S:- {. NV $3 .3 S1. HB 5044-, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 As the chairman ofthe Department of Psychiatry for Danbury Hospital and New Milford Hospital, I appreciate the opportunity to submit testimony concerning HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. We oppose the imposition ofbudget cuts for mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment services. At a time when health care is transitioning from a fee for service payment model to a value based payment model these cuts will ultimately cost the state millions of dollars in unnecessary health care expenses by driving the under and uninsured back to emergency departments and hospitals where the cost of care is greatest. A recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine outlined that when comparing high utilizers of health care resources, there were clear distinctions by diagnosis between Medicare, the privately insured, and Medicaid patients. It found that, unlike high utilizers with Medicare and private insurance, high utilizers with Medicaid consume most of their resources in the area of mental health. (1) Thus, if one is going to reduce the cost and improve the care for all Medicaid beneficiaries, it is critical to focus on these high utilizers and support efforts to steer them toward outpatient services and reduce their utilization of emergency department and hospital based services. This requires an investment in the growth of access to outpatient mental health services. There are three main institutions providing outpatient mental health services to the Medicaid population: 1) State supported outpatient clinics,- 2) Private Non-Profit institutions (PNPs), and 3) Hospital based outpatient programs. Many believe that most outpatient mental health services are provided by either state clinics or PNPs so any cuts to hospitals would not impact those services. But the PNPs also face severe budgetary constraints by these cuts, and thus access to them will be further reduced. Finally, state operated outpatient clinics do not depend on Medicaid revenue, are under no mandate to improve access, and many are effectively closed to new patients. At Danbury and New Milford Hospitals where I work, the state supported local mental health center serves less than 200 patients, and is closed to all but the most chronically ill. Additionally we have no PNP so we are the only option. The DMHAS grant money we receive supports the added expense — but not the full expense - of caring for these patients as Medicaid does not cover their entire cost of care. The grant calls upon Danbury and New Milford to cover at least 630 patients but we routinely cover 850 patients in addition to the more than 2000 patients in our system with mental health and substance abuse needs. The DMHAS grant funding is needed to ensure that these hospital based outpatient mental health services can continue to provide care for this population in as close to a cost-neutral basis as possible. These DMHAS grant cuts will only compound the continued Medicaid cuts to our hospitals, furthering the diminished access to mental health services for the Medicaid population. Finally, the Governor is recommending cutting the funding to community care teams, which have been largely organized by hospitals and target high Medicaid utilizers as noted in the NE]M article, even though these teams have amply demonstrated their ability to save the state tens of millions of dollars going forward. All of these cuts conspire together to target patients with mental health problems. Outpatient centers who cannot afford to provide mental health services will have no alternative but to cut them which will limit access. Hospitals that have no such alternative to escape the state will see an increase in patients seeking mental health care in their EDs and these patients will present sicker, need higher cost services including hospitalization, and when stabilized, will have no safe discharge plans. This scenario delays their discharge and further drives up the cost of care. This happened in Sacramento, CA after their academic medical center cut its psychiatric beds in half and closed its outpatient facility. In 8 months the number of psychiatric emergency department visits tripled and length of stay increased 33%. The number ofviolent events increased more than 5 fold and those presenting with psychosis increased 400 %. (2) Connecticut was one ofthe first states in the nation to embrace the affordable care act and expand the Medicaid rolls to its population. This took vision and courage and our hospitals were big proponents of this change. The governor has told its citizens how proud he is for making Medicaid available to more people, but then has systematically cut Medicaid payments to the very institutions whose mission it is to provide care to those we are collectively tasked with serving. By doing so he has jeopardized those institutions ability to provide needed care, and placed the Affordable Care Act in jeopardy of realizing its goals of providing high quality, cost effective care to its citizens. More simply, he is putting people and communities at risk. I appreciate this opportunity to be heard and hope you will give my comments every consideration. 1. Powers and Chaguturu. "ACOs and High-Cost Patients",- New England Journal of Medicine 2016,- 374:3: 203-5 2. Nesper et al. "Effect of Decreasing County Mental Health Services on the Emergency Department; Annals of Emergency Medicine, on line and in press, November 13 2015,- ht‘tn:1’[WWI/v.3ciencedirectcomiscience[articleipiii80196064-415012?06 Testimony before the Appropriations Committee on Governor’s proposed Midterm Budget adjustments FY 2017 H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Re: Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) budget February 18, 2016 Karen Caplik, Berlin Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Karen Caplik and | live in Berlin. I am writing to you today to oppose the proposed cuts to the state's mental health and behavioral supports for those people afflicted with a mental illness. Currently, I have a family member who has been diagnosed with such an illness. Over the last 10 years, it has placed our entire family under emotional and financial strain and has impacted every facet of our lives. Through the minimal supports in place, it has helped our family to try to rebuild our lives and help our loved one lead a hopeful existence. With such reductions in services it will tremendously impact CT residents and the public health of our state. Please oppose such cuts! Thank you, Karen Caplik \E Catholic Charities M Wm. :25“ “It 1“»: «W 22‘ fl fit; it“: 4/ 71"; A; “m, :2 92 >4; .3: ‘4} w, :14 TESTIMONY FOR H.B. N0. 5044: AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. Submitted By: Robyn M. Hawley, Ed.D, LCSW, Director of Behavioral Health Catholic Charities, Inc. Archdiocese of Hartford To the Appropriations Health Subcommittee February 18, 2016, Department of Mental Health And Addiction Services Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana, Representative Dillon and Distinguished members of the Appropriations Health Subcommittee; my name is Robyn M. Hawley and I am the Director of Behavioral Health Services at Catholic Charities, Inc. Archdiocese of Hartford. Catholic Charities is a social services organization which provides services to over 26,000 individuals and families without regard to race, religion, or economic circumstances each year. The agency offers human services across 34 sites in the Hartford, Litchfield, and New Haven counties. A wide range of human services offered by the agency include: Outpatient Behavioral Health programs for families and children with significant mental illness and substance use disorders. I request your urgent assistance in appropriating necessary funds to adequately fund mental health and addiction services. The current proposed budget will dramatically and negatively impact the well being of our community by inadequately funding DMHAS’ grants for Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Treatment. In addition to cuts in grants in previous years, the Governor is proposing another cut of almost $16 million dollars for mental health and substance abuse services. In addition, the Governor is proposing a cut of over $34 million to the combined block grant “Agency Operations” account at DMHAS. Because there is no assurance that DMHAS would be required to evenly distribute these cuts across all programs, it is possible that a disproportionate amount could fall on, and in some cases, completely eliminate outpatient mental health and substance abuse programs altogether. Without appropriate funding of these grants, providers of behavioral health services will be forced to close programs or drastically reduce services. Individuals and families in need of these services are already having a difficult time finding services. If funding is reduced or eliminated, they will have no options available to them. Instead, they may seek exponentially more expensive services in emergency departments or worse, not at all. They may end up in jail, become homeless, or become a danger to themselves or others. In particular, the effect on children can be extreme. Children are affected when a caretaker has behavioral health issues as well as when they have their own issues. Inadequate access to treatment results in increased stress in the home, higher incidents of dysfunctional family systems, and increased behavioral problems in the children. Those problems then play out at home, in schools and in the community. Investing in mental health and substance abuse services is not only a way of resolving problems, it serves as a proactive, preventative strategy for those who interact with people that suffer from such issues. Some think that Medicaid can serve as a resource to replace money that has been provided by state grants. Unfortunately, the Medicaid rates do not cover the true cost of care. The additional cuts to grants are unsustainable and will, in many cases, close outpatient services for uninsured citizens. New and increased Medicaid enrollment will not resolve this ongoing problem. WM. % M \E Cathalu: Chafififi The private non-profit mental health and substance abuse agencies that receive funding from DMHAS provide a low-cost alternative to using state employees or higher levels of care such as visits to the emergency department and inpatient treatment. We know that the legislature takes the needs and well being of CT residents seriously because for the last two legislative sessions, the legislature has restored funding to maintain finding for DMHAS’ mental health and substance abuse programs. On behalf of our clients, I urge you to continue to support these services. Thank you. Contact information Robyn M. Hawley, Ed.D, LCSW, Director of Behavioral Health Services, Catholic Charities, Inc. Archdiocese of Hartford, 56 Church Street, Waterbury, CT 06702, 203-755-1196, ext. 110, rhawley@ccaoh.org. § {KLENNEiiTi‘EiZ{ET \\\ I—IOSPIYAL & N\\\\\\ .«xssoamom TESTIMONY 0F CARL SCHIESSL DIRECTOR, REGULATORY ADVOCACY CONNECTICUT HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION BEFORE THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2016 HB 5044-, An Act Making Adjustments TO State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 Good afternoon. My name is Carl Schiessl, and I am the Director, Regulatory Advocacy, for the Connecticut Hospital Association (CHA). I am here today to testify in opposition to H8 5044, An Act Making Adjustments TO State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending lune 30, 2017. Before commenting on the bill, it’s important to point out that Connecticut hospitals provide core healthcare services to all of the people in Connecticut, 24 hours a day, regardless of ability to pay. Connecticut hospitals offer safe, accessible, equitable, affordable, patient-centered care that protects and improves peoples’ lives. CHA opposes the imposition of budget cuts to mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment services set forth in HE 5044. Ifenacted, these cuts will further destabilize an already stressed mental healthcare system, reduce the options for care available to individuals and families who need high-quality mental health services, and impose a greater burden on hospital emergency departments, outpatient clinics, and crisis services, at a time when Connecticut is struggling with ominous and intensifying threats to public health from binge drinking, heroin use, and prescription drug abuse. This is exactly the wrong time for the state to withdraw its support of our mental healthcare system. The Governor is asking for a $16 million reduction in grants for mental health and substance abuse services. These cuts will impact community and hospital-based outpatient mental health and substance abuse treatment services. Demand for these services has not abated, and grant funds are essential to maintain the person-centered, recovery-oriented care provided by these programs. Loss of these funds will lead programs to close. And hospital emergency rooms will be inundated by the people served by these closed programs, because they will be left with no other choices. Page 1 of 3 This leads to another distressing budget adjustment — a $3 million proposed cut to the grant program authorized by the General Assembly last year to establish Community Care Teams (CCTs). You will recall that hospitals and community providers appeared before you last year and asked for a modest investment of$1.5 million in the first year and $3 million in the second year to expand the Community Care Team model statewide. You listened to hospitals and other community providers explain how these teams were successfully piloted in certain regions of the state, bringing together the widest array of community medical, mental health, and social service providers to address the needs of frequent visitors to emergency departments. You heard us when we told you that the $4.5 million in funding over two years was necessary to sustain the existing CCTs and fund the establishment of new CCTs in every region of the state. And you heard us when we explained how CCTs are a proven, integrated care model, one that was attracting national attention, and would result in improved patient outcomes, reduced pressure on care providers, and fewer ED visits by Medicaid clients, which would save the state money. Those of us involved with the CCT initiative are thankful to the members ofthe Appropriations Committee and the General Assembly. You included funding for CCTs in the budget you passed in late June that was signed into law by the Governor. And then, when the funding for this program fell victim to the Governor’s rescission order just 10 short weeks later, it was the Legislature that restored funding for the program in the package adopted and signed into law by the Governor in December oflast year. But despite the best efforts ofthe community medical, mental health, and social service providers, and in contradiction to the mandate ofthe Legislature, expressed not once, but twice over the course of six months, the Department opted not to initiate the program. Do we understand why the Department made a difficult short-term fiscal decision at the expense of a new program boasting longer-term savings? Yes, I suppose we do. But do we agree with the Department’s decision? No, we do not, because unlike other new programs, the CCT program would help hundreds of hard-to-treat patients with complex medical and mental health conditions and a persistent need for social services, and almost immediately begin to relieve the fiscal burden on the state by eliminating thousands of emergency department visits from the Medicaid expense line item. Now that we are in the second year of the biennium, and the $1.5 million appropriated last year is lost, we come before you again to ask that you resist the temptation to achieve short- term relief and confirm the commitment you made twice last year to fund the CCT program. There are nine Community Care Teams that are up-and-running right now. They are being funded by hospitals, through private grants, and with the help of donations from providers and not-for-profit organizations. But some ofthem do not have the funding to continue into the fall and through 2017. There are several other regions ofthe state where efforts to establish a CCT Page 2 of 3 were commenced, but then stalled due to lack of funding. If the $3 million is made available through the DMHAS grant program, these critical efforts will restart. To its credit, DMHAS supported the development ofCCTs during 2015 by participating in both the Beacon Health Options ED Frequent Visitor Program and the Partnership for Strong Communities/CHA Opening Doors Hospital Work Group. The state administrative services organization, Beacon Health Options, developed a guidebook and conducted a series of webinars in the fall of 2015 entitled Community Care Teams: An Approach to Better Meeting the Needs of Frequent Visitors to the ED. Since we last met, the evidence supporting this particular model of integrated care has mounted. Regions that are not presently served by a CCT have indicated they are interested in forming one. The only missing piece is the $3 million already appropriated to pay for administration ofthe CCT and for the care coordinator to work with patients. Ifyou keep this funding in place, then the promise of CCTs may be fulfilled in Connecticut. We hope you will agree. On an unrelated but equally important note, CHA expresses grave concerns about the proposed consolidation and $34.5 million reduction in DMHAS operating funds. Ifthis change is enacted, the Commissioner would be empowered to make unilateral decisions limiting access to mental health and substance abuse treatment services for patients in need, with little or no input from the public or other community providers, and with no authorization or oversight by legislators. Among the services that we believe may be at risk is the 20-bed detox unit within the Addiction Services Division of the Middletown campus of Connecticut Valley Hospital. Ifthese beds are allowed to close, community providers will not be equipped to address the complex and persistent medical and mental health needs ofthese patients. They will be forced to rely on hospital-based care, most likely through our emergency departments. We question the wisdom of closing these beds at a time when the state is wrestling with escalating rates of binge drinking, mounting evidence of nationwide prescription drug abuse problem, and an ominous surge in heroin addiction. Rates of heavy drinking in Connecticut spiked 21.3% between 2005 and 2012, and binge drinking rates rose nearly 14%. Connecticut is one of 17 states whose residents are more likely to die from unintentional drug overdoses than in motor vehicle accidents, with the majority of those deaths caused by common prescription opioid painkillers. And, according to statistics released last week by the state’s Chief Medical Examiner, more than twice as many Connecticut men and women died of overdoses involving heroin in 2015 than did three years earlier. We recognize that the state is facing a challenging budget, but we ask that you do not enact cuts to mental health and substance abuse treatment services included in HB 5044. Hospitals and other community providers need your support to preserve what remains ofthe mental health safety net at the very time Connecticut residents are demanding improvements to the mental health system. Thank you for your consideration of our position. For additional information, contact CHA Government Relations at (203) 294-7310. Page 3 of 3 TESTIMONY OF KATHERINE TAIT MICHAEL, MD DANBURY HOSPITAL/NEW MILFORD HOSPITAL/NORWALK HSOPITAL WESTERN CONNECTICUT HEALTH NETWORK SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Thursday, February 18, 2016 HB 5044-, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending lune Thirtieth 2017 Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. I am Dr. Katherine Michael a practicing psychiatrist for 20 years, on the medical staff of Danbury, Norwalk and New Milford Hospitals and now engaged in strategic planning and implementation ofpopulation health strategies for Western Connecticut Health Network. Today, I would like to speak to you about the proposed budget reductions to the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse and in particular, the obliteration of funding for statewide Community Care Teams. As a reminder, Community Care Teams are cooperatives of hospitals and community providers working together for our most vulnerable citizens: those who are homeless, chronically medically and mentally ill and substance abusing. I also serve as co-chair ofthe Opening Doors Fairfield County, Health and Housing Stability Subcommittee, which spawned the Fairfield County Community Care Team Leadership Committee, an innovative regional collaborative of Bridgeport, Danbury, Norwalk and Stamford Community Care Teams. I’d like to share with you the results ofthese teams. 0 Norwalk’s CCT, begun two years ago, has served almost 200 individuals, helped house more than 50, linked many to specialty care and achieved a reduction in ED visits by over 35%. o Stamford’s CCT, operating for over a year, has achieved more than 60% reduction in costs for four of its most vulnerable patients amounting to $378,000. 0 Danbury’s team, operating for one year, has served 85 individuals, 70% ofwhom were homeless at the time of referral. It has assisted in acquiring housing for more than 20 individuals and reduced Danbury Hospital Emergency Department utilization by 35%. o Bridgeport’s CCT, begun one year ago has created care plans for 45 individuals, 17 of whom were homeless. ED utilization by five oftheir highest users decreased by more than 60%. To put this in personal terms, I would like to share the story of]V who is followed by the Norwalk Community Care Team. Homeless, in his mid 50s with severe alcohol use disorder, IV visited the Norwalk Emergency Department 110 times in fiscal year 2014. The CCT took his case and working together, referred him to a 90 day rehabilitation program not once but twice, monitored his care and organized a disposition plan that included housing and case management. A year later, while not completely abstinent, he remains housed and has not been back to the ED. You may wonder why, if the hospitals are supporting this work so effectively, is state funding necessary. There are several reasons. First, the evidence clearly shows that these teams cannot be successful without having at least one dedicated navigator. For each ofthe Fairfield County CCT’s, the navigator has been at least partially grant funded, money that is not expected to continue. And hospitals, still reeling from the unexpected and debilitating tax burden will not have the wherewithal to support positions that do not provide direct patient care in revenue generating services. Secondly, the opiate related overdose deaths in Connecticut continue to climb and will require a multi faceted approach to combat. In addition to having treatment sites available, we will need people on the ground—in emergency departments—to link individuals to treatment. Community Care Team Navigators do just that. In addition to opposing budget cuts in mental health care services, I strongly urge you to support funding the Community Care Team Initiative which represents one of the truest and most direct paths to achieving the goal ofthe Triple Aim: higher quality healthcare, improved patient experience and decreased costs. Thank you for your time and attention. Testimony of Grant Zimmerman Before the Appropriations Committee IN OPPOSITION TO: HB 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Grant Zimmerman, West Hartford, Connecticut Good evening Senator Bye and Representative Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Grant Zimmerman and I am testifying in opposition to H3 5044: An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. Please do not make any cuts to Chrysalis. Chrysalis has quite literally saved my life. Several years ago, I was going through deep mental and emotional pain. I had no friends and seemed incapable of making any productive socialization. Very close to suicide, I decided in a last ditch effort to attend one of the Chrysalis social events. There I met another person going through a hard time who turned out to be the best friend I ever had. I found new meaning in life and had a new lease on life. My friend encouraged me to branch out in any way I could and I eventually found more friends, including my first serious girlfriend. Recently he also encouraged me to find work and I am now in the process of looking for work. Chrysalis facilitated this meeting and without Chrysalis I strongly believe Iwouldn't be here today. Furthermore, Chrysalis is great with case management. They've been very helpful for myself and others in pursuing volunteer or paid work. Please do not make any cuts to assisted living. Assisted living has helped me at a very precarious time in my life with essential skills to help me live on my own. Please do not make cuts to the Regional Mental Health Boards. These are the foundation that the mental health care system relies upon, and they also function to maintain, repair and improvise to fix any damage that may be done. To me and many others, this seems like a poorly disguised effort to dismantle and eliminate the little that is left of the mental health care system. Last year, after surviving a fall that left me unable to walk for months and a subsequent infection, I experienced first—hand the what the overloaded, understaffed hospital and nursing homes for the mentally ill have to deal with. The situation is very bad. Please don't make it any worse. Recently, hundreds of millions of dollars have been taken from the middle class and those living in poverty in the form of higher taxes and bigger spending cuts. And it has been given to powerful and wealthy corporations and their CEOs. Is it possible to balance the budget by diverting some of this corporate welfare? If the motivation for these payments is to create jobs, why are bills being proposed to outsource many state jobs? These unending attacks on funding have also adversely affected the mentally ill population. Creating fear and uncertainty about our lives and what could happen to the essential services that our lives hinge on. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Janis Eremita— Hartford, CT Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Janis Eremita and I am a registered voter in the City of Hartford. I am here to testify on H.B. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. I am opposed to the following: Carrying forward the $17 million in cuts from fiscal year 2016. Any grant reduction for mental health and substance abuse services. Any funding cut to Community Care Teams. Any cut or elimination of the Regional Mental Health Boards and Regional Action Councils. The consolidation of the operating funds of any agency into one—line item. I urge you to keep crucial services available to the residents of Connecticut. I have been coming to Chrysalis Since 2004. I like coming to The Chrysalis Center because I like socializing with my peers. I also attend group here and really like the bingo. I like that they have special lunches. There is nothing more I would rather do than come here. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Kenneth McMullin Jr.— Hartford, CT Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Kenneth McMullin Jr. and I am a registered voter in the City of Hartford. I am here to testify on H.B. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. I am opposed to the following: Carrying forward the $17 million in cuts from fiscal year 2016. Any grant reduction for mental health and substance abuse services. Any funding cut to Community Care Teams. Any cut or elimination of the Regional Mental Health Boards and Regional Action Councils. The consolidation of the operating funds of any agency into one—line item. I urge you to keep crucial services available to the residents of Connecticut. I have been a member of the Chrysalis Center REC for 14 years. I now lead a Diabetes Support group that I received books through grant from the North Central Regional Mental Health Board. I also run a Men’s group, a gardening group and lead the bicycle group and softball. I like coming here because it gives me a place to go where I am surrounded by people who have the same illnesses as Ihave. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Ronald Murphy— Hartford, CT Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Ronald Murphy and I am a registered voter in the City of Hartford. I am here to testify on H.B. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. I am opposed to the following: Carrying forward the $17 million in cuts from fiscal year 2016. Any grant reduction for mental health and substance abuse services. Any funding cut to Community Care Teams. Any cut or elimination of the Regional Mental Health Boards and Regional Action Councils. The consolidation of the operating funds of any agency into one—line item. I urge you to keep crucial services available to the residents of Connecticut. I have been coming to The Chrysalis Center since 1996. I started at the old clubhouse in 1984. I work on my typing skills and I like to volunteer. I go to groups on how to manage behavior and about mental health. I also go to Capitol Region Mental Health too. I also like the trainings that are offered, I also get help from the staff here. They have achievement groups that I like, resource groups, meditation groups. I also get to learn about the legislature and advocacy. The staff also recognizes the things I do at Chrysalis. I also like helping with the newsletter every month. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports. v u — -_. Testimohgbefore the Appropriations Committee "h-uv / \ HE. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Andrew McAllister, Windsor, CT Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Andrew McAllister and l am registered to vote in the Town of Windsor. I am here to testify on HR. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. i am opposed to any preposed cuts to the VMHAS and any mental health services and supports. I am opposed to the following: Carrying forward the $17 million in cuts from fiscal year 20 i 6. Any grant reduction for mental health and substance abuse services. Any funding cut to Community Care Teams. Any cut or elimination of the Regional Mental Health Boards and Regional Action Councils. The consolidation of the operating funds of any agency into the one-line item. I urge you to keep crucial services available to the sentences available to the residents of Connecticut. Statement: PREAMBLE: please consider my argument because: 1. I am bipolar and l have experienced most aspects and ramifications of this endogenous, organically—based. yet psychologically, intellectually. economically. and socially injurious disease. 2. l have undergone most forms of treatment for this disease more than once, and l have suffered from nearly all the possible, negative side effects of said expensive, ineffective, intervening treatments. 3. i desire to move forward respectfully and constructively. I wish to invest myself in life, in proper self-conduct, in morality, with proper respect for the State and its Government, with love toward the community, and I aspire to humbly struggle spiritually. If l err in my testimony, ptease forgive me, and know that i do not complain about existing or past State Governance, which I respect . BELIEF: The single most important and easily addressed deficiency in mental health care in Connecticut is inadequate relief from social isolation. Funding self-empowerment community centers like Chrysalisi is cost—effective. beneficial for our entire community, and a good value for tax-payers who neither want mentally ill individuals to become homeless, nor wish to unnecessarily criminally administrate and/or incarcerate mentally ill people. The public also r_ig_lfly does not want to support the existing cyclic (revolving—door} institutionalization of mentally ill individuals that generates a more dependent, less self-reliant, less healthy popuiation within our community. The “hand—holding" provided in expensive, overly supervised, over-kill facilities {facilities that also and often, by the way, house court-mandated individuals who do not want to get well) engenders dependency and further disability. Such treatment is inappropriate for patients who sincerely desire to get well. Such expensive treatment centers and programs often wrong both patients (ciinically) and the community, socially and financially. The Role of Community Self—Empowerment Centers: There exists a simple relationship between exacerbated mental illness symptoms, low self~esteem, isolation, substance abuse, and the consequences of these factors in bipolar disorder if not all mental Andrew McAllister. 2/18/2015 pagez of2 illnesses, With community self-empowerment centers like Chrysalis, we can socialize the mentally ill in order to lessen all aspects of mental illness. Mentally ill people often have low self-esteem due to psycho—social histories of dysfunction. These people are ashamed of their dysfunction. As a result. they often recede into self-isolation. which they mistakenly believe to be “protective" or ”insulating." More often than not. such isolation exacerbates organic symptoms. An exacerbation of symptoms like instability. depression. and mania, etc. further erodes self-esteem, leading to further isolation, a further exacerbation of symptoms. further dysfunction. and so on. Seeking alleviation of exacerbated symptoms. misled individuals consume illegal substances and alcohol. leading to further dysfunction. and thereby eroding self—esteem more again. Also, consuming illegal substances and alcohol will most likely exacerbate the mentally ill person's organic illness and thereby, again and profoundly. increase the actual experience of any kind of dysfunction, andfor subjecting said individuals to criminal. judicial administration. worsening dysfunction further, and exacerbating organic illness again and further. thereby eroding self—esteem again. And so on . . . By simply socializing a mentally ill person in a community self—empowerment center. we can improve self~esteem. alleviate symptoms. help the suffering individual avoid experiencing dysfunction. and reduce the likelihood that the mentally ill individual will choose (it is a choice) to consume illegal substances andfor alcohol. All this remediation. made possible by funding community self-empowerment recovery centers like Chrysalis, can help the State avoid paying for expensive incarceration and court and police administration, expensive ambulance services. expensive and ineffective in-patient lock-down unit stays. and expensive. disempowering. institutionalizing. enabling day programs. We must avoid such costly, ineffective. disabling. sickening. if not criminaiizing measures by funding recovery centers like Chrysalis. More costly, intervening treatments do patients little good while they cost our government vast sums of tax revenues. At community centers. people find limited. measured support. The benefit realized from funding self-empowerment community resource centers is tremendous and realized at a fraction of the financial and social costs incurred by other. more intervening, dependence- generating, and non-self—empowering treatment regimens, interventions. and facilities like prisons. inpatient lock-down units. and day programs. Unnecessarily taking away life responsibilities is not therapeutic and entails great costs for the community. Mentally ill people might be disabled by horrible. incurable diseases, but does this mean that these ill people benefit by enabling them to give up managing life affairs—including seif—care— when We not necessary to do so? What are the economic and social costs of generating and enabling a population of mentally ill people who do not even try to care for themselves and who even go so far as to break the law and consume illegal substances or alcohol. thereby making themselves more ill at the cost of the community and more burdensome for the police and the courts (who and which have more important matters to attend to)? Legislative action to cancel funding for community centers for patients who actually and presently desire to get and stay well is. at this time. in my humble opinion. ill-advised. Please do not cancel funding for the Chrysalis self—empowerment recovery center. i believe that doing so will not oniy hurt many people who sincerely want to get. be. and stay well. but will also be a disservice to the community. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports. ‘ iThe Chrysalis Center. located on Homestead Avenue in Hartford. where the Asylum Hill and the North-End neighborhoods of Hartford border upon one another is. as stated on the center‘s website: ”a private, non—profit, socially innovative multiservice organization that serves individuals and families living in the State of Connecticut." Testimony of Debbie Anderson Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 My name is Debbie Anderson and | live in Hartford. I became extremely depressed and anxious when I received a letter from the managing office from my housing complex that my live in aide would have to move out upon my death. It also said that if she were to retire as my live in aide, she couldn’t continue to live with me and she would have to move out immediately. Of course, this was terrible news to hear because we had become friends in the last 20 years. CT Legal Rights Project’s representation and their request for a reasonable accommodation allowed my no longer live in aide, but my friend Carol to become my legitimate roommate. Thanks to CLRP, we live in our apartment in peace and stress free. If this budget isn’t approved for CT Legal Rights Project, it would be a hardship for people with psychiatric disabilities which could result in homelessness because they would have no one to turn to? It could possibly create emergency psychiatric symptoms, such as suicides, more hospitalizations, drug addictions, and confusion for the clients especially as to what they can or cannot do. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people with mental illness that may not have family, friends or church support. It would be devastating to feel abandoned at a time like this. Statement of Angela Astrachan Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 My name is Angela Astrachan and | live in Plainville. I am writing this statement in lieu of attending because I have health issues which prevent me from traveling. I would like to let this committee know I was in desperate need of help and I had no where to turn to. I was faced with much difficulty. The buck kept being passed and I was able to be helped with a housing discrimination case by CT Legal Rights Project. I suffer from many health issues on top of being Bipolar. The paralegals and the attorney was able to get results. I was in mental anguish which affects all my health issues. There is a need for their housing help without them I would be lost. They were able to get the proper documents which I had been denied. I know without their help I would still be in anguish. When I was ignored for months, they were able to advocate for me. Their agency's paralegals and attorneys are serious about protecting our rights. Their request for a reasonable accommodation has since allowed me to be able to use my voucher in my current living situation. CLRP is an asset to have in the community. With their help we can work through problems and not work around them. Thank you very much, Angela Astrachan TESTIMONY OF HENRY BAIXAULI Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 My name is Henry Baixauli and | live in North Haven, Connecticut. I have a psychiatric disability and an addiction to alcohol. At the present time I am in recovery and doing very well. CLRP has represented me twice successfully. Just recently, January 19, 2016, I was faced with a conservator hearing at probate court and some of my rights were going to be taken away. When given papers by the marshal I felt the fashion was unfair and I felt hopeless and I couldn’t get any answers to help my situation. Then I called CLRP and spoke to one of their paralegals. They took my case because of my income level and they were always there to answer my questions and were very supportive to me and my case. They did an in depth search of my medical record, were in touch with the providers in my case, and they pointed out facts that the State was inconsistent in favor of supporting their case. They were very professional and supportive to me. Because I was in recovery and CLRP worked hard on my side I felt assured with a low sense of anxiety and I felt hopeful again. I felt that I was represented in the best way possible. On January 19, 2016 we received a favorable decision. I am managing my life well today. | feel that funding for CLRP is very important for people with psychiatric disabilities who are of low income along with all the other issues they may have. Thank you. Testimony of Juan Bonilla Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Good evening Senators and Representatives of the Appropriations Committee: My name is Juan Bonilla and I’ve lived in Meriden for fifteen years. I got CLRP’s number through Rushford. I was telling them my situation in group and my counselor suggested I call them. I was going through a situation with the apartment I was living in at the time. The place had faulty and dangerous electrical wiring, a bedbug infestation, and the plumbing was constantly backing up. I told my landlord several times about the many problems and asked him to fix them, but he ignored me over and over again. I even contacted City Hall and the Fire Marshall and the Building Inspector came out and both wrote reports of multiple violations, and still, my landlord ignored their orders to repair the violations. Finally, I got in touch with CLRP and spoke with a lawyer named Katrina. She took action immediately. She contacted my landlord, and told him that if he didn’t fix the violations, we were going to take him to court. Katrina filed an action that allowed me to pay my rent to the court and kept the money out of my landlord’s hands until he made the repairs. When the landlord was served with papers, he tried to evict me in retaliation. My lawyer got the first eviction dismissed, but my landlord just filed another one right after. It felt like a nightmare that would never end. I just wanted to leave and find a new place by that point, but I had no money to move out, and it was difficult to find a new landlord who would me with my limited income and a pending eviction on my record. My lawyer worked hard and negotiated for many days. Eventually, she got the landlord to agree to immediately withdraw the second eviction he had filed against me and to pay me $1,600 in cash in exchange for me moving out. With the money from the agreement, I was able to move into a more affordable apartment that is well maintained. The building is quiet and I get along with my new landlord. I would not have been able to afford a new place without the with an eviction on my record. Without CLRP’s representation, I would be living on the streets today. Instead of being homeless, I have a place to call home. Thanks to a referral from CLRP, I also have a peer bridger from FOR—U who has become a good friend and who helps me with paperwork, listens to me, gives me advice and is a source of support. I don’t think that the funding for CLRP should be cut. They helped me out with so much— if not for them, the landlord would never have been held accountable and I would have no money or shelter. Without CLRP, people like me will be in trouble— we cannot afford to pay lawyers out of pocket. Please do not turn your backs on those of us who need help the most. Thank you listening to me. Testimony before the Health subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee Re: H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Cheri Bragg, Portland, CT Good evening Senator Gerratana, Representative Dillon, and distinguished members of the Health subcommittee of Appropriations. My name is Cheri Bragg and I am a registered voter from Portland. I am also a Board member of CLRP (CT Legal Rights Project), an organization that provides representation to DMHAS eligible clients by paralegals and attorneys on rights matters pertaining to housing, education, employment, and treatment of their choice. I am also the daughter of a person who received this invaluable representation. Tuesday evening I listened to Governor Malloy speak about defining and prioritizing core government services. The Appropriations budget process was the one way mentioned that the public could have input into defining what those core services are. The services that CLRP delivers ARE core services that must continue to be protected. Representation of people in the community helps to promote self- sufficiency, which includes promoting people in obtaining education and getting and keeping jobs which promotes healthy communities and economy. If people are able to live in safe, affordable housing and are supported in their right to pursue education and employment, not only are we increasing the health and wellbeing of people living in our communities, but we are greatly saving the heavy taxpayer costs of institutional and emergency care at the same time. For example, representation in a housing case costs $806; in contrast, a private hospital stay costs the state $1 ,089/day; inpatient psychiatric care $1,157/day; one ER visit $2,152. Maintaining safe, stable, affordable housing is a cost-effective way to sustain the recovery of DMHAS clients living in the community and avoid the use of more expensive services. Investing in CLRP’s services clearly makes sense! It is also important to clarify that part of CLRP’s funding comes from a consent decree which is enforceable by court order. This was not taken into account under the proposed budget as CLRP’s entire line item was included in the consolidated agency operating fund line (which was then reduced by 5.75%). I encourage the committee to closely look at CLRP’s testimony by Executive Director Kathy Flaherty for further clarification. If core services are defined as services that our state “must have”, and that to lose them would have negative consequences on the health & well-being of our communities, then CLRP fits the bill. CLRP protects rights that people already have, rights that are guaranteed by our laws, but which might be trampled on without advocacy and legal representation. There are countless examples of this — my family has just one of many. My mother received representation from CLRP which assisted her in keeping the conservator of her choice and also in determining the treatment of her choice. Without this representation, perhaps well-meaning, but definitely ill-informed people made it clear p. 2 (Bragg) that they would have inserted their own opinions instead of ascertaining and zealously advocating for my mother’s wishes as required by law. This representation was critically important to her as she was often subjected over her lifetime to people and systems that have often completely disregarded her rights and her voice by taking that power from her. After intervention by CLRP, she was able to state her rights, refuse costly, forced treatment that had not worked multiple times in the past and keep the conservator of her choice, her daughter, as opposed to being assigned to a random lawyer who would never meet her, let alone get to know her and her wishes. CLRP also goes above and beyond important individual advocacy and seeks to educate other parties such as probate court lawyers, nursing facilities, landlords, administrators, and other people in positions of power to make important and even life-altering decisions that affect many people in our communities. Examples of this highly cost- effective systems advocacy and change include training people to assist with Advanced Directives, creating performance standards for certain probate proceedings, and working with other organizations to provide education about the rights of people they serve in common. I urge the committee to preserve CLRP’s funding and DMHAS funding including items like W.I.S.E. (the mental health waiver), that can clearly improve peoples’ quality of life while saving the state unnecessary costs at the same time. To eliminate these services equates to subjecting CT taxpayers to the dual costs of lives and dollars. Thank you for your time in reading my testimony. Statement of Natasha Carolina Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 My name is Natasha Carolina, and I live in Waterbury. I have lived in this community for the past 10 years. I had been a member of one of the mental health social clubs in Waterbury for 10 years when they tried to permanently terminate my membership without even giving me an explanation why. I was so upset, and it felt like I did not have a right to be heard. CLRP took my case. My attorney taught me about the Patient’s Bill of Rights and helped me learn that I do have rights. She represented me in the grievance process to help me restore my rights as a member. CLRP is also representing me in dealing with my landlord, who is refusing to make repairs in my apartment, where the dangerous conditions have caused me serious injury. The federal government has even stopped paying the landlord my rent subsidy because of how bad things are. I need to find a new place to live, but can’t do it on my own, so CLRP intervened to get me the case management I need to help me find a new place to live where I can feel safe. At CLRP, I know they care, and I know they’re here for the right reasons. If CLRP wasn’t here to help me, I would have lost all of my community supports. I rely on CLRP to protect my legal rights in the community and to make sure that my mental health providers treat me with the respect and dignity I deserve. There’s no one besides CLRP to help low-income people with disabilities. They give us a voice when no one would listen otherwise. PLEASE DO NOT TAKE THIS AWAY FROM US! Statement of Anthony Corigliano Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 My name is Anthony Corigliano and I live in Ridgefield. Unfortunately I was not able to appear in person tonight. I am thirty seven years old and suffer from mental & physical disabilities. For the last 12 years I have lived in the same apartment. At this time I’m facing a possible eviction due to my mental illness. I am unable to adequately defend myself and am anxious about the possibility of losing my home. Due to the severity of my physical and mental limitations, my sole source of income is my disability check and I cannot afford a private attorney. CLRP was recommended to me. I meet with Attorney Cessna and paralegal Wendy. My rights were explained and immediately I felt a huge relief that I was not alone. Attorney Cessna continues to work diligently on my behalf trying to resolve this matter. A request for “Reasonable Accommodations” is in process; something I would not have known about on my own. I sincerely believe that without the impact from CLRP'S services I would be homeless now. Attorney Cessna has always treated me with respect, and her professionalism has been above and beyond my expectations. Please keep CLRP funded so that they can continue to provide the vital services, not just to help me, but for the many others who are in such great need and who will have nowhere else to turn if CLRP is not there. Testimony of Leslie Eisemann Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 My name is Leslie Eisemann and I represent Waterbury, CT. | feel that the cuts that want to be made are wrong and detrimental to the people that they are supposed to protect. I am speaking from experience from learning to have a voice in the Regional Mental Health Board going to testify in Hartford with psycho-social clubs. CT Legal Rights Project helped me find a voice and passion with Advance Directives. CLRP is a necessity for those of us, such as myself, that are unable to afford a lawyer. CLRP empowers, but also helps to protect our rights. I may be one voice, but there are many that will come to join against the cuts that are unnecessary. Do not hurt us!! Choice for everyone is MANDATORY. I myself, am being affected by the Department of Social Services wanting to reduce my companion services. These services are basic HUMAN rights. Please increase the funding as people who come down the pike are going to need more services. These include: Our vets, youth, homeless, parents with children, undiagnosed, inpatient a person like myself who is living in the community, etc. Please hear us and HELP. Testimony of Lesa Ferry Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Good Evening. My name is Lesa Ferry, and I live in Torrington, which I have called home for the last nine years. Thank you for listening to my words this evening. As important as they are to me, they will mean nothing if they are not truly heard by those of you here tonight. I wasn’t always disabled- I had a tragic thing happen in my life which caused the brain injury that I have now and that has left me different than I once was. I was taken by two men who had no regard for my life and didn’t care if I lived or died. They took me from my parking lot of my home, and tried to kill me, but God gave me the strength to survive. I am not at all the person I once was mentally, but in my heart, I am still me. I am now on disability and have to do my best to survive in this world with a lot of obstacles in my way. But I can’t always do it alone. I do need hope and support when difficult things occur, like recently, when my home where I have lived in for the last nine years of my life, on my own, was foreclosed. The person who owned the home was my landlord, but he moved out suddenly, leaving without returning a single dollar of my security deposit. I was left very vulnerable, trying to stand up to a bank with lots of money and lawyers that made me feel like I had no hope. Scared, alone, and with no one to turn to, I found help. I got the legal representation I desperately needed when an attorney at Connecticut Legal Rights Project accepted my case just in the nick of time. All I need is just enough time to find a fair outcome to what I am facing. Fighting not to be homeless, or misplaced, even though I wound up in this situation through no fault of my own. I just want to be able to fight for what’s fair, and not to be a burden on anyone. If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything, and without this help from CLRP, I would be homeless and a burden on society. I alone could not stand up to the bank’s team of lawyers, but with CLRP’s help, I stand tall, and feel powerful knowing that there is another voice speaking up for my rights besides my own. Some lawyers do it for money, some do it for greed, but a few do it because they care deeply about the rights of other people. Without CLRP to fight by my side, I don’t know where I would be. Just because I am disabled does not mean I deserve any less than anyone else. Please do not cut the funding to an organization that is the only thing standing between people like me and a life on the streets. Statement of Carol Gee Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 My name is Carol Gee and I live in Waterbury. Recently, I received help from Connecticut Legal Rights Project and I want to thank them for representing me in getting access to affordable housing. I had two misdemeanor charges on my record from over fifteen years ago, and my application for a lower cost apartment in Waterbury was denied because of that. I am a member of Mental Health Connecticut’s Independence Center, and I was able to attend a workshop about housing rights that was given there by CLRP. After the workshop, I met one-on-one with Katrina, an attorney from CLRP, who said she could represent me in appealing the property manager’s denial. She represented me at the hearing, and I won my appeal. Now, I have the option of renting in an affordable housing community, which I need because I have a fixed income of SSI. If I didn’t have CLRP’s help, I’d probably end up in a shelter or homeless. I have a mental illness, and I have trouble communicating to others sometimes. The Connecticut Legal Rights Project is very helpful to me because I cannot speak appropriately for myself. I want the people who are trying to cut the budget to realize that for people like myself, who cannot communicate professionally and who struggle with emotional instability when dealing with others in stressful situations, haVing an attorney can be the difference between getting a place to call home and becoming homeless or winding up in a shelter and costing the state more money. Please keep the Connecticut Legal Rights Project available to help people who are on the verge of homelessness. Statement of Helena Gorski Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Esteemed representatives of the Appropriations Committee, my name is Helena Gorski, | live in Wethersfield. I’m the parent and conservator of an adult with a psychiatric disability. My son would be homeless today were it not for the legal representation he received from Connecticut Legal Rights Project. These people are experienced in the courts unlike people with mental health issues and they have a remarkable ability to explain legal terms in a way that clients and their families can understand. My son was living in an apartment in Newington. The landlord blamed my son and tried to evict him for bringing bedbugs to the building, even though there was a long history of bedbug treatments in the complex prior to my son’s tenancy. There was something quite shady about the management of this property. Every few months, the landlord would ask me for more money other than the rent and would threaten to evict if I as his conservator didn’t pay it. I didn’t understand the charges and they approach me about more money every few months. These funds were not in the lease. Multiple times, they tried to evict my son and I would never receive notice until it was nearly too late. Luckily the court referred us to Connecticut Legal Rights Project. Their representation was unbelievable. I cannot imagine having to navigate the court system on my own, never mind my son having to do it and meet with the landlord’s bullying attorney. They negotiated to keep my son in his apartment for five and a half months until we could find a new home for him that was suitable. I understand that you are faced with many difficult choices in this year’s budget, but you must keep core services- homelessness prevention via legal representation of the most vulnerable and discriminated people in our state. Testimony of Frankie Green Good evening honorable Senators and Congressman, My name is Frankie Green, and my address is 66B Main Street, Ansonia Connecticut. If it were not for Connecticut Legal Right’s Project, there is a chance that I would now be homeless. Two years ago, I applied to the Norwalk Housing Authority for a Section 8 voucher. I received the voucher, however, the voucher was only good for a short amount of time, and in that time, I needed to find housing, or the voucher would be lost. If the voucher was lost, I would have to reapply and wait for a long time, maybe years, to get a new one, and in the meantime, I would not have been able to continuing living where I currently was because it was too expensive. I was having trouble finding housing in time, so I contacted CLRP. The first thing CLRP did was file a reasonable accommodation request to get me extra time to find new housing. I then found a place in my former hometown of Ansonia, Connecticut, just as the voucher was about to expire, and the Ansonia Housing Authority told me that they would accept my voucher and that I could live there. But then, at the last minute, they revoked their offer, and CLRP requested an immediate informal hearing with the Ansonia Housing Authority. At the hearing CLRP advocated for me to be allowed to port my voucher to Ansonia. We won the hearing and I was so relieved. It was a huge burden off my back to know that I would have a roof over my head, and that I could get on with the rest of my life. I am still living in the same apartment in Ansonia, and I like it there very much. CLRP is a group that gets justice for their clients every time. I myself, Frankie Green, was helped with getting housing and winning my case. If CLRP loses it’s funding, I worry that if someone else has a problem similar to mine, that they will have no one to advocate for them, and that they may end up homeless. That is why I respectfully ask today that you do not cut CLRP’s funding. Thank you very much for your time, and for listening to my story. Statement of Donna Lee Haas on behalf of Jordan Richard Haas Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 My name is Donna Lee Haas and my son, Jordan Richard Haas, of whom I am conservator, resides in Thomaston, Connecticut. He is currently a client of the Connecticut Legal Rights Project (CLRP) , availing of the services of Katrina Cessna following his entry on the Connecticut ABI Waiver list. Jordan suffered a brain injury in 2012 and immediately following his injury, I put his name on the ABI Waiver list so that he could receive services following his accident. It took three years for him to become eligible for these services, which were certainly something he desperately needed since my husband and I did not know how to properly attend to his needs, nor could we afford the private facilities in the area. However, in the process of dealing with the Department of Social Services, we encountered one setback after another, mainly because of the changing of social workers assigned to his case. After much frustration and desperation, I turned to CLRP because I needed a legal voice in this process if I wanted to get anything done. If it were not for Katrina and her involvement in Jordan’s case, I’m certain that I would still be battling the red tape involved in getting Jordan the services he needed. And Katrina did not stop here but has also been actively involved in processing the necessary paperwork needed for Jordan’s SSI benefits. Again, without someone to navigate the paperwork, it’s almost impossible to get anything done, which is why CLRP is so important for so many. I am happy to report that Jordan is making progress, and I know how much gratitude I owe CLRP and Katrina for their assistance. Knowing that this organization is in financial jeopardy is heartbreaking, not only for myself but for the multitudes of others left to fend for themselves. Organizations like CLRP act as a voice for so many who would otherwise be lost in the system, sol implore of you to put yourselves in the shoes of those less fortunate. Without CLRP, these masses have no voice and could prove to be an even bigger burden on the state when they either become a legal liability because of frustration or when they become wards ofthe state because no one was there to act as their proponent. Testimony of Scott Lofty Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Good afternoon Representatives and Senators of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Scott Lofty. I’m a resident of Norwich and don’t know where I would be without the legal representation I received from Connecticut Legal Rights Project. For more than 16 years, I rented a cottage on a farm in Colchester. In the last 8 or 9 years of my tenancy, my pipes would freeze, leaving me without water from December to June. That’s right. 6—8 years with no water for half of the year. You can only imagine what I had to endure. My elderly parents came weekly to carry water to me so I could flush my toilet. Once | week, I would go to their home in Marlborough to shower. I had no water to cook, clean, or brush my teeth. I couldn’t use pots or pans, | used nothing but paper goods. If that wasn’t bad enough, my landlord was holding my mail and I was missing scheduled medical appointments I knew nothing about. Eventually, I couldn’t take it anymore and I was referred by the Southeast Mental Health Authority to CLRP. | withheld my rent and the landlord who couldn’t provide me water, went directly to Liberty Bank and tried to illegally access my bank account. Thanks to the hard work of CLRP, I was freed from that place. CLRP went to court for me settled my case. Without CLRP, I wouldn’t have a new place to call home. I moved in October. I can now get in and out of my home without any trouble. I have running water and can get in and out of the shower on my own. I’m better able to do things for myself. My medical workers can access me in my new home. Please save these vital funds and protect the legal representation for people with disabilities. STATE OF CONNECTICUT OFFICE OF PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES 60B WESTON STREET, HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06120-155l TESTIMONY BEFORE THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE, REGULATION AND PROTECTION SUBCOMMITTEE on HB. 5044, AN ACT MKING ADJUSTMENTS T 0 STA TE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDWG JUNE 30, 201 7 February 18, 2016 Craig Henrici, Executive Director Co—chairs, Ranking Members, and Members of the Appropriations Committee: Good afternoon. I am here to submit testimony on behalf of the Connecticut Legal Rights Project (CLRP). As with all funding of Connecticut State Agencies during this difficult budgetary process, the specific line item for CLRP was eliminated, and their funding consolidated into the single line item that the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) has the discretion to allocate. As a core service of DMHAS, CLRP’s individualized funding should be maintained and should not be cut. CLRP was created as the result of a law suit filed by the then Connecticut Civil Liberties Union (CCLU) in 1989 against the then Department of Mental Health (now the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services - DMHAS). Now, firmly established as one of the leading public interest law firms in Connecticut that provides legal and advocacy services to individuals with psychiatric illness, CLRP provides a broad range of legal services, including services related to psychiatric inpatient hospital issues, housing, general civil rights issues, and issues impacting individuals in the community. These are all services that are necessary to protect the civil rights of individuals with psychiatric illness, and to enable such individuals to live in the community rather than being forced back into psychiatric institutions. The only discretionary funding in CLRP’s budget is for their housing work. Funding related to services to the inpatient community is required by the consent decree that established CLRP and those services are a priority. However, the loss of CLRP’s ability to represent individuals in housing cases will have a, severe impact on their client population. Maintaining safe and affordable housing is key to ‘ enable individuals with psychiatric disabilities to maintain recovery. Without that safety net, individuals run the very real risk of institutionalization, which is the very thing CLRP’s housing work is designed to prevent. However; CLRP doesn’t know how their funding will be impacted given the current budgetary format. Because of that, it is impossible for them to plan or prioritize their work. Previous budgetary proposals would have devastated CLRP’s housing work and required that they lay off so many people that all their work would have been compromised. They would be forced to provide only basic services to the growing inpatient population. The danger remains that this is what may finally happen. That is certainly not what this administration wants to see and is short sighted as DMHAS would be required to spend more and more money on inpatient services. We therefore ask that CLRP’s specific budget line be reinstated as a core service at the current funding level. Phone: 297-4300, 1—800-842—7303; TTY: 297-4330: FAX: 566-8714 An Afiirmafive Action - Equal Enwlayment Oppormnior Employer Testimony of Jacob Scatton Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Good evening Connecticut Legislators and Senators and to whom else this may COHCCI‘IIZ My name is Jacob Scatton and I live in Avon. Connecticut Legal Rights Project met with me early 2015, a year ago, to assist me with a housing case. Due to their amazing work, I was able to obtain affordable housing and continue on with my life without the major disruption of homelessness. This is actually my second time testifying before you- I have accomplished a great deal in the year that has passed since the first time. The stability that came with knowing I had a warm and safe place of my own allowed me to focus on more important things. I am currently working on furthering my education. I am proud to say that I recently completed four courses at a community college in Farmington, Connecticut, earning good grades in each class. The pursuit of this dream would not have been possible without the services offered by CLRP. In addition to earning 27 college credits and continuing to work toward earning my degree, I have also relocated in the past year to a beautiful New England town in the northwestern area of the state. In addition to testifying before the legislature, successfully returning to college, and moving to my ideal apartment, I have also recently accepted a job, which I will work on a part time basis as I continue to pursue my degree. It is amazing what a difference a year- and a safe, warm, affordable place to call home- can make! I pray and hope that others may continue to have the opportunity to turn to CLRP to receive the help and support as I once did so that others can discover their own potential. CLRP’s work led me down a productive and rewarding path and it will do the same for others if you allow it. Please do not take funding away from this organization. TESTIMONY OF KELLY SCINTO Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Good evening to all legislators and to all in attendance here today. My name is Kelly Scinto. Connecticut Legal Rights Project (CLRP) represented me on housing issues both when l was in the hospital and when l was in the community. When I was in the hospital, CLRP helped me break my lease at my old apartment while avoiding any negative consequences. This allowed me to retain my voucher and focus on my recovery while I was inpatient at Connecticut Mental Health Center (CMHC). CLRP also educated me about housing vouchers and my rights that go along with it. CLRP also represented me when I left the inpatient unit. CLRP submitted a request for reasonable accommodation asking for extra time for me to locate an apartment using my voucher. I needed this extra time because of my recent hospitalization and I did not want to lose my voucher, a valuable asset. CLRP was successful and | now have until April 1, 2016 to find an apartment. My life has improved because I’m not constantly worried about the state of my voucher, and I know if I ever have questions I can just ask CLRP and they will clarify things for me. If I was unable to use CLRP’s services I would have lost my voucher- leaving me homeless. l was inpatient and in no position to find legal representation. They are a true asset in the mental health community where not everyone knows how to navigate the system of housing law. Please keep CLRP fully funded. Thank you. Statement of Esteban Francisco Sebourne Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Dear honorable Senators and Representatives of the Appropriations Committee of the State of Connecticut, my name is Esteban Franciso Sebourne, and I live at 1290 Iranistan Avenue Bridgeport CT. I am asking you today to act bravely to restore Connecticut Legal Rights Proj ect’s funding under the DMHAS Legal Services line item. CLRP has represented me on some 30 cases since 1994. These cases have ranged from brief legal advice to full blown litigation. For example, Joanne Bilger advocated for me at Connecticut Valley Hospital when my right to refuse medication was being violated. She successfully prevented me from being force medicated and thereby preserved my right to autonomy. On another occasion Gina Teixeira advocated for me when I was an inpatient at Greater Bridgeport Community Mental Health Center. In that case, Gina fought for my right to have meaningful participation in my treatment plan, and, more importantly, a voice. CLRP even helped me create and execute an advance directive which will help ensure that my rights and preferences are respected should I ever become incapacitated. Yet again in 2014 I was discriminated against when I was asked to vacate the lunch room of a Hospital only because it was known that I had been in the inpatient ward two days after my release from their doctor’s care. CLRP helped me as I gained a settlement and my right to make use of the facilities used by the public was upheld by the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. CLRP has always been there when I have needed them. They ensure that my civil rights are enforced and help protect me from discrimination. I sincerely hope that their funding is maintained, so that if I, or others like me, need their services in the future, that they will be available. Statement of Peter M. Shugrue Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 My name is Peter M. Shugrue and I live at Garden Brook Residential Care Facility in Watertown, Connecticut. Connecticut Legal Rights Project helped me out a lot. I worked as a machinist for 25 years until I was laid off, and fell on hard times when I couldn’t find another job. t was living in my house and the utilities got shut off because I ran out of money to pay the bills. During the wintertime, it got so cold in my house that the pipes froze. I ended up getting frostbite and had to be taken to the hospital. Once I got discharged, I realized I needed more support in my living arrangements. I lived in respite for a while, and then I came to live at Garden Brook. I liked it here very much, but I was afraid I would not be able to stay for long because I had no income to pay for the cost of my care. My mental health case manager helped me to file an application for Social Security Disability, but my application was denied. Then, I called CLRP and they sent an attorney out to to interview me. Katrina put my mind at ease- she treated me with respect and explained everything so I could understand it. Once she agreed to represent me, she filed my appeal, gathered all of my medical records, and sent the evidence to Social Security. My claim was approved only a couple of months later. This was a lifesaver because it allowed me to start receiving my benefits many months before I would have if I’d had to wait for a hearing the way that most people usually do. Once I started receiving my monthly Social Security checks, I was able to help contribute to the cost of my care at Garden Brook. I don’t have to worry anymore about whether my housing is secure. If it wasn’t for CLRP, I don’t know if I would still be living here or if I would have won my disability appeal. I’m not sure I would have a roof over my head at all. It is very important that you do not cut from CLRP’s budget. They are very helpful for me and for other disabled people like me in Connecticut who have do not have the money to pay a lawyer. We need them. Please keep them going. Testimony of Mark Soboslai, Esq. Opposition of HE. 5044 Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Good evening Honorable Senators and Representatives. My name is Mark Soboslai. I am an attorney in private practice in Westport and I presently serve as President of the Board of Directors of the Connecticut Legal Rights Project (CLRP.) I am here to testify in support of CLRP. Preliminarily and as many of you know CLRP came into existence 25 years ago as the result of a Consent Decree resolving a suit in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. The mandate of that Decree provided that CLRP staff provide legal advocacy and support services for: “all present and future indigent patients of inpatient facilities funded or operated by the Conn Department of Mental Health who are or will be in need of legal assistance.... ” Over the years, those core services have included advocacy for many, many indigent patients with mental illness to obtain housing upon discharge into the community and to remain in their housing. While some of our funding is guaranteed by that Court Order, there is a significant portion of our funding that is subsumed under the line item for “legal services” and those are the funds that will be cut based on the proposed Budget. This funding is included under the umbrella of the funding for the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) in the “CONSOLIDATED AGENCY” Summary. Therefore the 5.75 across—the—board reductions applied to Agency Operating Funds of DMHAS will severely impact CLRP’s ability to l continue their much needed work on behalf of indigent persons with severe mental illness in this State. Essentially, these critically important services for our most vulnerable citizens with severe mental illness will be eliminated. The executive team and staff of lawyers and paralegals work tirelessly to assist our clients with many of their most basic and essential needs such as obtaining housing and securing income by representing clients in Social Security disability hearings and appeals. The staff has already been hit with an unpaid furlough day every month. If these budget cuts are approved, not only will the current and prospective clients of CLRP be harmed; it will inevitably lead to the loss of jobs for an already limited staff. Another logical and likely effect of such cuts is to insure that more people who would otherwise remain out of the hospital in the community in their homes will inevitably require inpatient hospitalization at a significant increase in the cost per client. From the standpoint of cost effectiveness, this impact is straightforward: It costs about $806 per day to allow CLRP to continue to protect a client’s housing. Whereas, the daily cost for inpatient hospitalization is from $1,157 to $2,152 per day. On behalf of the dedicated staff and the clients of CLRP, I truly hope that you will continue your commitment as a vital partner with CLRP to allow these very special lawyers and paralegals to continue assisting our most vulnerable citizens to have a safe and decent place to call home. Statement of L. Glenn Stowe Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 My name is Glenn Stowe, and I live in Beacon Falls, Connecticut. Connecticut Legal Rights Project helped me because they gave me a foundation to stand on when my disability benefit claims were being denied repeatedly. Before I met with my attorney from CLRP, I had been pretty discouraged being denied my disability benefits time after time. When I found them and Attorney Cessna said she would take my case, it gave me hope again, that maybe there was some light at the end of the tunnel, and I might finally get the disability benefits I need and deserve. If I wasn’t able to use CLRP’s services, I probably would have given up. I would have lost hope, given up, and would have probably matriculated to the streets. I am homeless right now, and have managed to couch surf with friends here and there, but that arrangement won’t last forever. Knowing that I have an attorney to represent me and to be a voice of support and expertise has kept me hopeful that I will finally prevail. Disability benefits will make the difference between self- sufficiency and homeless for me, so having a lawyer in this case is of vital importance. The loss or reduction of services offered by CLRP due to funding cuts would be highly detrimental to the community. There is no other resource out there like CLRP, which not only offers no-cost legal representation to the poor, but which is also staffed by dedicated attorneys and paralegals who treat us with dignity and respect and who understand and care about the struggles faced by those of us with mental illness. Before I learned about CLRP, I didn’t think I had any options. If they are forced to close their doors due to budget cuts, I really won’t have any. Please don’t jeopardize our safety and stability by taking this important service away from us. Testimony of Aileen Sullivan Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 My name is Aileen Sullivan and I am a resident of Torrington, CT. | live currently at the Torrington Towers. I am writing this to express that if it wasn’t for legal aid that I may not have an apartment today. I received legal aid from Connecticut Legal Rights Project (CLRP) and was able to get an apartment preventing me from being homeless. l was looking at relocation or possible homelessness. Since I knew nothing about the legal housing I wasn’t sure if I could get an apartment at the Towers. I contacted CLRP and spoke frequently to Attorney Katrina Cessna and her paralegal and with their help lam not homeless. CLRP is a great resource. STATEMENT OF CHRISTINE WILLOUGHBY Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 To whom it may concern: I, Christine Willoughby, resident of New Haven, Connecticut, would like to say something about this program that has helped in my time of need. The program is Connecticut Legal Rights Project. I couldn’t afford a lawyer, so I was told about this program that helps low income families with housing by my counselor. I got the help that I needed to stay in my apartment thanks be to God. What I am asking is that you not close or stop the funding to this program, Connecticut Legal Rights Project. In Jesus name, I believe this program will help lots of people like myself. We can’t fight these landlords without them. So, please take time to think before you shut this program down or the funding that they need. Thank you very much. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. N0. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 201 7. February 18, 2016 Haleigh E. F eldman, Ansonia CT Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Haleigh Feldman, and I am a registered voter in the town of Ansonia. I am here to testify on H.B. No. 5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. This act will cut funding to Community Care Teams by $3 million. This program has already shown it will save the state money by encouraging joint effort between hospitals and community providers to stabilize individuals living in the community. I urge you to keep crucial services available to the residents of Connecticut. As a young adult living in the community, I receive a multitude of supports from Young Adult Services, the providers within my community. Cutting funds to community providers would greatly reduce the amount of assistance I obtain on a daily basis. I am expecting a baby girl in July, and the support I am already receiving from Young Adult Services is incredible. If the funds are greatly reduced to this program, these supports Ireceive now will also be reduced. When my child is born, I will need more assistance. If the amount I obtain now is reduced when my daughter is born, I am afraid Iwon’t be able to provide for her in the ways I know I can with additional support. She deserves the best, and I need the support from my community providers so I can be the best me and provide the best for my daughter. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports. The Simanar Chaise for Ears: \\ mmmsgx 305mm; TESTIMONY OF Terri DiPietro, Director of Outpatient Behavioral Health Services MIDDLESEX HOSPITAL SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Thursday, February 18, 2016 HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 Middlesex Hospital appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony concerning HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. We oppose the imposition of budget cuts for mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment services. If enacted, these cuts will further destabilize an already stressed mental health care system, reduce the options for care available to individuals and families who need high—quality mental health services, and impose a greater burden on hospital emergency departments, outpatient clinics, and crisis services, at a time when Connecticut is struggling with ominous and intensifying threats to public health from heroin use and prescription drug abuse. This is exactly the wrong time for the state to withdraw its support of our mental health care system. My name is Terri DiPietro; I am the Director of Outpatient Behavioral Health Services at Middlesex Hospital. I have had the opportunity to serve on the Behavioral Health Partnership Oversight Council since January of 2009 and as Co—Chair of The Connecticut Hospital Association’s Mental Health and Substance Abuse Subcommittee since 2012. Middlesex Hospital Center For Behavioral Health Outpatient Services provides treatment to more than 3,500 outpatients with mental health and substance abuse disorders. We operate a full continuum of outpatient treatment including a Partial Hospital Program, Intensive Outpatient Program and Outpatient Mental Health Services for adults. We also have a Child Outpatient Clinic and we are the EMPS provider for Middlesex County. We are an IICAPS provider for Middlesex County and for the Meriden/Wallingford service area. Middlesex Hospital also provides several Maternal Child Health In—Home visiting programs. The Governor is asking for a $16 million reduction in grants for mental health and substance abuse services. These cuts will impact community and hospital—based outpatient mental health and substance abuse treatment services. Demand for these services has not abated, and grant funds are essential to maintain the person—centered, recovery—oriented care provided by these programs. Loss of these funds will lead programs to close resulting in patients being forced to seek services through the Emergency Departments. I have learned firsthand through my work on the Community Care Team that while the ED can manage the crisis in the moment, patients fall through the cracks as they require the stability and structure of adequate outpatient treatment systems to fully recover from these chronic, and often devastating medical illnesses. This leads to another distressing budget adjustment — a $3 million proposed cut to the grant program authorized by the General Assembly last year to establish Community Care Teams (CCTs). I have had the privilege of being a founding member ofthe Middlesex County Community Care Team. We are a group over 14 provider agencies that meet for an hour each week at Middlesex Hospital to address Page 1 of 3 clinical concerns for frequent visitors to the Emergency Department. Our process is simple; we identify the barriers that a patient is experiencing that lead to the patient’s perceived need to present to the emergency room. Using a care coordination model we develop a care plan to connect the patient to the appropriate services within the community and then monitor that plan until the patient is established in their recovery. I have witnessed the success of community collaboration that results in better patient outcomes and financial savings to the state. As you know, DMHAS is an important provider of mental health and substance abuse treatment services. If the proposed consolidation of agency funds is enacted, the Commissioner would be empowered to make unilateral decisions limiting access to behavioral health services for patients in need, with little or no input from the public or other community providers, and with no authorization or oversight by legislators. Among the services at risk is the 20—bed detox unit within the Addiction Services Division of the Middletown campus of Connecticut Valley Hospital. |fthese beds are closed, community providers will not be equipped to address the medical and mental health needs ofthese patients. They will be forced to rely on hospital—based care, most likely through our emergency departments. I urge you to review how destructive the closing of these essential beds will be to the patients they serve. I believe the closing will result in higher costs as a patient receiving medical detox in a hospital setting is less likely to engage in the essential recovery services in the community that will allow them to manage this life threatening disease. These patients present with complex medical co—morbidities that necessitate the detox being provided in a medical setting. Merritt Hall functions as a hospital. While the private not for profit (PNP) community serves many of our patients for long—term rehabilitation and routine detox, these medically fragile patients cannot be safely managed in the PNP setting. We know this first hand as the detox beds at Merritt are often full and when we reach out to community providers they are not able to manage the medical acuity associated with these cases. It is my belief based on the data from the Middlesex County CCT that if the patient does not go directly into rehab following a complex medical detox they will not be successful in managing their addiction. Our experience has shown that if we develop a care plan that supports detox, rehabilitation and connection to community services, patients are able to start and maintain theirjourney of recovery. Another vital component of the success we have seen in the CCT model is supportive housing. The national data has been there for years, and now our local CCT can corroborate these findings. One of the key data elements we track is housing. Forty percent ofthe cases we manage are homeless or housing insecure. We have watched as patients with 40—50 or more ED visits a year reduce their visits to less than 10 and on several occasions zero once they are placed in a supportive housing program. Our Middlesex CCT has representation from all of the housing providers which allows us to build a care plan that addresses lack of housing. We have seen time and again that once a patient is housed with a case manager their recovery journey can begin. Not only does this reduce unnecessary ED visits, it helps the patient to connect to vital Primary Care services and other treatment services that serve as the bridge to physical and mental wellness. We recognize that the state is facing a challenging budget, but we ask that you do not enact cuts to mental health and substance abuse treatment services included in HB 5044. Hospitals and other community providers need your support to preserve what remains of the mental health safety net at the very time Connecticut residents are demanding improvements to the mental health system. Thank you for your consideration of our position. Page 2 of 3 I urge you to reach out to hospitals that are trying to sustain these models and ask for their data. What you will find are stories of success, but also associated cost savings for this model of care. Thank you for your consideration of this position. Page 3 of 3 {AAAAAA WAAAAAUAY ttAAAAn tA/ttAtAoA/AMANA PAAn NAAAAAAA aft) Saint Mary A at 5mm mm Am y HEJISE'WAL February l 8 , Bill 6 "to: 'l‘hc Connecticut Appropriations Committee RE: Community Care Team Funding On behali’ofthc many local and regional. healthcare, social service and community organizations that comprise the Greater Waterbury Health improvement Partnership (GWHEP), i am writing to you to express the critical need for funding for Acute and Emergency Behavioral Health Grants, more specifically the establishment of Community Care Teams (CC’I‘). As an active consortium of community providers in the (heater Waterbury area, our primary focus has been to address the [our pressing health concerns identified by area residents in the 2013 and 2016 Community Needs Health Assessments which prioritized: Access to Care, and Mental i-Iealth/Substance Abuse, as well as Chronic Diseases (Obesity, Heart Disease, Diabetes and Asthma) and Tobacco Use. Community Care 'l‘eams are necessary to better help patients who over—utilize the two hospital Emergency Departments, while also helping the two hospitals to provide patients with access to necessary community services. GWl’lli’ feels strongly that this funding will provide the revenue necessary to bring our current level of healthcarc navigation to the next level by the introduction of a Community Care Team outreach worker. The (heater Waterbury Area is ahead of the rest ot‘the state in that we currently have intensive, scutecare patient navigation services provided by the Waterbury Health Access Program, who assures that the needs of acute care clients are adequately met. With. the introduction of the COP Patient Navigator. the intense, multi‘faceted, ' complex needs ot‘the chronically ill clients can be adequately monitored and addressed. The Waterbury Health Access Program is an established consortium of community care providers that provides a natural framework for the addition of an intensive CCT Patient Navigator. With the security and privacy issues already in place, a CCT worker would hit the ground running in the Greater Waterbury Area. Attached, please find a list of organizations committed to participating on the CCT Greater Waterbury. If providing patient stories would be helpful please feel free to contact: Waterbury Health Ascess Program. Coordinator, Leslie Swiderski RN, IQCSW @ 203—573—7689. 8i} wereigr; ) if if; 1:. g .." /-" i 3.32? z i s- ’ Will‘ihm Quipn; _ D‘iecto’i‘ of Health City of Waterbury 1 Cl 121ir Gleater Waterbury Health improvement Partnership 994-63% XmEx E94444 Emu 4.4manEo44 3366.43.36. :wuqt/Eov 4465 420T 4,2 3QO E3452 48.645 6:544. umxm 44.63.44... 463:3 mEEE hhmv4mmh4mmw mcgmmcsau bu 6635 ”magma DE 33.2 “44.32 waw4m®n4mo4m 6 E45 m6..444>m:4E 6.444... .EmEEEmE mm mm :35 mag gamma umEmanSE momfimofimom “4:666 4.444.466 .46 m 464.. .26 mm IEm 26.4.. EmENmEoom 6.4.4.; 834-4% 4m6m , .440 4.. E. 84:. 4.4.6.44 65, 2454.4 $93.44 $54.4, mmmo4mnm4mmm 44.6.3354... .6.. a mtgmu $4.44 fimmwr EmEE>mEmm 46 6695 .AEBEQ EmeQ gownmméew 64.4....EE63 >36 6... 604.3 36.54.3444, ,. . 6664.5 EmuEEG 4.33 .4663 346.4% maqméomé 45m. .mfirsau$436564...“ deEQW Qmu Easm fimSE mem4mom4moN .4. 6. 4464.450 E6 40 $545 .452 Egmmm EmEoEEWEEwm 46 669.5 EEEQI E645 4mg, mwméwm 44.44.. .4346 u n 6.4.340 .6443 Emncm owwmm .Ammmcs 46mm6©m4m6m .44.... .4464 E45 $0.. >4...qu 44. a Ema. 66.33% 6346.8 44% 6.2, .4..ng 4444.4. $.44???QO 4 $3.53 6 :2... Etmmi EmEoEmem 45 48.6.4415 QSE . MEmEEwm $5654 .44 manuxg EOEQUOE NEE“. wEflE mm mwmfimmmfiom 4E6. Emmxfits 4.4603 mud: 44.3 65,6663. SammEmEm 56.44.46 mcrenz zm EwmmEE $me nmmm..mom.m_um .4..Wm.mmmw.umm.%3 .m 32m $6565. 46EmmeEJE .6446 $5 meats: 2m EEumEI fimflm Emmawwmam 44.44... 66:45.44...644.66.660.44»... IRE. EmEmwmcwE mm m... 64.696 2% 6.36633. 4664...... 664.46.63.84“. . 4.5 484....4644mfiwfim am 3...... E46444: 4.4.8 2E 3444.4 Eacm mmwm4mom-mom, 446.464: EE4 .m44.....o.xmuu...nmfl mm 3.4% EmmmEmSE 6mm“. 2m 6:44.446 Emma mmmw4mmm4mom . ....4..E.44 4.444665636 IEw Emw.4.mm 63.442343 446:4 34.26% 204484.43 E8685 ESEEE as... 2.. E46 $4.4 ...4.E mmem..m4.m.mem 2m, 424.25.604.94. 834.... wmwm4mom4mwm E3625 E332 92 fifimzmuumnwm $66366 ..H....,...444....E444W.. _ 4.9.68 E8542 6.4.4 $8. 5.444.444. flwmm-mm.4.4mwm 63:33 _Em...,.>$m 46.8.35 E8622 34$. $50.0 .Ezm $3-844.-QO $4.65th xEm 64%ng 6643?. 2a. 8644.5 Efiam 6344.66.44-84 46.4.5643 xgm 4.46%.: 4.0.4.6665 4.86.5 ESE. 38.4.2.4.qu mfimw4mmm4mom 8.644466% 1.44.... 652.qu EEmewEm .6633 Q? mmggoo MESS .4 6464.44 6263 20:454.... NEE... . mafia 44.4.9an5. Emmw Emu. EMEmEEOU £33444“.ng yummx.Emm.M. Emu BEDEEQU \CMSHMwwmgbeé hudFEOuflcme Mum/GTE“: mm mm,mmm-mmm Eoficc. mun. QEEmnmmfi RESEMEOQ we (6585 $880 cmmw M H? 33-3meme EoéwfismmufixfiMHERMMEM mm}; nmfica, Swag >§35Eou M6 ”53¢.me $5 mmcmwmm mEocmmm E53 , mmx mmmm$mfimwm M Eoégmivmacnmimnumg mm; Mamas; M $qu Macawmmmuai Exubcmnmmmfi M583 SEEM n “30mm MEEm anEuQMMW 3E wig M mammza , :M M M mmmm‘mmm,mmm ”$5.0Mmaxg‘éwfimfiQmwwnwgmm mdfg Mowwcmmhoou Ewumui QQIKS Em.Mw§§m @2qu mmmmmmomummm mEm waxcomummeEmm as, Emoccou zmmmg Nemoemwm-mcm QIU commmm 53mm?) uxu m> Moamgw >5¢ wwmhammflmm IE, QOuxCOfimwaEfim 35 SEE Emma Mmowuwmmymom Mwm>§mpm \fimu.“ Euzmmm MEEEQ mmnmfimflom ..5.manfiflmmmmmfimmm Ema Emmx 3:5 92 M 2:6 Em n szI m .mdgm EQMMflUQa ,M WEE. $242, M MM MM mamawmdm “Exam mhmwrmwmfiam to.UEMManMmpMMfiM$33 Ema fiMmmI ENE Emmfimaw EmEqumMfim mums; . 33S mvcfl flmewémfimcw Eo,fimmngmmaafimmwmmfi :mfimmmm 53mg mmmmmbm BESEEOU ncm £30m mmflcmozum MM u, uzoxmw zofifiod WEE @qu . mmwtmg Edmm , M MM wHQm,mmm-mmm SawwficéwijmHm mucmEEouM Mmtmcm Ema an EmucS gm ”RM 3535 33% mcom {NEHMNHEN M : :M $0.335?»fixfiogm 2%, Exam} pummbzo Boom REE u ESE fiEm . . zefiSB 3E. mafia M mqumga mmmijaom mmmmMmE-mQN Egfimfimmcéfi xém EwEwmmcmE EMMNEEEMM fiMmmm , . Mmmz £3 mmnm‘manQN Endmofififiémficmxu IE EoEwmmcmE gmeEMQpEM Emwx Ecmw rug, mmmm-mmn-mmm EDAMEQOMM... . mgw mucmmEEQu .ucm mumpta M cmsémnwmhmfimm 039mmm‘mom gaging 1%. EEE fig Swab 3% mwwm,mon-mmm M EoM‘MEmQQEMalwmwm 13% “Eye fix M8283 22:3 & mzflmm JEEQ ZOmhfian want.» wgdz M , .fiwfiamm flnm h2m§w®¢2<§ Mmmm TESTIMONY OF Deena Tampi MSN, MBA, HCA Executive Director, Behavioral Health Services Saint Francis Hospital and Medical Center and johnson Memorial Hospital SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Thursday, February 18, 2016 HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 Saint Francis Hospital and Medical Center appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony concerning HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending lune 30, 2017. We oppose the imposition of budget cuts for mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment services. If enacted, these cuts will further destabilize an already stressed mental healthcare system, reduce the options for care available to individuals and families who need high-quality mental health services, and impose a greater burden on hospital emergency departments, outpatient clinics, and crisis services, at a time when Connecticut is struggling with ominous and intensifying threats to public health from heroin use and prescription drug abuse. This is exactly the wrong time for the state to withdraw its support of our mental healthcare system. Saint Francis Hospital and Medical Center serves more than 8,220 inpatients and provides 32,130 outpatient Visits with mental health and substance abuse disorders. Services include inpatient, outpatient (with 5 satellite locations), consultation and liaison, and crisis emergency services. The Saint Francis Behavioral Health Group employs 18 physicians, 8 APRN’s, 30 clinicians, and 25 support staff. Johnson Memorial Hospital serves more than 623 inpatients, 1,400 crisis evaluations, and provides 95 Chemical Dependency program Visits with mental health and substance abuse disorders. It is expected, based on current volume and trend, this number will exceed in 2016. Services include inpatient, consultation and liaison, crisis emergency, and chemical dependency program services. The Governor is asking for a $16 million reduction in grants for mental health and substance abuse services. These cuts will impact community and hospital-based outpatient mental health and substance abuse treatment services. Demand for these services has not abated, and grant funds are essential to maintain the person-centered, recovery-oriented care provided by these programs. Loss of these funds will lead to community closures. As a result, hospital emergency rooms will be inundated by the people once served by these closed programs as they will be left with no other Choices. These cuts could derail national and state efforts to bring parity between the treatment provided to those needing medical care and patients who need mental health services. This could also lead to accidental harm to self and/or others. Page 1 of2 The threat to public health due to the current state of opioid drug use has reached alarming proportion. Among the services at risk is the 20-bed detoxification unit within the Addiction Services Division of the Middletown campus of Connecticut Valley Hospital. Ifthese beds are closed, community providers will no longer have access to these beds or be equipped to address the medical and mental health needs of these patients. They will be forced to rely on hospital-based care, most likely through our emergency departments. This will be more costly to the state and result in less satisfactory outcomes and patient experiences. Another distressing budget adjustment includes the $3 million proposed cut to the grant program authorized by the General Assembly last year to establish Community Care Teams (CCTs). These teams were successfully piloted in certain regions ofthe state, bringing together medical, mental health, and social service providers to address the needs of frequent visitors to emergency departments. The $3 million in funding is necessary to sustain existing CCTs and fund the establishment ofnew CCTs in every region ofthe state. CCTs are a proven, integrated care model, resulting in improved patient outcomes, less pressure on care providers, and fewer ED visits by Medicaid clients, which saves the state money. There are 42 agencies that work with the Greater Hartford area to provide access to community services that supports mental, physical health and wellbeing. We recognize that the state is facing a challenging budget, but we ask that you do not enact cuts to mental health and substance abuse treatment services included in HE 5044. Hospitals and other community providers need your support to preserve what remains ofthe mental health safety net at the very time Connecticut residents are demanding improvements to the mental health system. Thank you for your consideration of our position. Page 2 of 2 Swimmer} fiassma The Reg'eix'n'zai steam? is}? fiaaim TESTIMONY OF Stamford Hospital SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Thursday, February 18, 2016 HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending june 30, 2017 Stamford Hospital appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony concerning HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending Iune 30, 2017. We oppose the imposition ofbudget cuts for mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment services. If enacted, these cuts will further destabilize an already stressed mental healthcare system, and impose a greater burden on hospital emergency departments. Stamford Hospital is on the front lines of an intensifying threat to public health from heroin use, PCPs, and prescription drug abuse. This is exactly the wrong time for the state to withdraw its support of our mental healthcare system. Rather, it is time to coordinate local, regional and state efforts. This leads to another distressing budget adjustment - a $3 million proposed cut to the grant program authorized by the General Assembly last year to establish Community Care Teams (CCTs). Stamford Hospital established a CCT to improve health outcomes for vulnerable populations, including those who are chronically physically and/or mentally ill, homeless, or abusing substances. 0 Stamford Hospital’s Community Care Team, operating for over a year, has achieved more than 60% reduction in costs for four ofits most vulnerable patients, amounting to $378,000. The CCT outcome data in Stamford clearly points to improved care, increased community safety, and a reduction of costs by providing wraparound services through this multi-agency partnership. As the state struggles with its budget, we urge the legislature to invest in, rather than cut, Community Care Team funding. Hospitals and other community providers need your support to preserve what remains ofthe mental health safety net at the very time Connecticut residents need and are demanding improvements to the mental health system. Thank you for your consideration. #### S‘G Rx 1x91? 5 Sta Swimmer} fiassma The Reg'eix'n'zai steam? is}? fiaaim TESTIMONY OF Stamford Hospital SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Thursday, February 18, 2016 HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending june 30, 2017 Stamford Hospital appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony concerning HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending Iune 30, 2017. We oppose the imposition ofbudget cuts for mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment services. If enacted, these cuts will further destabilize an already stressed mental healthcare system, and impose a greater burden on hospital emergency departments. Stamford Hospital is on the front lines of an intensifying threat to public health from heroin use, PCPs, and prescription drug abuse. This is exactly the wrong time for the state to withdraw its support of our mental healthcare system. Rather, it is time to coordinate local, regional and state efforts. This leads to another distressing budget adjustment - a $3 million proposed cut to the grant program authorized by the General Assembly last year to establish Community Care Teams (CCTs). Stamford Hospital established a CCT to improve health outcomes for vulnerable populations, including those who are chronically physically and/or mentally ill, homeless, or abusing substances. 0 Stamford Hospital’s Community Care Team, operating for over a year, has achieved more than 60% reduction in costs for four ofits most vulnerable patients, amounting to $378,000. The CCT outcome data in Stamford clearly points to improved care, increased community safety, and a reduction of costs by providing wraparound services through this multi-agency partnership. As the state struggles with its budget, we urge the legislature to invest in, rather than cut, Community Care Team funding. Hospitals and other community providers need your support to preserve what remains ofthe mental health safety net at the very time Connecticut residents need and are demanding improvements to the mental health system. Thank you for your consideration. #### S‘G Rx 1x91? 5 Sta Swimmer} fiassma The Reg'eix'n'zai steam? is}? fiaaim TESTIMONY OF Stamford Hospital SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Thursday, February 18, 2016 HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending june 30, 2017 Stamford Hospital appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony concerning HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending Iune 30, 2017. We oppose the imposition ofbudget cuts for mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment services. If enacted, these cuts will further destabilize an already stressed mental healthcare system, and impose a greater burden on hospital emergency departments. Stamford Hospital is on the front lines of an intensifying threat to public health from heroin use, PCPs, and prescription drug abuse. This is exactly the wrong time for the state to withdraw its support of our mental healthcare system. Rather, it is time to coordinate local, regional and state efforts. This leads to another distressing budget adjustment - a $3 million proposed cut to the grant program authorized by the General Assembly last year to establish Community Care Teams (CCTs). Stamford Hospital established a CCT to improve health outcomes for vulnerable populations, including those who are chronically physically and/or mentally ill, homeless, or abusing substances. 0 Stamford Hospital’s Community Care Team, operating for over a year, has achieved more than 60% reduction in costs for four ofits most vulnerable patients, amounting to $378,000. The CCT outcome data in Stamford clearly points to improved care, increased community safety, and a reduction of costs by providing wraparound services through this multi-agency partnership. As the state struggles with its budget, we urge the legislature to invest in, rather than cut, Community Care Team funding. Hospitals and other community providers need your support to preserve what remains ofthe mental health safety net at the very time Connecticut residents need and are demanding improvements to the mental health system. Thank you for your consideration. #### S‘G Rx 1x91? 5 Sta Testimony of Melissa Updyke February 19, 2016 Testimony before the Appropriations Committee In Support of Legal Aid Funding My name is Melissa Updyke. In May 2014, my son Alex and I were referred to Connecticut Legal Services by the court support services division when my son got into some trouble. When my son and I met with his probation officer, I told him about my frustration that Alex, who was 13 years old at that time, could neither read nor write. I had been attending Alex’s planning and placement team (PPT) meetings for years asking for help. The school told me that the services they were providing Alex were the only services they had and that there was nothing more they could do. Nieka Thompson, an attorney at Connecticut Legal Services, met with me and reviewed Alex’s educational records. She was outraged by the lack of educational progress that my son had made over the years. Despite being eligible for special education and receiving services since Kindergarten, my son was still reading at a kindergarten/ first grade level in the 8th grade! Attorney Thompson agreed to represent me at a PPT meeting that had been scheduled before her involvement. The school district cancelled the meeting and ignored our requests to reschedule it. That’s when Attorney Thompson filed a complaint with the State Department of Education against them. The complaint said that the district failed to provide Alex with an appropriate education. She also asked for independent evaluations to get a better understanding of Alex’s disabilities and what services were needed to help him make progress. The district initially responded by agreeing to do evaluations but then took months to complete the evaluations they were responsible for doing. Every step they took only came about because Attorney Thompson was pushing them. They didn’t care that my son still wasn’t learning and getting the services he needed. At one point, the Director of Pupil Services even told me that maybe my son wasjust incapable of learning. This really made me mad, because I knew my son could learn to read and write if the school would just give him the services he needs. The evaluations proved that. After the evaluations, Attorney Thompson requested that the district provide Alex with the kind of reading instruction and other services that he needed, andthat the evaluations said would work for him, or send him to a school that could meet his needs, but the district refused. At that point, we requested a due process hearing. That finally got the district to take us seriously and they agreed to provide Alex with individualized reading instruction using one of the programs recommended in the initial reading evaluation. The district had to train a staff person in one of the programs. While the staff was trained, Alex was sent to Ben Bronz Academy to learn how to read. The district also agreed to send Alex to Ben Bronz each summer for reading instruction until he graduates. This would not have happened without CLS’s help. Before Attorney Thompson got involved, the school just ignored my son and every request I made for help. Since I didn’t know the law, I didn’t know how to get the school to provide the services my son really needed. Today, Alex is making progress. His reading and writing have improved. He is gaining more confidence in himself. He wants to be a corrections officer when he grows up. I didn’t think that he would be able to be one before, but now I know that he is on the path to gaining the skills he needs to make his wishes come true. Thank you. Kristine Diana Wallingford, CT 2/18/2016 Hello, I would like to thank this committee for allowing me to speak today. lam here to tell you all a little about our family’s life and how good mental health care affects our quality of life. My husband and I have a son and a daughter and our life was good until my son turned 17 years old. Everything changed. After months of bizarre behavior and terrifying events, our son was diagnosed with schizophrenia at the age of 18. He is now 29 years old. Up until two years ago, he had been living with my husband, my daughter and me. For those of you who have had teenagers, you know to expect occasional distress calls in the middle of the night. For the past 10 years we got them day and night. When I would get a call from my husband, I didn’t even say hello, just ”what happened?” And my husband answered the same way. The calls would go like this: He’s been arrested. He’s been in a fight with a stranger. He punched holes in the walls of our home. He lost his phone and wallet. He got in an accident in New York City. He was fired from his job. and on and on. Our life was a nightmare. We couldn’t leave him alone in our home. We couldn’t sleep, and had pain in the pit in our stomachs all of the time. He was off meds, on meds, in and out of many of the psych hospitals in Connecticut, too many to count. We had continual problems getting consistent, intensive psychiatric services for him. He was unhappy having this illness and not being independent like kids his own age. We searched for supportive care housing for years with no luck. Two years ago, we began having conversations with one of the directors at Continuum of Care, a DMHAS-funded facility. She was trying to help us get our son placed in supervised housing. But there was always someone else that was in more need of services. Then came a blessing. Our son was accepted into the supervised housing program at Continuum of Care. It was life changing for all of us. Our son feels more independent and gets along great with the staff. There are young people supervising the home and they have a wonderful relationship with our son. He sits and talks with the staff members every day and feels comfortable sharing things with them. He has a visiting nurse that he likes and respects, and he is compliant with his meds, something that didn’t often happen at home. The staff who work at Continuum are the most wonderful community health workers we have ever encountered. We stay in touch with them and stay involved in our son’s well-being. Our son was hospitalized at Yale New Haven Psychiatric hospital last year. Several staff members from Continuum visited him at the hospital and we were pleasantly surprised when 3 staff members attended family meetings with us. It was a great feeling for us to know that there are people out there helping my son and not to have the burden of caring for someone with a mental illness fall solely on us. Yale New Haven Hospital clinicians were also able to provide a referral for outpatient services at the Connecticut Mental Health Center, which is also a DMHAS-funded facility, and he now gets excellent services and regularly sees a psychiatrist there. Continuum of Care is part of the Community Care Teams that are in danger of losing funding as well. In addition, I have applied for an appointment to the Behavioral Health Partnership Oversight Council which I understand is being considered for funding cuts. Thank you for listening, and I hope you have a better understanding of how good mental health care dramatically affects our quality of life, both for the patient and the caregivers. I urge you to support strong funding for care for the mentally ill in our state. It really matters. {TSNR {’i‘iili; ‘ ‘ BAR Etiiii’siiiri'i‘iifld Testimony of James T. Shearin President, Connecticut Bar Foundation Appropriations Committee February 19,2016 Good afternoon Sen. Bye, Rep, Walker, and esteemed members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is James T. Shearin and l offer this testimony as President of the Connecticut Bar Foundation (“Foundation”) to express the Foundation’s concerns with respect to changes proposed to the budgets of the Department of Mentai Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) and the Department of Social Services (1388) in House Bit} Stilts An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 39, 2017. The Foundation’s simple goai is to provide access to justice to ail of Connecticut’s citizens, regardless of economic means. White our organization recognizes that Connecticut‘s fiscal situation may require cuts in various programs throughout state government, it urges the Legisiatore to pause and consider the impact that some of the cuts Wiii have on a popuiation that often. remains voiceless. The Foundation is a 503(c)(3) charitable organization devoted to fimdiog the delivery of iegai services to the poor by providing grants-iiiuaiti to nonprofit organizations providing civil iegal representation to low income people. Pursuant to Connecticut General Statute §Stn81c, the judges of, the Superior Court have designated the iii’oundation to administer the interest on iam’ers’ trust accounts program, the fees imposed upon certain court filings under the Judicial Braneh’s Court Fees Grants~in~Aid program, and the Judicial Branch’s Grants—inwAid program. The Iii’oundation presently supports ten civil iegai service providers in Connecticut who address 3‘: Frat: Street, Hartford, CT Gt? tosses: 86833323494 Fax 86{l«722.~2497 ifimaii etht‘t‘ii’ebf— i or}; the legal needs of those who constitute Connecticut’s poverty population, a group of people who, since 2007, has grown from 268,880 to 374,772. The Foundation’s ability to continue providing adequate funding to these civil legal aid providers has become even more challenging as our revenues have substantially declined in recent years. One of the grantees the Foundation supports is the Connecticut Legal Rights Project, a statewide, non-profit organization which, with much needed funding from DHMAS, provides legal services to low income individuals with psychiatric disabilities on matters related to their treatment, recovery, civil rights, and housing. Three of the Foundation’s grantees, Connecticut Legal Services, Greater Hartford Legal Aid, and New Haven Legal Assistance provide legal services to very low—income people to help them achieve safety, housing and other essential services such as education, nutrition and health through a social services block grant provided through DSS. Both funding sources are in jeopardy of being cut this year. I ask you to appreciate fully the consequences that these cuts may have. For many who are too poor to afford counsel, representation through the legal service providers is the only way they can secure necessary government benefits or ensure that their legal rights are protected; the judicial system and government bureaucracy are simply too complex to handle on their own. The societal costs of leaving people with psychiatric disabilities and their families without legal aid attorneys to help them access the benefits to which they are entitled or to deprive them of the means to secure their basic human needs are far greater than any of the contemplated budget savings. We cannot, as a modern society, turn a blind eye to those who most need our help. ACT IVE/ 1.1/JTS/5617905v1 Testimony before the Appropriations Committee on the Governor’s Midterm Budget Adjustments February 18, 2016 Claire Bien, Hamden, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Claire Bien. I’m a registered voter in the town of Hamden and work full-time at The Connection as a writer and grantwriter. I’m immediate past president of the board of directors and NAMI Elm City and facilitate a Hearing Voices Network support group at Yale-New Haven Psychiatric Hospital. I’m also a person in recovery from hearing voices. I’m here this evening to testify on the Governor’s proposed mid-term budget adjustments. The proposed 5.75% cut to the DMHAS budget will have a devastating impact upon the ability of community agencies to provide quality clinical services to people who are struggling with mental illness and addiction. In the New Haven area, the clinical services that agencies like the Connecticut Mental Health Center and The Connection provide are critically important to some of the neediest members of our community. Similarly, the residential programs and scattered-site supportive housing programs provided by The Connection are vitally necessary in helping people with mental illness and addictions move from crisis, to stability, and back into the community. You have heard this evening the testimony of many clinicians and providers who chose to enter the mental health profession because it offered the opportunity to help people build, or re-build their lives. We—individually and collectively—can share many success stories about the difference our efforts have made on the lives of individuals and the community as a whole. But all of this is greatly threatened by the proposed cuts to the DMHAS budget As I said, I am a person in recovery from hearing voices. I learned to find my way toward substantial recovery because I had private insurance, access to excellent care, and a habit of self-guided and professional therapy. I was also embraced by a loving family and community of friends who knew who I was and what I am capable of being, and who helped support and guide me through crisis, toward recovery. I was lucky. The industry standard for quality care is person-centered—the ability for a clinician or case manager to see the client or patient not as a diagnosis or set of behaviors, but as an individual. But the ability to see the person behind the diagnosis or behavior, and to establish the trust necessary to begin to effect change takes time. And sadly, clue to lack of funding, time appears to have become an unattainable luxury. I—and tens of thousands of others in Connecticut—are living proof that with proper support, significant recovery from mental illness is not only possible, but likely. Medication, which can certainly be very efficient, is often a critical part of the solution. Equally if not more important are the principles and interventions at the core of the community mental health movement: Person-centered therapy, the use of peers, meaningful work, and the clear understanding that true acceptance by, and full integration within, the broader community is critical to the recovery process. There appears to be greater political will to provide the level and quality of mental health care needed to ensure that every citizen in every community is safe and well cared for. I hope that is true and hope you will work together to identify and secure the funding needed to allow our dedicated staff the time and opportunity to see people in the throes of crisis, or struggling toward recovery, as the individuals they are, and to work with them toward becoming the citizens they are destined to be. Thank you for your attention. Claire Bien Hamden, CT 06517 Written Testimony for the Appropriations Committee of Connecticut Mental Health Center February 18th, 2016 Luis Afiez, Psy.D. Director, Hispanic Services, CMHC. Associate Professor, Yale University School of Medicine Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and Members of the Appropriations Committee, thank you for this opportunity to offer my views about HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. Last year I had the privilege and opportunity to serve as a voice for the hundreds of individuals that we serve at the Connecticut Mental Health Center (CMHC) who cannot personally be here today. My name is Luis Afiez and as a licensed clinical psychologist who has worked in various capacities at the Hispanic Clinic of the Connecticut Mental Health Center (CMHC) for the past 20 years, I am here once again to share the unique accounts of a disenfranchised, yet growing, community afflicted with the consequences of mental illness, addiction, and poverty. Over the years, your continued support has been essential in changing a story of hopelessness and fear to one of hope and recovery. At CMHC, we bear witness to the negative impact of mental illness, but we also see resilience and growth when people are provided the necessary support and treatment. They can recover and become productive and valued members of their community. The need for care is particularly evident among the growing Latino community. Latinos represent nearly 30% of New Haven’s population, and as of 2012, data demonstrates that in the greater New Haven area, communities from Mexico, Ecuador, and Guatemala have each increased by over 70%. As a provider of mental health services to this community, I can not only endorse this as true, but can also attest to the severity of mental health needs among this population. Histories of trauma, abuse, and violence are often worsened by experiences of poverty, community violence, unemployment, substandard housing, and poor access to care. I am here to ask you to please reflect on what CMHC cuts will mean for people at the Connecticut Mental Health Center. The proposed budget cuts will seriously compromise our ability to continue providing an already strained service to a vulnerable community whose last resort for care is CMHC. As I did last year, | ask you to look and consider the following facts regarding our Hispanic Services when making your decision. 1. Nationwide, and in the state of Connecticut, the Latino community is a majority among the minority. As of July 1, 2014, census figures estimate the Latino population surpassing 55 million, or approximately 17% of the total US. population. It is expected that by the year 2060, the Latino population will total more than 119 million, comprising an estimated 28% of the US. population. Latinos in Connecticut make up 13% of the state population, and in the city of New Haven, the numbers more than doubles to 28% of the total city population. 2. The Hispanic Clinic represents a national model of collaboration, training and culturally responsive community based mental health care. The Hispanic Clinic at CMHC is a collaborative endeavor between the Yale University Department of Psychiatry and the Connecticut Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS). Since its inception in 1973, the Hispanic Clinic has provided outpatient mental health and addiction services to the monolingual Latino community of the greater New Haven area. The Clinic is staffed by a multidisciplinary team of bilingual-bicultural clinicians who provide a comprehensive range of treatment services to an adult population aged 18 and over. Nationwide, the number of behavioral health professionals that identify as Latino remains inadequate - social workers at 11.6%; psychiatrists at 4.3%; psychologists at 6.2%; and counselors at 10.4%. Training sites like the Hispanic Clinic represent one of the few places in the country that prepares students from the fields of medicine, psychology, psychiatry, and social work to deliver empirically supported community-based, recovery-oriented, and person- centered behavioral health services in Spanish. 3. People served at the Hispanic Clinic of CMHC present with long histories of chronic and persistent mental illness—for example, Major Depression, Bipolar Disorder, Schizophrenia, and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. This is consistent with national trends indicating that 90% of clients in public behavioral health settings have experienced trauma. Serious and persistent mental illness often means years of repeated hospitalizations, inconsistent access to treatment and medication, and debilitating psychiatric symptoms that have often strained relationships with family, limited their opportunity to secure gainful employment, and compromised their potential. 4. Our community is suffering, but we have the capacity to respond. Often times we are faced with the reality that there are things that we just cannot change. But the good news is that this is not one of those cases. Untreated mental illness affects individuals, families, and entire communities. There is the consequence of homelessness, the risk of continued victimization, and the fiscal costs as people access care through inappropriate, yet available venues such as hospital emergency rooms. We are in the privileged position where we can actually make someone’s life better. With your continued support, we can continue to make a difference. Together we can recognize the strengths and resilience among this historically marginalized community and do our part to change the outcome of their story. In closing, as a voice for the individuals we serve, I urge you to preserve funding for Latino services at CMHC. You are not simply investing in a faceless treatment intervention or program; your actions go far beyond that and will reap benefits that may not be immediately seen. You are investing in human life, in someone’s father, mother, son, and daughter. You are supporting the belief that all members of our community, regardless of language, ethnicity, and mental health status, are important and deserve the opportunity to a have a life worth living. Thank you for your time and attention. Luis M Anez Written Testimony for the Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Health and Hospitals February 18, 2016 Luming Li, MD Psychiatry Resident, PGY2 Dear Members of the Appropriations Committee, Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak about mental health and addictions services. I am currently a psychiatry trainee at Yale, and have the privilege of taking care of patients at the Connecticut Mental Health Center (CMHC), West Haven Veterans Affairs Hospital, and Yale New Haven Hospital. Working at these different institutions has taught me that organizational finances can acutely impact the healthcare services delivered. Today, I will describe the potential impact of this year’s proposed budget cuts on CMHC and other local non-profit organizations. The governor’s budget plan proposes to cut $15.8 million from mental health and substance abuse grants, $3 million from funding from acute and emergency behavioral health grants, and $34 million from agency operating expenses. These are alarmingly large numbers. These budget cuts will tremendously diminish access to mental health services by citizens in our local communities. Currently, our nation is facing a crisis in delivering mental health services. In fact, national legislation has been proposed to bolster mental health access, to expand early intervention psychosis programs, and to integrate primary care and psychiatric care. The legislation aims to address the access problem and mental health parity. However, federally these proposed bills won’t help people in Connecticut in crisis right no_w. What will help patients will be continued state-level financial support for core psychiatric services. Even though treating mental illness doesn’t generate as much money as plastic surgery, core services are needed for a healthy, emotionally well community. Investment in preventive care and rehabilitative services will reduce the number of expensive emergency visits and the likelihood of poor outcomes. When I work at CMHC, clients often remark that someone at CMHC saved their lives. Many people tell me that they have nowhere to go when they lose insurance or lose family support. The compassionate providers in Acute Services respond to people in need by referring them to CMHC clinics, neighboring clinics, or community resources for housing and employment. In addition, the early intervention psychosis program helps young people and families receive specialized services for schizophrenia. These services highlight just some of the clinical and delivery innovations at CMHC. Clients truly appreciate the attentive staff and community feel of the place. By promoting recovery principles, CMHC clients are encouraged to pursue meaningful lives despite having serious mental illness as peer specialists. A cut of $15.8 million means that important collaborative services that patients praise may be gone by this time next year. Notably, these proposed cuts to DMHAS will extend to our local communities. I am particularly worried about neighboring community non-prof1ts that have lower operating budgets. As part of an independent research project, I found that many DMHAS-funded New Haven organizations already struggle financially and have limited resources. These are organizations work tremendously hard to provide quality mental health services to low-income, disparaged people with mental health diagnoses. Many of these organizations have had long relationships with the local communities they serve. A $15.8 million cut will certainly mean that many of these organizations will be forced to close their doors. Providing adequate mental health services for an entire population is hard work. However, budget cuts to DMHAS will dramatically worsen the access problem and further limit resources. Statistics suggest that if psychiatric disorders are left untreated, the implications are huge. For example, a young person with treatable schizophrenia may instead be placed in a nursing home, or worse yet, in jail. The downstream effects perpetuate homelessness, unemployment, stigma, disability, and early age death for people with mental illness. I strongly advocate for Connecticut to continue supporting its constituents when they are mentally down and have nowhere else to turn but state facilities. As a provider, I learned firsthand the debilitating nature of mental illness. As a researcher, I now know that part of the solution will require dollars toward mental health prevention and rehabilitative services. As a concerned citizen, I hope you can help revoke the DMHAS budget cuts so people in need can get help. Written Testimony for the Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Health and Hospitals Robert T. Malison, M.D., Attending Psychiatrist, Connecticut Mental Health Center Professor of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine Senator Bye, Representative Walker and Members ofthe Appropriations Committee, it is my privilege to be able to speak to you this evening on behalf ofthe patients with severe mental illnesses and addictive disorders who are treated at the Connecticut Mental Health Center and to offer my views about HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. | first came to New Haven in 1983 in order to attend medical school. At the time, I wasn’t sure which field of medicine I would ultimately pursue, but ifthere was one thing of which I was absolutely certain — it wasn’t psychiatry. My thinking was permanently, and I hasten to add thankfully changed by my medical school rotation in psychiatry at the Connecticut Mental Health Center. It was there that I witnessed for the first time, not only the tremendous personal suffering endured by those affected by severe mental illness, but also the incredible compassion and commitment of the doctors, nurses, mental health workers, social workers and other professionals caring for them. It was at CMHC, a DMHAS facility, that I had the opportunity to see patients who had suffered for years with debilitating depression, unremitting obsessive compulsive disorder, and chronic psychotic illness recover from their illnesses as a result of the expert clinical care. Nearly 30 years later, as a professor and attending psychiatrist at CMHC, I consider myself extremely fortunate to remain a part of this important, and I believe highly successful, partnership between the State of Connecticut and Yale University — a partnership that celebrates its 50th anniversary this year. In fact, 50 years later, the CMHC and its staff continue to aspire to fulfill the clinical and educational missions on behalf of the Citizens of Connecticut: 1. The Clinical Mission: It is our mission to treat and care for those that suffer from severe mental illness and addiction. Patients come to the CMHC to receive state of the art care in specialized clinical programs for alcoholism, bipolar illness, cocaine addiction, major depression, obsessive—compulsive disorder (OCD), schizophrenia and numerous other severe psychiatric conditions. They may be presenting for the first time and are new to treatment, or conversely, they may have already had extensive treatments by multiple providers and have yet to find an adequate solution to their clinical problem. Make no mistake about it, the proposed cuts to DMHAS and CMHC will be devastating and impair our ability to deliver clinical care to patients seeking and needing our help. 2. The Educational Mission: As it was for me 30 years ago, it is also our mission at CMHC to attract the very best and brightest members of society, including those in the medical profession, to dedicate themselves to the improved treatment of mental illness and addiction. I lead a training program at CMHC for psychiatrists in training, who like myself, develop the skills and commitment to care for the severely mentally ill in Connecticut. I’m am pleased to note that, like myself, many of our prior trainees are in fact active as attending psychiatrists at CMHC and elsewhere within the DMHAS system caring for the underserved, indigent, and severely mentally ill. Make no mistake about it, the proposed $70 million in cuts to the DMHAS budget will be also be devastating to our ability to train and educate the resident physicians today, and a result, Connecticut’s psychiatrists of tomorrow. Thus, in summary, the proposed DMHAS budget cuts severely threaten the clinical care and educational missions ofthe Connecticut Mental Health Center. In turn, the lives of the patients we care for would be dramatically impacted. For the sake of our patients, their need for care today, and their need for skilled doctors that will care for them now and in the future, please restore these funds. Feb 18 DMHAS budget hearing Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Grant Mao and | live in New Haven. I am here to testify on the Governor’s proposed midterm budget adjustments related to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, I understand the fiscal crisis we find ourselves in and that these will be hard decisions for legislators. And, I want to express my deep concern about and opposition to the deep and devastating proposed cuts to mental health and behavioral health services and supports. I want to share my experiences with Connecticut Mental Health Center. I came to New Haven in 2014 August for pursuing my education at Yale School of Management. However, soon after I came on campus, I got overwhelmed and became depressed. After I didn’t get the help I needed from Yale School of Management, my depression became severe that I had to stay in hospital for 6 days. Then, I was dismissed from Yale. So my insurance was cancelled and I couldn’t afford to get treatments by paying on my own. When I was in desperation, CMHC took me in as a patient. I started to come to my weekly, sometimes bi—weekly therapies. The staff members were very caring that I began to make progresses in my recovery. As an outpatient, I was under care of Dr. Matthew Gambino, Susan Frechette and Jeanne. After I transferred into an in—patient unit, I received cognitive therapies from Benjamin Cooleyhall. I have been receiving therapies from CMHC over 10 months. My health condition has been improved dramatically. I am very grateful for the services and help | get from CMHC. I couldn’t imagine how my health condition would be if| didn’t receive my treatments and therapies from CMHC. I hope I will continue to receive such help and support from CMHC. I urge you to protect the health and wellbeing of our CT residents by supporting these essential and core services and supports. Thank you for your attention to my testimony and these crucial services and supports! Best regards, Grant Mao Feb 17th 2016 Testimony for the Appropriations Committee, Vinod H. Srihari, M.D., Attending Psychiatrist, Connecticut Mental Health Center Director, Program for Specialized Treatment Early in Psychosis (STEP), Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine February 18, 2016 Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and Members of the Appropriations Committee, thank you for this opportunity to offer my views about HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending .June 30, 2017. It is a privilege to speak to you this evening on behalf of the treatment and educational programs at the Connecticut Mental Health Center and the vital importance of protecting budgetary support to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS). | first came to New Haven in 1999 as a trainee and CMHC had a formative experience on my choice to become a psychiatrist in the public sector. l was attracted to the unique environment of the Center, which allowed for real engagement with underserved populations while also encouraging the development of novel, innovative programs to relieve suffering — all in a setting that prided itself on training the next generation of psychiatrists, psychologists and social workers. This unique public-academic collaboration would not be possible without the consistent support of the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS). For the past 10 years l have had the opportunity to develop and expand a clinical program that seeks to improve outcomes for youth with new onset psychotic disorders. DMHAS support and leadership has been vital to the birth and growth of the clinic for Specialized Treatment Early in Psychosis (STEP) and contributed to the growing national focus on the care of this vulnerable group. STEP has since been recognized in guidance from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to states, and has been cited as a model of care in communications from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and the Cassidy-Murphy Mental Health Reform Act, currently under consideration in the U.S. senate. The investment by DMHAS leadership in this work as far back as 2006, led to the development of a cost-effective clinical program that has demonstrably improved outcomes while also reducing costs related to unnecessary inpatient care, emergency room use and incarceration. As one of the training directors of the Yale Psychiatry Residency, I understand the unique and vital role that CMHC plays in developing the next generation of psychiatrists. The training program last year attracted more than 1,000 applications for a mere 16 positions and several applicants specifically cited clinical programs at CMHC as crucial to their reason for choosing to relocate to Connecticut. Aside from physicians, the Center plays a vital role in exposing a wide variety of trainees — from nursing, social work and psychology — to the rewards of caring for our patients, and this educational mission adds irreplaceable value that pays for itself many times over as many of these trainees choose to take up staff positions at CMHC and arrive at their first day of work, as I did, already well oriented to the system of care and personally invested in its health and success. In summary, the proposed DMHAS budget cuts threaten the vital clinical and educational missions of the Connecticut Mental Health Center. I believe that further cuts to an already stretched system of care will adversely impact the lives of those patients whom we serve: in the short term, by crippling programs that provide care, and in the longer term, by weakening the training experiences that are vital to the health of the mental health workforce. Testimony for the Appropriations Committee Of the Subcommittee on Health and Hospitals Yale Department of Psychiatry Residents: Chad Lane, MD Jessica Isom, MD MPH Luming Li, MD Oluwafikunmi Sobowale, MD February 18, 2016 Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and Members of the Appropriations Committee, thank you for this opportunity to offer my views about HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. We are current psychiatry trainees at Yale, and have the privilege of taking care of patients at the Connecticut Mental Health Center (CMHC). Today, we will describe the potential impact of this year’s proposed budget cuts on CMHC and other local non-profit organizations. The governor’s budget plan proposes to cut $15.8 million from mental health and substance abuse grants, $3 million from funding from acute and emergency behavioral health grants, and $34 million from agency operating expenses. These are alarmingly large numbers. These budget cuts will tremendously diminish access to mental health services by citizens in our local communities. What will help patients will be continued state-level financial support for core psychiatric services. Core services are needed for a healthy, emotionally well community. Investment in preventive care and rehabilitative services will reduce the number of expensive emergency visits and the likelihood of poor outcomes. When I work at CMHC, clients often remark that someone at CMHC saved their lives. Many people tell me that they have nowhere to go when they lose insurance or lose family support. The compassionate providers in Acute Services respond to people in need by referring them to CMHC clinics, neighboring clinics, or community resources for housing and employment. Studies show that these Community Care Teams are one of the most effective approaches for delivering services to people with severe and persistent mental illness. This community based service saves the state costly inpatient stays and ER visits that could be better served with a timely, sensitive and team-oriented approach. In addition, CMHC provides an early intervention psychosis program to help young people and families receive specialized services for schizophrenia. The clinicians working in the program are truly dedicated and caring, and participate in a variety of community outreach efforts to find youth with psychosis as early as possible. They have ongoing collaborations with local religious leaders, sponsored benefit runs, and educational flyers locally and online. Young people and families are able to learn about the diagnosis of psychotic disorders and receive wrap-around care, meaning that they are able to get help with anything from finding a job to getting treatment. Years of international and national research show enormous returns to investment in children and adolescent mental health. Recently, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services sponsored a 5-year demonstration program showing a cost savings to each state’s Medicaid programs by an average of $40,000 per youth served by the program. These programs offered by CMHC are just a few examples of the community mental health services in Connecticut that serve over 145,000 residents with serious mental illness. A cut of $15.8 million means that important collaborative services that patients praise may be gone by this time next year. Therefore, I strongly advocate for Connecticut to continue supporting its constituents when they are mentally unwell and have nowhere else to turn to but our state facilities. As a provider, I learned firsthand the debilitating nature of mental illness. As a researcher, I now know that part of the solution will require dollars toward mental health prevention and rehabilitative services. As a concerned citizen, I hope you can help revoke the DMHAS budget cuts so people in need can get help. Testimony for the Appropriations Committee Of Gustavo A. Angarita, M.D., Attending Psychiatrist, Connecticut Mental Health Center Instructor of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and Members of the Appropriations Committee, thank you for this opportunity to offer my views about HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. My name is Gustavo Angarita and live in New Haven I am here to testify on the Governor’s proposed midterm budget adjustments related to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services I am originally from Colombia, South America. As a Colombian, I witnessed first hand the impact that mental illness and substance use disorders have on the persons suffering from those. As a medical student, I noticed that a big challenge for these patients was receiving care in fragmented systems. As part ofthis, multiple professionals from different disciplines were taking care of the same patient but each treatment was compartmentalized and isolated from the others. As a former trainee of the Connecticut Mental Health Center and as an Attending Psychiatrist I have had the privilege of being part of an organization that is committed to good communication and collaboration between providers. As specific examples, CMHC reaches out to its patients when they are in the emergency room ofthe Yale New Haven Hospital, or in a medical floor, in one ofthe Yale Psychiatry Hospital Inpatient units, or even at their homes when they have crises of difficulties coming to their appointments. Seeing how patients can come to CMHC in Acute Crisis, can come to the Wellness Center for Medical Care, or can come to one of our psychiatry units and receive treatment by providers that collaborate with the outpatient clinicians is an example of an integrated approach to patient’s care. After this training and after 4 years of practicing at CMHC, I am comfortable saying that I witness first hand how a community of mental health providers can mobilize resources in a way that overcomes the problems I identified as a medical student but that I could not address back then. I am convinced that this integration and quality of care is only possible with the resources and supports we currently have, thus, I urge you to protect the health and wellbeing of our CT residents by supporting these essential and core services. Thank you for your attention to my testimony Written Testimony for the Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Robert T. Malison, M.D., Attending Psychiatrist, Connecticut Mental Health Center Professor of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine Honorable Members ofthe Appropriations Committee, it is my privilege to be able to speak to you this evening on behalf of the patients with severe mental illnesses and addictive disorders who are treated at the Connecticut Mental Health Center. | first came to New Haven in 1983 in order to attend medical school. At the time, I wasn’t sure which field of medicine I would ultimately pursue, but ifthere was one thing of which I was absolutely certain — it wasn’t psychiatry. My thinking was permanently, and I hasten to add thankfully changed by my medical school rotation in psychiatry at the Connecticut Mental Health Center. It was there that I witnessed for the first time, not only the tremendous personal suffering endured by those affected by severe mental illness, but also the incredible compassion and commitment of the doctors, nurses, mental health workers, social workers and other professionals caring for them. It was at CMHC, a DMHAS facility, that I had the opportunity to see patients who had suffered for years with debilitating depression, unremitting obsessive compulsive disorder, and chronic psychotic illness recover from their illnesses as a result of the expert clinical care. Nearly 30 years later, as a professor and attending psychiatrist at CMHC, I consider myself extremely fortunate to remain a part of this important, and I believe highly successful, partnership between the State of Connecticut and Yale University — a partnership that celebrates its 50th anniversary this year. In fact, 50 years later, the CMHC and its staff continue to aspire to fulfill the clinical and educational missions on behalf of the Citizens of Connecticut: 1. The Clinical Mission: It is our mission to treat and care for those that suffer from severe mental illness and addiction. Patients come to the CMHC to receive state of the art care in specialized clinical programs for alcoholism, bipolar illness, cocaine addiction, major depression, obsessive—compulsive disorder (OCD), schizophrenia and numerous other severe psychiatric conditions. They may be presenting for the first time and are new to treatment, or conversely, they may have already had extensive treatments by multiple providers and have yet to find an adequate solution to their clinical problem. Make no mistake about it, the proposed cuts to DMHAS and CMHC will be devastating and impair our ability to deliver clinical care to patients seeking and needing our help. 2. The Educational Mission: As it was for me 30 years ago, it is also our mission at CMHC to attract the very best and brightest members of society, including those in the medical profession, to dedicate themselves to the improved treatment of mental illness and addiction. I lead a training program at CMHC for psychiatrists in training, who like myself, develop the skills and commitment to care for the severely mentally ill in Connecticut. I’m am pleased to note that, like myself, many of our prior trainees are in fact active as attending psychiatrists at CMHC and elsewhere within the DMHAS system caring for the underserved, indigent, and severely mentally ill. Make no mistake about it, the proposed $70 million in cuts to the DMHAS budget will be also be devastating to our ability to train and educate the resident physicians today, and a result, Connecticut’s psychiatrists of tomorrow. Thus, in summary, the proposed DMHAS budget cuts severely threaten the clinical care and educational missions ofthe Connecticut Mental Health Center. In turn, the lives of the patients we care for would be dramatically impacted. For the sake of our patients, their need for care today, and their need for skilled doctors that will care for them now and in the future, please restore these funds. Written Testimony for the Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 John K. Krystal, M.D., Robert L. McNeil, Jr. Professor of Translational Research Chair of the Department of Psychiatry Yale University School of Medicine john.krystal@yale.edu Honorable Members of the Appropriations Committee, it is my privilege to address leaders who have shown unwavering dedication to the needs of people with mental illness and addictions. My comments address a serious threat to this mission posed by proposed cuts to the Connecticut Mental Health Center (CMHC) component of the DMHAS budget. I ask you to protect the support for programming at CMHC. I. History: CMHC was founded in 1966 as a collaboration between the Governor of Connecticut, Abraham Ribicoff, and the Chair of the Department of Psychiatry of the Yale University School of Medicine, Fritz Redlich, to provide community-based mental health and addiction treatment to people in the New Haven area, to train mental health professionals, and to conduct groundbreaking basic and clinical research aimed at alleviating the suffering and public health burdens of mental illness and addiction. ll. Current Status: This special collaboration continues to this day. Commissioner Miriam Delphin-Rittmon and I have worked together to make sure that CMHC fulfills its potential as a unique resource for the New Haven community and the State of Connecticut. We gratefully acknowledge her leadership at this time of transition. The State’s investment in CMHC research programs is currently paralleled by Yale’s investment of the revenue from over $15 million of its endowment in CMHC faculty, research programs, and facilities and a $13 million investment in structural renovation of the laboratory space. Signs of the success of this collaboration include: CMHC provides outstanding clinical services for which there is no back up system in Connecticut. 0 CMHC is the primary provider of long-term treatment for people disabled by mental illness and addiction in the New Haven area. 0 CMHC leads the State’s effort to provide early detection and specialized treatment of individuals with psychotic disorders, with the aim of reducing long-term disability. 0 The CMHC Division of Law and Psychiatry is the leading state program addressing the challenge of criminal behavior committed by the mentally ill. 0 La Clinica Hispana is the leading program for the treatment of mental illness among Spanish- speaking people in the State and it is a national model. 0 The CMHC Clinical Research Unit provides access to new treatments without charge to patients throughout our region who have not responded to currently available treatments. CMHC stimulates the Connecticut Economy Through Biotechnology Innovation: 0 For each dollar invested by the State of Connecticut in CMHC research programs, more than a dollar is sent back to the State of Connecticut General Fund through facilities fees generated from federal grants obtained by CMHC researchers. 0 CMHC researchers generate more than $7 in federal grants for each dollar invested by the State of Connecticut ($24 million annually in grants and contracts); generating important Connecticutjobs. 0 CMHC research programs have been a magnet for investment in Connecticut, drawing Pfizer to locate its Clinical Research Unit in New Haven, across the street from CMHC. 0 CMHC research programs have spun off biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies including, the Neurogen Corporation, PsychoGenics, Biohaven Medical Sciences, New Haven Pharmaceuticals, among others. IV. Summary: CMHC is a critical community resource, a flagship of the DMHAS system, a national model, and an engine for the Connecticut economy. This unique union of community and university is a national treasure. It is essential to preserve the integrity of the CMHC mission by protecting its funding. Written Testimony for the Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Health and Hospitals Robert T. Malison, M.D., Attending Psychiatrist, Connecticut Mental Health Center Professor of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine Senator Bye, Representative Walker and Members ofthe Appropriations Committee, it is my privilege to be able to speak to you this evening on behalf ofthe patients with severe mental illnesses and addictive disorders who are treated at the Connecticut Mental Health Center and to offer my views about HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. | first came to New Haven in 1983 in order to attend medical school. At the time, I wasn’t sure which field of medicine I would ultimately pursue, but ifthere was one thing of which I was absolutely certain — it wasn’t psychiatry. My thinking was permanently, and I hasten to add thankfully changed by my medical school rotation in psychiatry at the Connecticut Mental Health Center. It was there that I witnessed for the first time, not only the tremendous personal suffering endured by those affected by severe mental illness, but also the incredible compassion and commitment of the doctors, nurses, mental health workers, social workers and other professionals caring for them. It was at CMHC, a DMHAS facility, that I had the opportunity to see patients who had suffered for years with debilitating depression, unremitting obsessive compulsive disorder, and chronic psychotic illness recover from their illnesses as a result of the expert clinical care. Nearly 30 years later, as a professor and attending psychiatrist at CMHC, I consider myself extremely fortunate to remain a part of this important, and I believe highly successful, partnership between the State of Connecticut and Yale University — a partnership that celebrates its 50th anniversary this year. In fact, 50 years later, the CMHC and its staff continue to aspire to fulfill the clinical and educational missions on behalf of the Citizens of Connecticut: 1. The Clinical Mission: It is our mission to treat and care for those that suffer from severe mental illness and addiction. Patients come to the CMHC to receive state of the art care in specialized clinical programs for alcoholism, bipolar illness, cocaine addiction, major depression, obsessive—compulsive disorder (OCD), schizophrenia and numerous other severe psychiatric conditions. They may be presenting for the first time and are new to treatment, or conversely, they may have already had extensive treatments by multiple providers and have yet to find an adequate solution to their clinical problem. Make no mistake about it, the proposed cuts to DMHAS and CMHC will be devastating and impair our ability to deliver clinical care to patients seeking and needing our help. 2. The Educational Mission: As it was for me 30 years ago, it is also our mission at CMHC to attract the very best and brightest members of society, including those in the medical profession, to dedicate themselves to the improved treatment of mental illness and addiction. I lead a training program at CMHC for psychiatrists in training, who like myself, develop the skills and commitment to care for the severely mentally ill in Connecticut. I’m am pleased to note that, like myself, many of our prior trainees are in fact active as attending psychiatrists at CMHC and elsewhere within the DMHAS system caring for the underserved, indigent, and severely mentally ill. Make no mistake about it, the proposed $70 million in cuts to the DMHAS budget will be also be devastating to our ability to train and educate the resident physicians today, and a result, Connecticut’s psychiatrists of tomorrow. Thus, in summary, the proposed DMHAS budget cuts severely threaten the clinical care and educational missions ofthe Connecticut Mental Health Center. In turn, the lives of the patients we care for would be dramatically impacted. For the sake of our patients, their need for care today, and their need for skilled doctors that will care for them now and in the future, please restore these funds. Testimony of Melisa Luginbuhl Executive Director of ERASE, Inc. Connecticut Prevention Network H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. Department of Mental Health & Addiction Services- Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillon, my name is Melisa Luginbuhl and I am the Executive Director for ERASE, Inc. and one of the thirteen regional action councils that make up the Connecticut Prevention Network (CPN). I am here today to strongly oppose the grave cuts to regional action councils that will decimate the current prevention network structure. The proposed cut that equates to an almost 80% cut would eventually cause my agency to cease to exist. In essence it is eliminating the entire structure and it would undo the many grassroots partnerships that have been established by ERASE and partner organizations over the past 20 years not to mention jobs, current programs and the outreach and community needs we meet. ERASE staff are trained prevention professionals and play a key role in our ability to technically assess community needs in the drug prevention and mental health, which has ultimately helped towns secure additional funding to deliver community based services that address a range of public health, social and mental health issues Some examples that come to mind immediately include the research support that we have provided helping to assess students substance abuse and mental health indicators in our communities, including the perception of school safety and school climate. This work has supported community strategies to reduce underage drinking, expand anti bullying programs and suicide prevention programs. The RACs also bring current substance abuse concerns, new legislation and resources to the community such as making communities aware of new legislation such as several years when the social host law was first introduced helping parents and teens understand the legal and ethical responsibilities we all share in our communities in trying to prevent underage drinking. RACS also provide training that meets local needs such as QPR, Connect and Mental Health First Aid, State Wide Tobacco Education and funding medical drop boxes allowing people to dispose of their old medications limited access to prescription drugs. And RACs support data collection through school surveys and regional reports that provide essential information needed for competitive grant applications and in many cases RACs assist with grant applications. CPN with the current structure of 13 RACs is critical to the prevention needs in CT. CPNs ability to influence change and provide assistance to its member towns is based on continuity and effective solid relationships. In fact, these relationships are what enables CPN to effectively fulfill the role of substance abuse planning that DM HAS has prescribed. CPN is able to provide reports to DMHAS and plan regional efforts using evidence-based models because of its relationship with local contacts. These relationships enable CPN to call community representatives with requests for data, in-person meetings and information and have a response within 24 hours. RACs have knowledge of local needs, resources and the culture of regions throughout CT and they are able to support local grassroots community based prevention efforts through their work with Local Prevention Councils. Having the expertise of these RACs at the tables of LPC meetings each month has a) assured that local, state and private investments in prevention programs are being spent wisely and b) helping assure that this work is aligned with answering that most important of all that we are we making a meaningful and lasting difference in the lives of those we serve through the services we provide. We urge you to reject the severe budget cuts to regional action councils and keep in place the current CT Prevention Network structure. Melisa L Luginbuhl Interim Executive Director ERASE, Inc 70 Canterbury Street East Hartford, CT 06118 P: 860.568.4442 Page I of 2 0 Mark Cotterell o 157 Tryon Street 0 Middletown, CT 06457 Appropriations Committee Public Hearing - February 18, 2016 Opposition to House Bill No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADIUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING IUNE 30, 2017 Good Evening, Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and Members of the Appropriations Committee. I am Mark Cotterell, a psychiatrist at Connecticut Valley Hospital, in the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. I have been at the Whiting Forensic Division of CVH for fifteen and a half years, and I am primarily employed as a forensic monitor, conducting court-ordered evaluations. We have a pressing and on-going need for adequate mental health services for our clients, both while they are hospitalized and after they are discharged from our care. Right now, we are almost completely full on eleven (11) inpatient units. In the recent months, we have seen a substantial increase in admissions for court-ordered competency evaluations. The criminal courts have an expectation that we will have beds available for these assessments. We have to fully staff our inpatient units to attend to the needs ofthese clients. Many ofthe forensic patients are unstable and require one- to-one staff observation. When we are able to recommend to the court that no further competency assessment is needed, those clients have to be transitioned to other treatment programs, and we will then make room for the next such referral from the criminal courts. The forensic division is just one part of a larger, highly-interconnected system to provide needed care for our most impaired citizens. In any given month, you will see, on the front pages of our newspapers, another story about someone with mental health needs who has come to the attention of the court system, and has been sent to the state hospital for care, custody, and treatment. Our citizens want these clients to receive services. We all want our communities to be safe, and for our families, friends and neighbors Page 2 0f 2 to receive care for their mental health problems, so that they can be safe and secure and live with dignity. Clients with mental health and addiction problems do not choose their condition, and they are not to blame for their illnesses. Even after they are discharged from our hospitals, the clients still need services, it’s just that they now need to get care through our community-based programs. When you propose to cut funding to these programs, you make it that much harder to give needed care to our sickest neighbors. You make it that much harder for DMHAS to fulfill our mandate to support the court system, both criminal and probate. When you propose to cut funding to the community-based programs, you make it that much harder to actually discharge clients from the hospital, so that they can continue to receive the care they deserve, in less restrictive and less-expensive settings. DMHAS provides care for those who cannot care for themselves. lfa client could be somewhere else, he or she would be somewhere else. We have to provide care to our clients wherever they are at that moment, and give them whatever they need at that time and place. When they can move on, we will help them to do that. But DMHAS cannot be arbitrarily forced to cut needed care for our neighbors. ...We do not tell our citizens that they cannot have firemen to help in their time of need. ...We do not tell our citizens that they cannot have police services to keep them safe. ...We do not tell our citizens that they cannot have schools for their children and their communities. And we simply cannot tell our neediest neighbors that they cannot have help for their mental illness, and that their families cannot help their loved ones to live with dignity, and that our communities cannot be made safe and secure and supportive for all of our citizens. Jay Patel 66 Rolling Green M iddletown, CT 06457 Appropriations Committee Hearing - February 18, 2016 AGAINST: House Bill No. 5044, AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and Members of the Appropriations Committee: Thank you for the opportunity to speak before your Committee. My name is Jay Patel and I work as a Pharmacist at Connecticut Valley Hospital, also known as “CVH,” a DMHAS state—run mental health hospital in Middletown. The clients at CVH represent a population within the state that require critical medical attention and acute care—many of whom are receiving carefully planned medication treatment. I help to ensure that the clients receive their medications in collaboration with the other medical professionals on this hospital’s campus. I am here to testify against House Bill #5044, AN ACTMAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 201 7. I am here because I would like to testify on behalf of CVH and its clientele with regards to the negative impact that the proposed budget cuts for 2017 would have on the mentally ill patients of the state. DMHAS provides many support programs essential to patients of broad demographics. Here at CVH, I can attest to the effects budget cuts have had on services. Reduced staffing levels have resulted in less one—on—one care per patient, and this has direct impact on the overall success of psychiatric patients in the community. I have seen personally the effect my own intervention has had on a patient when I had the time to talk to them about concerns regarding more than the medication Page 1 of 2 side effects but the impact medication has on their daily living. Helping my patient see why daily medications were important to staying healthy, how to cope with peer pressure and how deal with side effects without stopping the regimen was important to maintaining a normal life. To date, this patient has not returned to hospital and I consider her one of the reasons why we need more support for mental health issues and not less. This illustrates essentially how pharmacy services make a DIRECT impact on outcomes. As is, we run the hospital with reduced staffing levels which impede clinician ability to help people achieve long—lasting remission of symptoms, and the proposed cuts will set our state back in strides we have made in this state concerning mental health, since Commissioner Rehmer’ s testimony in front of the appropriations committee in February 2013. I feel that drastic cuts in mental health services will compromise our public safety and shift the burden of these patients to the prison system which a punitive approach to patient’s having mental disabilities. Page 2 of 2 Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. NO. 5044 An Act Makinq Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Endinq June 30,2017 Good Evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Chantal DeArmitt, and I am a registered voter in the city of Middletown. lam here to testify on H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year 2017. lam opposed to any reductions to current mental health services and supports. I want our state’s mental health care service system strive to provide the care and supports I had, enough core resources to give children, adolescents and adults with psychiatric and behavioral conditions identified and helped as early as possible in their lives. I have lived with a mental health disorder since my late 20’s. lam now in my late 60’s. Fortunately, I was able to obtain the medications, treatment and other supports that I need and will need throughout my life. This has enabled my recovery sufficient to obtain a Master’s Degree in Public Health at Yale University School of Medicine and have a 40 year career in health services administration. I currently work for a regional mental health board because I strongly believe in their mission to assure citizen volunteers a role in reviewing and evaluating the services in their communities, and to recommend improvements to the Commissioner and the Legislature. As you know, the 5 regional mental health boards were established by law 41 years and are instrumental, and exceptionally cost-effective, in improving CT’s mental health system. History and data clearly demonstrate the impact on individuals, families and their communities if these devastating financial resources are withdrawn from DM HAS, you will see increased: use of very expensive emergency services and hospitalizations, homelessness, use of and addiction to alcohol and illegal drugs, incarceration, suicides, school drop-out rates, and difficulty obtaining and maintaining gainful employment. All of these negative impacts affect our economy in many ways. The cost-effectiveness of community-based services has been impressively documented for a long time, especially as CT made increasing investments in treatment, access to medications, housing with wrap- around services, a variety of rehabilitation and peer-support programs, and other components of CT’s mental health service system. Such services effect recovery and one’s ability to maintain it. These services help Individuals to develop and reach personal goals, thus improving their quality of life and positive participation in the life of their communities. I have seen incredible improvements in all aspects of our service system since 1983 when I began working in our state service system. Please continue to preserve at least current service levels look for innovative ways to make your reductions and to seek revenue enhancements. Thank you for your time and attention. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. The long-term outcomes from at least maintaining current service levels are worth every penny of investment. Please continue to look for innovative ways reduce expenditures in other less vital areas. Thank you for your time and attention. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Marc DeGregorio, North Haven IN OPPOSITION Governor’s proposed Midterm Budget Adjustments FY2017 H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Re: Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Marc DeGregorio and lam a registered voter in North Haven. I am writing to you to testify about the Governors proposed midterm budget adjustments regarding the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS). As a parent of multiple children who have been afflicted with mental illness, I want to emphatically request that no cuts be targeted in this area. My family and l have had a 20—year odyssey within the state system pursuing programs and care and housing for my children. However, no matter what the fiscal situation of Connecticut has been over the past 20 years, there was never enough money or services in the DMHAS budget. To even consider any cuts at this time is unfathomable. Yes, we are in difficult budgetary waters. And yes it is real, but these difficult times, including as a result of the rescission, was not brought on by individuals with health conditions who need state services and supports in order to live decent lives in our communities. This budget seems to take, again, from those who can least afford it. l have had one of my daughters in multiple programs and no matter how many services were given, they were never adequate. My other daughter became homeless 15 years ago and we were told she had to remain homeless for her to be able to get housing, and so we waited. After some months, we contacted a non—profit agency for help. They said they would help us, but had no housing available at that time. So my wife and I purchased a condominium to put my daughter in and get her off the street. We never heard back from the agency on housing availability. If we didn’t have the means to support our daughter, who knows how long she would have been homeless. And this was 15 years ago. How much worse will these cuts make it for these families today? I know we have made progress when it comes to Supportive Housing for people with mental health conditions, but we need to continue to invest, so individuals like my daughter don’t end up homeless for long periods of time or experience homelessness over and over and still don’t have a safe and affordable place to call home. That is why is must urge you to protect the health and well—being of ALL of our Connecticut residents, especially the most needy, and protect services such as outpatient services, Regional Mental Health Boards and invest in effective and cost—effective solutions such as Supportive Housing and Community Care Teams. Thank you for your time. Respectfully, Marc DeGregorio 7//////////1 Gmremm’s; ngmafi E‘afigei FYMMFYW Appmpriafians Rearing Egpartmem {383° Mentai Heath and Afifiiafian Sarvficas Wexfinmday, February ‘18:“, 2916 Taking. Paints: Senate): Bye. Senate!“ Kane, Repregentative Waikev, Repifesentative Ziabron, and Member-s of ihe mmmitteeg thank yam Erma-ring my tegtimeny taday an the impertam‘: investments throughthe Department of Mental Heai‘rh and fifidictfim Services ta support effarts to end hgmeiessness in CT. The Emir}? a? iack Each: grewup inS'tamfard and was the, ymmgast 01” a large famifiy. Bespite being a memb amf a large 'famiiy, Eack’g parents always. provided for them and made sure they wemm Sachem}. E‘ackgraduated highsdm‘oi but then became addicted m flrugsn As Hack wauhi put its ‘3 made my amines and drugs messed me up, but} learned my 16535011 and MW E’m much better”. Hack became homeiess because a: his firug addictiun. in the Eate‘TG’S he» began in 1138M ariiuana at age. 16 and iatar heroin and £ka cocaine: became his drugs mf Chaim. Whfie living at the Masai man‘s,» shaker; jack apgflied for the 'Sheiterfius Care {permanent supportive hanging)? program as he became tirefi {3f living the. life at” an addict. Em 2968313 Emmi the beat Christmas gift in a long time jack mevad mm an apartment at; Caiony Apartments and never returned w his haifits of aid. in ”Emil, he wag afffirefi 3 gm) at a cfimpany in Stamfmfi and has been thm‘e ever? since. Rac‘enfiy, jack decided that his jab and his fife are-stabie emugi‘: far him to meme an. £351»: is; new seeking an independent apartment and hepeg 1:0 mave by the Swing so thatamther hemeless individua} can benefit fmm‘ the apparmnity he has haéi iiving at the {tawny Apartmentsa Cr.- 4: M -: «» . :.‘:. )2 ~\:.. mk- t-‘nfiv M1 WW We are making signififiam pragress tgwards our gm}. {if @1101ng he'n'aisies-sness in. {Sonnecticut thmugh thaungrecgfiented suppmrt 0f Governor Mallays the iegisiamm the Department 0f Hanging; and the Department of Mama! Health and Addictim Servicesa, e {3011;190:th became the first state in the natism recagmiged by the federal gavemmem far ending chmnic hameiessnegs ammg Vfiterans in 2:314. 0 Connecticut is on track in the Zemfifli’ 5 ‘flam‘mign 120 end chmni‘c hamelesmess {the 10ng~term hs'meEe-ssness fif peapie Wiih severe disabiiities‘} by the end {1f this year. Thraugh terrififi work acrcss the state; we reduced by 38% from 21312} to 2-315 the number if 'pes‘ple experiencing chronic hmnelez'asnem Working with am partners in the Reaching Hams 'Campaign and at the Emmecticut Caflitifln ta End Hameiessnesa we have wmkefi hard: in; éevelap mmprehamsive data regarding what we neefi to and chant homelessness. We ask far yam supparfi: far the additiem} 1.5% min M permanent supp’gmve hmsmgmquimé this year its make an? gaai. 0 We suppmt the-Reaching Hflme {lampaigns pmposai far“ $3.5 miifiifla Em ream} mmidifi and $3.125 miifiian ibrsewiceg in FY 1? m reach the gaafi {3f ending {:Em‘maic immefiesmess in fiunnecticui. Weimaw whatworks iii) em‘i ghmnic homeiegsnesgz permanent suppgrtive hanging, which cambines musing subsidy with case management services“ Permanent suppamve housing is highly effective at ending 01158 am far ail the homelesssness; 01“ 1131059, wha need this; assistanm And ii; is» prawn to Save mmmMfities up ta 7fl% of'the costs may wili mtherwise incur when chmnic harneiegsneas persists, Supportive servicas for {hast} Wm enter pfirma’nent sugpm‘tive housing are previded uncier the Department of Mental Heaith and Addiftian Services. These servicea are a Eriticai campenent 0f keeping these high-need individuals Muses? and stahie. 1‘. A: 7/////////A Whiie we understand that substantial cuts in EMfiAS pragmmming are. midis? mmidemtien;we ask that yam maintain the triticai support services far germanent suppurtive housing. Cum mthese SEWiceS weuid risk reversing the substantiai pmgress we have made :9 and. chranic harmless-mess. (Sufi: t0 these criticaiiy impm‘tant sawices mum” mean increases in: unsheitemd, highvnfled hnmeiessness +- taking us me Wang directimn, and impasing new masts rim. our wmmunities. ”flange. experiencing chmnic immeles-snegs are .th‘e mm: vulnerable, highest need _ anti highgst cast —- 9f the popuiatmns experim‘icing hamelegsness in CT. We kmw that these who Suffer in chmnic h0¥ffl€§8§$fl€$5 have a strong tendency :0 cycle in and; Gut Gf‘Gur public systems m emergency gervices, hospitaisfiand jails n incurring steep mats to thflSE systems fli’gfilggg resolving the undgrlymg harnelegsmess. Hame‘iegsnsgs is an unacceptabie sandman fer any Connecticut resident, and an expensive pubiic mlicy probiem, Investments in permanem Suppcrtive housing save pubiic resources., and heip these mast need transitian m heuzzingy'stabiiityg and huge. Thank you for hearing my testimany and thank'yau far your wpport ”w effarts m and hememS-sness in Cmnecticut Sincerely, N“ \ »-“ \‘\\\ w; ., ”11mg , m 1,. ,0; 1.725;). //1 Nee} Kammermann Chief Officer 0f Pragmm Effectiveness and Perfarmance Measurement .mspirica,_ Inc. ' PAT), Box 7093 11E :3 w \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\m\\ 586 21123 T. Gr‘assu Boulevard \\\\\\\\\\\“ . . , . \:\R \R§\\\\ Aiew Haven CT 06 19 T' m Adm inistrative Dffi ce: 203.401.4400 x 106 hill is} kg 33*; ’Q‘L‘TE F-ax:283.773,1430 ' " www.coiumbushousepr ‘ a To: Members of the Appropriations Committee From: Alison Cunningham, Executive Director Re: Dept of Mental Health and Addiction Services budget Date: February 9, 2016 Thank you to the members of the Appropriation Committee for your time today. My name is Alison Cunningham. I’m the Executive Director of Columbus House, an agency that provides services and housing for people who are homeless in our state. Our primary areas of service are in the New Haven region and the Middlesex, Meriden, Wallingford region. This past summer, the Governor announced that Connecticut had ended chronic homelessness for Veterans, and we are the first state in the country to have done so. Earlier today, he announced that the state had ended homelessness for all veterans, meaning that when a veteran does become homeless, our system will react quickly so that the homeless episode is short-lived. These are significant milestones for our state, indicating that we are on the right track with the right tools in place to reach our goals. Monday night, at the Govemor’s Town Hall meeting in Middletown, when asked about our efforts to end chronic homelessness for all people in CT, the Governor confirmed his commitment to funding the very programs that will help us reach this goal. A person is verified as chronically homeless if he/ she has been homeless for 12 months and lives with a disability, i.e. mental illness, substance use, chronic medical conditions. We know that people who fit this definition make inappropriate use of emergency systems and institutions, such as hospital emergency rooms, jails/prisons, mental health institutions. Cycling through these systems is not only costly to the institutions and to the state, but does not resolve a person’s homelessness. We know from our experience that permanent supportive housing is a proven solution to this crisis of chronic homelessness. Columbus House supports some 350 people across the state in this type of housing. . . permanent housing with case management support that helps people stay housed and enhance their quality of life. Not only are they out of the shelters and off the streets, but when housed, people’s use of emergency and institutional care is radically reduced. Supportive services for those who enter permanent supportive housing are funded through the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. These services are a critical component of keeping these high-need individuals housed and stable. While we understand that substantial cuts to DMHAS programming are under consideration, we ask that you maintain the critical support services for permanent supportive housing. Cuts to these services would risk reversing the substantial progress we have made to end chronic homelessness. Cuts to these critically important services could mean increases in unsheltered, high-need homelessness — taking us the wrong direction, and imposing new costs on our communities. Last summer, we joined the movement of ZERO: 2016, a national campaign intent on reaching that goal of ending chronic homelessness by the end of this calendar year. We know we can accomplish this, as evidenced by the fact that we have done so for chronically homeless veterans. Now, we will continue on with our success, striving to reach the end of chronic homelessness for individuals and families by the end of this calendar year. We can show success toward this goal in the 2015 the Point in Time Count, the annual count of all homeless people, which showed the number of chronically homeless was down by 21% from the prior year. Our success thus far is, in large part, due to the great commitment to this effort by the Governor, the legislature and both the Dept of Housing and the Dept of Mental Health and Addiction Services. New funding for systems changes and for targeted interventions have been the keys to our achievements in the past year. Further, to reach this audacious and doable goal of ending chronic homelessness by the end of 2016, we need new funding to eXpand permanent supportive housing for this population as well as those who are on the cusp of becoming chronic. We are asking for $1.5m for rental subsidies and $1.125m for services to support people who are housed. This is a difficult budget year, as we all know. We all also know that continued investment in upfront strategies will help reduce costs in the long run. When people are housed, their use of costly emergency and institutional care is greatly reduced. But the critical issue here is the fact that we are saving lives of the most disenfranchised, chronically homeless folks in our communities. That in itself is worth the investment. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration. ¢§3wm WM Alison Cunningham Executive Director Columbus House, Inc. 203-401-4400, ext. 105 acunningham@columbushouse.org Thames River Supportive Housing Program A program of Thames River Community Service, Inc. One Thames River Place Norwich, CT 06360 860-608-5316 (cell) 860-887-3288 (office) 860-887-4146 (fax) Email : sheilah@trfp.org Governor’s Proposed Budget FYl6—FY17 Appropriations Hearing Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services Thursday February 18th, 2016 Good Afternoon, Senator Bye, Senator Kane, Representative Walker, Representative Ziobron , and Members ofthe Committee, I thank you for hearing my testimony today on the important investments through the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services to support efforts to end homelessness in CT. I am here to speak on the impact that substantial budget cuts would have on these efforts, in particular Permanent Supportive Housing and Support Services. I am the Program Manager for Thames River Community Services Supportive Housing Program Case Manager located in Norwich CT. Supportive Housing services offered through DMHAS funding are critical to all of our initiatives to end homelessness here in CT. They are a cost effect solution to many of CT budget concerns. Those that have experienced chronic homelessness are high utilizers of public services — crisis services, emergency medical services and jails — taxing those systems and reinforcing a cycle of dependency without truly resolving homelessness. Permanent Supportive Housing Support Services allow participants to think long term about their lives, it provides a foundation and supports families and individuals to change from a crisis mentality to a stable, solution focused mentality. I would like to ask you to think long term for the next few moments, as | share a statement from one of the families I serve in our Supportive Housing Program, who was unable to attend, due to college and employment schedule. ”I have been with this program since Oct 2011 and due to having a Supportive Housing case manager, I was able to get my daughter back as well as getting (Social Security) disability. l have started college and hope to open my own business one day. l have also maintained consistent housing and take my medications, which is very hard for me to do. I honestly believe that without the supportive services that I would not have been able to do these things. Yeah, I might have gotten on disability without help, eventually, but I would probably just sat around collecting a check, not living, just being there in the present moment, doing nothing with my life. I would have never gotten the push to go back to school. I hated school but thanks to the support and encouragement that l have received, I feel like I can do it, as well as enjoy going to school and learning. Growing up I never really had support or anyone that even really cared about my needs or what I did with my life. lam not trying to make excuses on why I chose the path I did in life, but I do not regret any of it because it lead me here where I am today and I am a much better person for myself, my daughter and my wife. I am very thankful for having these services and to take away support services would not only be a loss for future or current clients, it would be a shame to not have those opportunities, knowledge, support, encouragement and so much more that supportive housing services offer. Sincerely, Alex” In that statement alone, you hear a family reunited, not a child raised by various state entities. You hear the goal to become independent of entitlements and become a part of our small business community. You hear an improvement of self—esteem and a decrease of mental health symptoms. You hear an ability to develop relationships, a sense of community, maintain housing and attend community college. You hear a reflection of the person they once were and the person they are becoming. With your help, we are making progress towards our goal of ending homelessness in Connecticut. On behalf of those I serve, | ask that DMHAS Support Services are not reduced and that you support the additional 150 units of permanent supportive housing required this year to reach our goal. Also, we ask that you support of the Reaching Home Campaigns proposal for $1.5 million for rental subsidies and $1.25 million for services in FY 17 to reach the goal of ending chronic homelessness in Connecticut. Housing is a basic human need and homelessness is an expensive public policy concern. By investing in permanent supportive housing, you are investing in breaking the cycle of homelessness and laying a foundation for people to rebuild their lives. Ultimately, you are investing in dignity and hope for CT citizens who desperately need it. Thank you, Sheila Hayes—Program/Case Manager Thames River Community Services Supportive Housing Program \\ \ §\\\§§\§\\\§ Governor’s Proposed Budget FY16-FY17 Appropriations Hearing Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services Wednesday, February 18th, 2016 Senator Bye, Senator Kane, Representative Walker, Representative Ziobron, and Members of the Committee, thank you for hearing my testimony today on the important investments through the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services to support efforts to end homelessness in CT. I am the Executive Director 0f]ourney Home, a nonprofit working in Greater Hartford to end homelessness. Iourney Home coordinates the Greater Hartford Coordinated Access Network, which is a group of shelter, housing, healthcare, and service agencies working together to improve access to shelter and housing for those facing homelessness. Although there is a long road ahead to end all homelessness, we are very close to demonstrating to the rest of the country that this state can end chronic homelessness, meaning those who have disabilities and have been living on the streets or in shelters for more than 12 months in the past few years. We are on track to finish the job this year, but we must have the continued support services from DMHAS, or all ofthis work that we have been doing for so many years, will be at risk of failure. This is a social problem that has plagued our country, our legal system, our healthcare systems, our neighborhoods for decades, and we are very close to proving that with the right level of coordination, services, and housing this is a solvable problem, and it will save our state millions of dollars. We know that those who suffer in chronic homelessness have a strong tendency to cycle in and out of our public systems — emergency services, hospitals, and jails — incurring steep costs to those systems without resolving the underlying homelessness. Since we implemented the Coordinated Access Network and started tracking data locally a year ago, we have seen a 40% decrease in chronic homelessness in Greater Hartford. One of the key ingredients that has made this progress possible is the services. There are lots of housing programs out there, but those with case management services included have the highest success rates. Out of more than 100 chronically homeless people in Greater Hartford who have been housed in permanent supportive housing since last March, only two have lost their housing and returned to shelter. That is a 98% success rate. The services funded by DMHAS are so essential to the success ofthese individuals, because they can be transformative. Help us finish the job of ending chronic homelessness this year and prevent chronic homelessness from ever happening again. Thank you for hearing my testimony and thank you for your support to end homelessness in Connecticut Sincerely, Matthew Morgan Executive Director Iourney Home 241 Main Street, 5th Floor Hartford, CT 06106 (860) 808-0336 Governor's Proposed Budget FY16-FY17 Appropriations Hearing Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services Wednesday, February 18th, 2016 Senator Bye, Senator Kane, Representative Walker, Representative Ziobron, and Members of the Committee, thank you for hearing my testimony today on the important investments through the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services to support efforts to end homelessness in CT. We are making significant progress towards our goal of ending homelessness in Connecticut, through the unprecedented support of Governor Malloy, the legislature, the Department of Housing, and the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. Connecticut became the first state in the nation recognized by the federal government for ending chronic homelessness among Veterans in 2014. Connecticut is on track in the Zero: 2016 Campaign to end chronic homelessness (the long—term homelessness of people with severe disabilities) by the end of this year. Through terrific work across the state, we reduced by 30% from 2014 to 2015 the number of people experiencing chronic homelessness. We know what works to end chronic homelessness: permanent supportive housing, which combines housing subsidy with case management services. Permanent supportive housing is highly effective at ending once and for all the homelessness ofthose who need this assistance. And it is proven to save communities up to 70% of the costs they will otherwise incur when chronic homelessness persists. Supportive services for those who enter permanent supportive housing are provided under the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. These services are a critical component of keeping these high—need individuals housed and stable. Here are only a few stories ofthose that have dramatically changed their live with access to permanent supportive housing: Meet Alfredo Rivera ”Shorty” Alfredo Rivera was a sinewy middle aged man living in a camp by the river for years. He kept to himself, was estranged from his brother and was untrusting of strangers. He especially disliked coming to Chrysalis to meet with case managers to discuss housing and his future. He reallyjust wanted to be left alone because as he put it ”nobody really cares". In May Alfredo was arrested for possession of narcotics and was assigned a probation officer he did not want to meet. He was reluctant to go but alongside his case manager, met his probation officer. She mandated he attend an intensive outpatient program for his chemical dependency. Discouraged and feeling like he was losing control, he did not want to attend IOP. Again with the encouragement of his case manager, he went. It took a while to house Shorty, but on September 1St 2015, he moved into his first one bedroom apartment located in a quiet neighborhood in West Hartford. When volunteers came to furnish his apartment he said ”who are all these people, I don’t want them in my house" to which I said, ”They already know where you live, at least let them give you furniture"! By the end ofthe interaction, Shorty was a bit more relaxed and even joked with the volunteers he was initially upset with. Over the course of the next couple of months, Alfredo continued to attend both his probation appointments and IOP on his own. He was learning a lot from both resources and had decided it was time to quit. He reported his relationship with his brother had improved and was on the mend. Today is January 21, 2016. I spoke to Shorty to confirm a home visit. He said we’d have to reschedule because he was in Newington running errands with his brother. He also said he needed new pants because he was getting fat! Alfredo now comes to Chrysalis just to say hi and check in. He regales me with stories about his latest IOP session and how he looks forward to going each week. He asks about support groups and states interest in going to the REC. He communicates and is open to discussion about his issues. Alfredo has had a lot of hurdles but since has changed from a person who believed the world did not care to hear his story to one who can’t wait to share it. Meet Salvatore Pinna 'Sal’ Sal is special for a number of reasons. Sal was the very first participant to be housed by the CABHI Team. In the mid 90’s Sal’s mother died. He left his native Long Island and made his way to Hartford. He had been homeless for over 20 years! Sal still has family in New York; however, he only had sporadic contact with the various distant relatives. Sal was truly alone. Sal lives with developmental issues, diabetes, and bipolar disorder. Sal is also a Batman and Mets enthusiast. Early last year Sal was staying at Hartford’s ’no freeze’ shelter, but when it’s funding ran out on March 31 2015 he and 49 other men were forced out to the streets. Sal did not want to seek another shelter. He slept outside, but refused to let anyone know where exactly he was sleeping. Sal called the life the rest of us live....(and complain about) ’a normal life’. He would often ask, ”When will I get a normal life?" For Sal, ’normal’ meant a kitchen, a television, and a door he could lock behind him. On April 23, 2015, Sal got that ’normal’ life he had been yearning for. On April 23, 2015 he signed his lease to an apartment on Hartford’s West end. Despite only having his sleeping bag and a few toiletries, Sal stayed in his apartment that night. I will never forget visiting him early Friday April 24, 2015. The apartment was bare, just a few pillows and a sleeping bag. | asked him how he slept last night, and without hesitation he said, ”That was the BEST night’s sleep I’ve had in a long long time!" | asked if| could sit down, plopped myself on the floor and we finished up paperwork and made plans. One of the first things we did was go to Walmart with a small stipend provided to us by Journey Home. He took his time choosing colors, styles, and of course Batman sheets! Fast forward to January 2016 ...... in less than a year here are a few things that Sal has been up to: Sal’s apartment remains meticulous. He opted on a black couch with yellow throw cushions ..... why? Batman colors of course! He now has food stamps; he has a resume and has been applying forjobs. Over the holiday’s Sal worked as a greeter at Walmart. While he was disappointed that he was only hired for seasonal work, he remains positive. What did Sal do with the paychecks from Walmart? Bought a Batman jacket of course!! He also started by putting $200 in a savings account. Sal will be successfully completing CABHI January 23, 2016, but he will remain part of the Chrysalis family. He will continue to work with CABHI’S employment specialist and receive case management. Most importantly, Sal will continue to live his ’normal’ life. Meet Steven Rogers, Steve Steve Just turned 50 on January 20, 2016! Steven has been homeless ’On and off’ for about 12 years. In those 12 years he has never had a permanent address. The longest her was able to maintain any sort of stable housing was about a month. Steven came to the CABHI team in earlyJuly. He also had just completed a 7 day DETOX at Blue Hills. This was a great start, but Steve needed a considerable amount more of treatment. Steve has been struggling with addiction and mental illness since the age of 15. At this time it was alcohol. Steve was in and out of shelters, hospital emergency rooms, DETOX, mental health facilities ..... and of course my favorite storage units! Steve was discharged from Blue Hills and was ready to be housed. The CCABHI Team encouraged him to stay one of the local shelters while searching for a place to live. Steve declined. Initially our thoughts were that he was being stubborn, but as we got to know Steve better, the more he opened up about what he has been through, not just the last 12 years of homelessness, but most of his life. Most recently Steve had been ’turned’. He was mugged. The little cash he had, identification, food stamp card, everything was gone again....he would have to start from scratch all over again. With the assistance of the CABHI Team all that was completed. Steve signed his housing certification and appeared ready to be housed. He struggled with his sobriety, openly admitted when he relapsed, but did not want to return to treatment. Our Peer Support Specialist would meet with Steve, continue to encourage him to attend meetings, and provide him with meeting dates and times. Steve would just say no thanks and that meetings were not for him. Things started to look up for Steve. He got a part time job at an auto mechanic shop and after having been estranged from his family, his sister reached out to him and the CABHI team. She was nervous, but set limits and boundaries. Then at the beginning of August Steve signed his lease!! Everyone (especially Steve) was thrilled. He only had to wait 2 days for the security deposit to come through. Well in those 2 days, Steve returned to the apartment complex ...... drunk ..... actually very very very DRUNK. The owner said he could not allow this on his property. He lost the apartment and hisjob in a matter of about 3 hours. We were all heartbroken. Steve literally took off. We would call his cell. Occasionally, he would answer, but he said very little, just that he needed some time alone. We called the shelters daily in hopes that he would go to one for at least a shower ....... nothing. He wouldn’t even contact his sister. One day in mid to late September, his sister called us. She was panicked, frustrated, and overwhelmed. She had not seen or heard from her brother in over 3 weeks. She went to his storage unit hoping that he was sleeping there. There was no sign of him. She was inconsolable when she called. On a hunch at 4:00PM the housing coordinator knew Steve had obtained a ’new storage’ unit. She was worried and felt terribly for his sister. She asked the Program Manager to go with her to the storage unit We traveled out to the ’new’ storage unit in search of Steve. Sarah was eagerly nervous. She thought she had the code to the unit, but when we arrived it was the wrong code. Sensing her apprehension we went to the manager of the storage place. We expressed concern for Steve, but without a release of information we couldn’t go into any detail. He assured us he had seen Steve earlier that day. We must have both appeared pretty pitiful because he agreed to take us up there and look ’just in case’. When we got up there the stench was horrible. I’ve been doing this for a long time....but the funky smell was even concerning to me. The lock to the unit was on backwards, which is indicative of someone staying there. When he opened the storage unit door, all of a sudden this pair of legsjust flopped out. Sarah Simonelli could be an Olympic runner!! I have never seen anyone run so fast. She and the manager to the storage unit then collided. The program manager and all her experiencejumped up and down screaming in a pitch so high that it would probably break glass. Finally, Stevejust said ’Hi’. The storage unit was indescribable. It made an episode of Hoarders look like a picture from Better Homes and Garden. The smell? Since I think dinner is being provided tonight, I won’t even go into that. Steve was TREMENDOUSLY drunk! We tried to encourage him to let us call an ambulance, but he refused and threatened to run off. From head to toe Steve was really in rough shape. The program manager and Sarah finally got Steve to agree to go with them and just get ’checked out’ at the hospital. We finally made it to the hospital, but they wouldn’t admit Steve unless Steve himself stated he wanted treatment. His blood pressure was sky high, the emergency room staff were concerned he would have a heart attack ..... I was about to have a heart attack!! After about 5 minutes (which felt more like 5 hours) Steve reluctantly said that yes, he needed treatment! We called his family and gave them the latest update. He would at least at Blue Hills till Monday. That means he would at least have 2 days without alcohol. Each additional day of sobriety helped. Steve called me a few days later and asked that I not forget about him, because after all he was special and gave me my first Halloween scare of the year....Thanks Steve! After a 28 day treatment Blue Hills gave Steve the option to continue with treatment fat Lebanon Pines for 3 to 4 months or be discharged. After a long talk with Sarah (and I swear to this day I don’t know how she did it) Steve committed to additional treatment at Lebanon Pines. In a month we already noticed a difference in Steve. He sounds confident and strong. He sent us a list of places he had researched and would like to reside in. He went out on a day pass last week and secured an apartment. On February 8, 2016 Steven successfully graduated from Lebanon Pines and moved into her new permanent supportive housing apartment. Steven is actively engaged with his case manager and remains clean and sober. Working with our partners in the Reaching Home Campaign and at the Connecticut Coalition to End Homelessness, we have worked hard to develop comprehensive data regarding what we need to end chronic homelessness. We ask for your support for the additional 150 units of permanent supportive housing required this year to make our goal. Homelessness is an unacceptable condition for any Connecticut resident, and an expensive public policy problem. Investments in permanent supportive housing save public resources, and help those most need transition to housing, stability, and hope. Thanks for hearing my testimony. Sincerely, Theresa Nicholson Chief Program Officer Chrysalis Center 255 Homestead Ave Hartford, CT 06132 860—263—4618 tnicholson@chsysaliscenterct.org Rs mes Senator Bye, Senator Kane, Representative Walker, Representative Ziobron, and Members of the Committee, thank you for hearing my testimony today on the important investments through the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services to support efforts to end homelessness in CT. My name is Lakeisha Kinsey and I am employed in a Supervisory position at Safe Futures. Safe Futures serves approximately 5,000 victims of domestic violence and sexual assault in Southeastern Connecticut annually. Our services include a 24/hr hotline, an emergency shelter, counseling and advocacy offices, a transitional living program, supportive housing services; court based family violence victim advocates in two courts, an advocate in a local police department and educators in local school systems. We are making great amazing progress towards our goal of ending homelessness in CT with the support of Governor Malloy, the Legislature, the Dept of Housing and the Dept of Mental Health and Addiction. CT is the first state in the nation recognized by the federal government for ending chronic homelessness among our Veterans in 2014. CT is also on track with the Campaign to end chronic homelessness ofpeople with severe disabilities by the end of this year. Working with our partners in the Reaching Home Campaign and at the Connecticut Coalition to End Homelessness, we have worked hard to develop comprehensive data regarding what we need to end chronic homelessness. We ask for your support for the additional 150 units of permanent supportive housing required this year to make our goal. We support the Reaching Home Campaigns proposal for $l.5 llfllllllll‘l for rental Slll‘lsltlles and $13.25 l‘l'lllllel‘l for servlces ll‘l l“! 17 ll} reael‘l the goal of encllllg cllrlllllc lllllllelessness ll‘l Connecllclll. We know what works to end chronic homelessness: permanent supportive housing, which combines housing subsidy with case management services. Permanent supportive housing is highly effective at ending once and for all the homelessness of those who need this assistance. And it is proven to save communities up to 70% of the costs they will otherwise incur when chronic homelessness persists Homelessness is an unacceptable condition for any Connecticut resident, and an expensive public policy problem. Investments in permanent supportive housing save public resources, and help those most need transition to housing, stability, and hope. After working with survivors of domestic violence who’ve escaped the abuse they’ve endured from their abuser, and now safely housed in PSH is an absolute blessing. There is one particular story I would like to share with you. This story is of a single mother who endeared a significant amount of domestic violence from her daughter’s father coupled with her mental health she was at her breaking point. This client wanted to give up she had no family or friends to support her, she had lost everything she’s ever worked for. Not only was this abuser physical but emotional, financial and controlling too. This client came to us in near death, fleeing with just the clothes she had on her back and infant in tow. After being approved for supportive housing services this client is absolutely flourishing in the community. This client continues with her wraparound supports and usage of the housing first model, she has maintained her housing, working a part-time retail job along with receiving her social security benefits. To see this young woman who once had absolutely nothing, now successful housed in PSH, obtained her driver’s license and school for nursing is a shining brighter than star. Thank you for hearing my testimony and thank you for your support to efforts to end homelessness in Connecticut. Sincerely, Lakeisha Kinsey Supervisor of Transitional Living and Supportive Housing SAFE FUTURES L. (J \ \ EI CT l C U T ‘1; 0 5K l T EC! M ENE} nannnsssness 257 Lawrence Street, Hartford CT 06106 IP (860) 721-7876I F (860) 257-1148 | www.cceh.org Governor's Proposed Budget FY16-FY17 Appropriations Hearing Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services Wednesday, February 18th, 2016 Senator Bye, Senator Kane, Representative Walker, Representative Ziobron, and Members of the Committee, thank you for hearing my testimony today on the important investments through the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services to support efforts to end homelessness in CT. We recognize that Connecticut faces a difficult budget climate and that hard choices must be made. Ending homelessness is the right thing to do for Connecticut residents in urgent need, and the smart thing to do for our state, particularly in these tight fiscal times. We are working hard to end all forms of homelessness, with a particular focus this year now on ending the long-term homelessness ofthose living with severe disabilities, which we refer to as the "chronically homeless," through the Zero: 201 6 campaign, co-led by my organization and the Partnership for Strong Communities, with strong support from the Governor. When chronic homelessness persists, our public systems — including emergency services, hospitals, jails, and schools — incur heavy costs, without resolving the homelessness of those cycling in and out ofthese public systems. National studies show that communities can save up to 70% of the costs they will otherwise incur when they act to end chronic homelessness. Working with providers across the state, our partners in the Reaching Home Campaign, we have worked hard to develop comprehensive data regarding what we need to end chronic homelessness in Connecticut — to the benefit ofthose who have lived too long on our streets, and to the benefit of our budget’s bottom line. We ask for your support for the additional 150 units ofpermanent supportive housing (housing with supportive services) proven to end chronic homelessness, that we need to make our goal. 0 We support the Reaching Home Campaigns proposal for $1.5 millien fer rental. snbsitiies and $1.125 millien fer services in FY 17 tn create 15% additienal nnits ei permanent snppertive llGiiSlllg in reach the geal ei ending elirnnic hemelessness in Cenneeticnt. Think Change - Be Change - Lead Change 1 We are making significant progress towards our goal of ending homelessness in Connecticut, through the unprecedented support of Governor Malloy, the legislature, and the Departments ofHousing and Mental Health and Addiction Services. 0 Connecticut became the first state in the nation recognized by the federal government for ending chronic homelessness among Veterans in 2014. 0 Connecticut is on track in the Zero: 2016 Campaign to end chronic homelessness (the long-term homelessness ofpeople with severe disabilities) by the end of this year. The decrease of 30% in this population from 2014 to 2015, alone, serves as important proof that this campaign is working. We are making great strides toward ending all forms of homelessness in Connecticut, improving the lives ofthose who have experienced homelessness, and improving our communities that have struggled with this issue. With the support of the Governor and the legislature, we are building a comprehensive and coordinated response system to end homelessness. We also know what works to end chronic homelessness: permanent supportive housing, which combines housing subsidy with case management services. Permanent supportive housing is highly effective at ending once and for all the homelessness of those who need this assistance. Supportive services for those who enter permanent supportive housing are provided under the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. These services are a critical component of keeping these high-need individuals housed and stable. While we understand that substantial cuts to DMHAS programming are under consideration, we ask that you maintain the critical support services for permanent supportive housing. 0 Cuts to these services would risk reversing the substantial progress we have made to end chronic homelessness. Reducing these critically important services could mean increases in unsheltered, high-need homelessness — taking us the wrong direction, and imposing new costs on our communities. Thank you for hearing my testimony and thank you for your support to efforts to end homelessness in Connecticut. Sincerely, Lisa Tepper Bates, Executive Director Connecticut Coalition to End Homelessness Think Change - Be Change - Lead Change 2 Achievements on the Way to Ending Homelessness — Let's Keep Up the Momentum by Maintaining Critical Investments in Homeless Services! Lower total numbers of people homeless every year in recent years... Annual Statewide Homeless Population 16000 14000 \\\\ 12000 \**\NNN\ \\\\\\\ 10000 8000 2012 2013 2014 2015 Source: CT Homeless Management and Information System (HMIS) FY2015-2 015 Lower numbers of people becoming homeless for the first time, and lower numbers ofpeople becoming homeless again... Episodes of Homelessness 7000 1 6500 “ “\\\\ 1 \\\\\ 5000 g \\ 3 \\ Repeat 5500 3 \ 3 Maw“ \“ H “ “ ‘\ 5000 3 \\ 1 \\ 4500 \\\ 1 \_ . . 4000 \‘ FirstTlme 3500 i 3000 ‘ 2011 2012 2013 2014 Source: CT HMIS FY2011-FY2014 And a significant decrease in chronic homelessness... Annual Drop in Chronic Homelessness \\\m\\\\\\~\\ \\ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ \\ \ \ ~ \\ \\\ \ ‘ ‘ ‘ \ \\\ \ \ xxx“ \ \\ \ \ \\\\ ““ “x \ . xxx xx \\ \x “xx“ \\\ ‘\\\\\\ 8% \\\ \\ , \\\ \“ \\\\\\\\ ‘ \\\ \\\ ‘ ‘\\ \\ 40% 2012 2013 2014 2015 Source: CT HMIS FY2012-FY2015 Think Change - Be Change - Lead Change Testimony Submitted to the Appropriations Committee: H.B. No. 5044: An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. Submitted By: Sandie Lavoy, Sr. Vice President of Community Rehabilitation Services, CW Resources, Inc February 18, 2016 Senator Bye, Representative Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee, my name is Sandie Lavoy and I am the Sr. Vice President of Community Rehabilitation Services with CW Resources, Inc. I am sorry I am not able to be present to provide this testimony but appreciate the opportunity to submit this for your review and consideration. CW Resources provides Employment and Day Supports throughout the State of CT to people with disabilities, primarily individuals with significant intellectual and developmental disabilities. Many of the individuals we support require continuous supervision in order to participate in activities that are meaningful, that are integrated in the community and that keep people safe — both those we serve and those within the community. We are among the 550+ member agencies of the CT Community Nonprofit Alliance (CT Nonprofit Alliance.) I would like to share my concerns with House Bill 5044: An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. In particular, I want to express my sincere concerns to the funding reductions in the Department of Developmental Services. Employment and Day Services providers and Residential Providers have continuously received cuts in past years making it more difficult to provide the essential services to those we serve. This funding reduction will further threaten critical services to individuals and families and will continue to damage and weaken the safety net. Annualizing the FY 2016 Deficit Mitigation and Lapses, the Governor is cutting millions from Employment Opportunities and Day Services, Behavioral Support Programs and opportunities for people to live in the community. Providers are faced with ongoing increases in the cost of doing business (unfunded mandates, increases in medical, worker’s compensation, general liability insurance premiums and rising costs of living) without reimbursement and are often forced to make decisions which ultimately jeopardize the health and safety of those we serve. If these changes and decreases are made, the result will be the continuation of destabilization of the community based service system that so many of Connecticut’s citizens rely on. People in desperate need cannot continue to bear this burden. People Matter! People deserve to be cared for and treated with quality services when they need them. Thank you for your time and consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions, or for additional information. Sandie Lavoy, CW Resources, Inc. 200 Myrtle Street, New Britain, CT 06053 860-229-7700, siavo fficwresourcesorg Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 February 15, 2016 Donald Rully, Farmington Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Donald Rully and I am a registered voter in the town of Farmington. I am here to testify on H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. I urge you to keep crucial services available to the residents of Connecticut such as employment support services and grant funded case management. These programs have assisted my greatly with practical, emotional, and professional support. So I’ve had the strength to move forward with my career and finding employment. Case management has helped me to become more goal oriented and has allowed me to speak with a qualified professional who is abreast with the issues facing the consumers of mental health services. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports. Donald Rully Farmington, CT Testimony before the Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Bonnie Eldridge from Willimantic, Connecticut Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Bonnie Eldridge and I am a registered voter in the town of Willimantic. I am a cancer survivor. I am here to testify on H.B. N 0. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. I urge you to keep critical services available to the residents of Connecticut. Currently, I see an APRN at United Services for my medication. I go to the Lighthouse Clubhouse almost daily for a variety of activities that include health and wellness topics to exercise. With these two supports in place, I have been able to graduate, so I no longer need case management services. I am an active member of Keep the Promise and am also, an active member of the Eastern Regional Mental Health Board. Last year I was awarded the first annual Robert E. Davidson Award for Advocacy. I have found my voice and I feel pretty comfortable speaking in public. Without these services, I feel I would go backwards mentally. I know I would be depressed and would find it difficult to live in the community. My confidence comes from having these supports. Please don’t take my safety net out from under me. Thank you for listening about how important mental health services are to me and to others like me that suffer from mental illness. TESTIMONY BEFORE THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Nicole Alexandre, East Hartford, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. Mental illness has affected me in many ways. I've seen several psychiatrists and therapists since second grade and have been diagnosed with different mental illnesses. I've struggled a lot with my mental illnesses and will be on several medications through out my life but lnterCommunity continues to provide me with the vital support I need. lnterCommunity provides me with a comfortable setting that allows me to socialize in an appropriate way. This agency also has taught me independent living skills and positive ways to integrate myself into the community. This program also supports my interests and hobbies. Please do not make cuts to the budget that will take away programming like this that helps people have a good life. To: Members of the Appropriations Committee From: Roberta J. Cook, President and CEO Re: Appropriations Committee Budget Hearings: DMHAS Date: February 18, 2016 Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Kane, Representative Ziobron and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee, I thank you for your consideration of my testimony. My name is Roberta Cook and I am the President and CEO of BHcare, one of six private nonprofits in CT dedicated to sewing individuals with the most serious mental illnesses. BHcare is designated by the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) as the Local Mental Health Authority (LMHA) for towns in Greater New Haven, the Valley and the Shoreline. Each year BHcare provides mental health treatment for more than 3,500 Connecticut residents. These individuals are struggling with chronic disorders such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and major depression. These illnesses are pervasive and if left untreated can lead to an increase in devastating symptoms, psychiatric crises, and result in public health and safety hazards. I am writing today in response to Governor Malloy’s proposed budget — specifically, the budget for DMHAS. I am strongly opposed to the continued cuts to grants for mental health and substance abuse sen/ices. Each year the executive branch claims that grants for behavioral health sen/ices are no longer necessaw because Connecticut residents now have insurance through the Affordable Care Act and Access CT. The truth of the matter is, the ACA had almost no impact on our clients; in fact, we’ve only seen eight newly insured clients since its inception. The proposed budget will force our State’s six LMHA’s to nearly eliminate outpatient behavioral health services; it will obliterate our mental health system. We feel the impact of these cuts each and every day in our communities. We’ve seen a nearly 30 percent increase in the number of people we serve over the last five years, as asked, we’ve managed to do more with less, but if this budget goes through, there is no doubt we will lose ground and our communities will suffer. Our outpatient services save lives, they prevent suicide, they give adults with serious mental illnesses the treatment, medication and supports they need to live safely and independently in the community. Our services are linguistically and culturally appropriate, we offer on-site clinical treatment in Spanish. If this budget goes through, we will be forced to cut 50 staff positions and eliminate sen/ices for 2,000 people. This budget will leave thousands of our most seriously ill without proper medication and treatment. It will drive the State into a mental health emergency- one that will cost significantly more than the outpatient services previously funded by grant dollars. Without accessible outpatient mental health services the State will see a sharp increase in the number of people accessing acute care and/or ending up in correctional facilities. Right now the community provider system in CT is facing a $408 million reduction over what was appropriated, that is a tidal wave of epic proportions, it will create a state of emergency and more than 75,000 Connecticut families will be the ones to suffer. If nothing is done to restore DMHAS grant funding, it will result in crisis, in loss, and in a significant financial and tragic burden for Connecticut. My request to you is simple, restore DMHAS grant funding for behavioral health services. Testimony Before the Appropriations Committee on Governor’s proposed Midterm Budget adjustments FY 2017 IN OPPOSITION H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Re: Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) Budget February 18, 2016 TESTIMONY OF AMANDA SAGE Monroe, CT Good evening, Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Committee. My name is Amanda Sage and I am from Monroe. I am here today to address House Bill No. 5044, ”An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for Fiscal Year 2017, Regarding the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services Budget.” Growing up I seemed to have everything going for me. I did well in school, I was a swimmer and loved my teammates. I did have some issues with depression in my teenage years, but it was nothing compared to what started just a few years later. After I graduated high school, I went to college with hopes of becoming a nurse. By November of my freshman year in college my life consisted of survival. I was diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder in 2010. I lost my ability to function. All I could do was find a way to survive each day. I was hospitalized twice and in 2012 I failed out of nursing school. In 2013 I moved back in with my parents. I went in and out of the hospital and some outpatient programs. Then my treatment coordinator at the program I was in at the time suggested that I start going to Bridge House in Bridgeport. I started there in June of 2013. Starting there was the best decision I’ve ever made. In august of 2013 I had my last of my 6 hospitalizations. With the support of Bridge House I eventually was ready to apply forjobs. The firstjob I got was not a success. I was devastated but Bridge House helped me get back up on my feet and get my next job as a cashier at CVS. With Bridge House’s support I was able to keep that job, get a 2nd job at Stop and Shop, and at the same time get my pharmacy technician license. I now work at that same CVS almost two years later as a full—time pharmacy technician. Bridge house is funded by the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. Without the funding that Bridge House gets, they would not exist. And if Bridge House didn’t exist, all that would be left of me today is a memory and a gravestone. I know you have to make hard decisions every day—but know that the money you spend really does save people and enables them to rebuild their lives and chase their dreams. As for me, I can genuinely say that I’ve never been happier, and I have never had this full of a life. You have the power to change many lives like mine by ensuring that support programs like Bridge House remain funded and are therefore able to do what they do best, recover lives. Thank you for your time. TESTIMONY BEFORE THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Alan E. Coker, East Hartford, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My Name is Alan Coker I live in East Hartford. I'm a Recovery Support Specialist I'm a Board Member at InterCommunity and I'm also a person in recovery. It is critical to protect DMHAS FUNDS. Through services I've received from InterCommunity Mental Health services and they linking me to additional services through the DMHAS wise program I have what you can say restoration to active life self worth. In the past year I've been a Job coach for young adults with disabilities. I took the first training in state designed for mental health first aid for older adults. How did this happen DHMAS The services provided and funded paved the way for me. You know I keep hearing how our Governor wants to set up a bill which funds for transportation can't be tampered with. I wish he would have one to stop tampering with mental health services. Hey let's have a fast track for mental health? Its critical its necessary please no cuts to DHMAS . Thank you for your time Alan E. Coker 200 Nutmeg Lane apt 333 East Hartford, CT 06118 TESTIMONY BEFORE THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Carol Gilbert, East Hartford, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Carol Gilbert and I am a registered voter in the town of East Hartford. I am here to testify on H31234, An Act Concerning the Governor’s Budget Recommendations. I am opposed to the cuts to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. I have been going to InterCommunity since 1997, for treatment for severe clinical depression. It is the first place that ever helped me overcome my diagnosis. I started going to Common Ground, InterCommunity’s member-run clubhouse, where I really found recovery. They showed me that I was a person that was capable of doing whatever I wanted in life. Let me tell you, I have such a wonderful life right now. I am still going there and enjoy showing other people that you can have a better life if you want it. I would recommend this place to anyone. Please keep the money where it means the most for people. Thank you for your time, Carol Gilbert 886 Main Street Apt. 308 East Hartford, CT 06108 (860) 291-9522 Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the F Y—17 February 18, 2016 Denise Hart, Windsor Locks CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Denise Hart and I am a registered voter in the town of Windsor Locks. | work on the Warmline, which is a peer support outreach service for people who are going through a difficult time. I am also a facilitator for the Hearing Voices Network, which is a peer support group for people who experience visions, voices, or unusual beliefs. I am also an advocate for mental health services. I am here to testify on House Bill No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports, especially those that fund grants for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services. We are being given an opportunity to make a difference, a significant difference for our fellow human beings who are in need of our love and support. We cannot, in clear conscience, allow people with mental illness and challenges to be victimized, untreated, homeless, hungry, or self—medicating because of lack of benefits and support. We did not choose this path in life. We all want the same thing— our basic human needs to be met and available to everyone. We are all members ofthe same communities. We are mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, grandparents and peers. We all want to co—exist with respect and dignity to enjoy our families, friends, and pride in ourjobs, our homes, and to have the beliefthat we do matter and that we do make a difference. We are contributing members of our communities and to society. Funding for mental health and addiction services allows us to be trained and educated, as well as treated. Our support system gives us an opportunity to bond, to heal, to nurture and to be creative in our arts, writings, and our crafts, as well as helping others to cope and to heal and have a better life. |fwe are not funding the crucial supports that people need, many may end up hospitalized. No one wants to be hospitalized and sedated, feel numb and nonresponsive, and have their basic rights taken away, such as freedom of choice. PLEASE, we realize that there are many needs for the monies, but our basic sanity, and to feel alive and coping are not things that we can go without. PLEASE allow us to be participating members in society and not a BURDEN. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports. Testimony Before the Appropriations Committee on Governor’s proposed Midterm Budget adjustments FY 2017 IN OPPOSITION H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Re: Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) Budget February 18, 2016 Brenda Kingsley, Putnam, Connecticut Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Brenda Kingsley and I am a registered voter in the town of Putnam. I am thyroid cancer survivor. I am proud to say that I am 65 years old. I walk very well with my cane. | go to a gym regularly to improve my health. I am here to testify on H.B. No. 5044 An Act making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any cuts to the DMHAS budget and any mental health services and supports. With the mental health services that I receive, I am able to live a better life. My mental health symptoms are under control with my medications. The supports that I receive that | find helpful are: Day Kimball Hospital: I receive individual and group therapy which helps me resolve my concerns before they become bigger problems. United Services: l have case management services that helps me to remain Independent in elderly housing. My case manager helps me to complete all the forms that I receive to keep my benefits in place. She helps me to set up And follow up regarding the medical appointments that are necessary for my physical and mental health. I also attend the Welcome Arms clubhouse daily for social support and to help me connect with the community. l have learned about advocacy and leadership at the clubhouse in addition to attending wellness and health groups. These services help me to be a stable person. Recently, I discussed these proposed cuts with other clubhouse members. One member felt strongly that services should not be cut. She said simply, ”Please don’t take away what we need.” Another member is concerned that he would lose his independence and would need to live in a nursing home, if his services were cut. I urge you to keep critical services available to the residents of Connecticut. Thank you for your consideration of these important services and supports. TESTIMONY BEFORE THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Carlos Martinez, East Hartford, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. I started coming to InterCommunity, seeing a therapist, because I was in trouble with the court system and also I was suffering from stress. I became a member of Common Ground and joined their unfunded young adult program. My progress continued to go up and down; I still had stress and blackouts. Even though I still dealt with these things, I felt comfortable when I could be around positive people my own age. They cared about me. Now I am more successful in my program. I run a video production team, that gets hired to travel around the state to teach young people technical skills of video editing, and that produces video and music for customers. I love it. It’s an amazing experience, because I never knew that I could do something like that. It feels good when young adults look at me as a role model. I never thought I could feel that way. None of this would be possible without DM HAS funding, because they are helping people from all different ages learn different skills. I am the successful person I am today, because of DM HAS programs like InterCommunity. Thank you, Carlos Martinez TESTIMONY BEFORE THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Anthony Pierlioni, Plainville, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. I’m lucky to be here before you today. In middle school, my mother was in prison and I would sometimes see my father getting high right in front of me. These were two tremendous people who struggled with things that could have been avoided. My mother is proof of that. She is now a nurse, having worked with state funded non-profits to turn her life around. My father, and best friend, is now dead. He passed away at age 56, right in line with what is expected for people with mental health diagnoses. The progress of my mother and tragedy regarding my father are what brought me to a career in social work, particularly mental health and addiction. I am the Manager of Social Rehabilitation and Young Adult Services at InterCommunity, in East Hartford. Interestingly, on December 22nd, 2013, Governor Malloy visited Common Ground, our Social Rehab Program, the best place on Earth. He was there to tell our members that he believes in the need for mental health services and was dedicated to ensuring our people would be accounted for, since he had just proposed cuts to our budget. Two days later, the Sandy Hook Massacre occurred. Its aftermath brought on a flood of media attention, the vast majority of which was focused on gun control. I wonder how this budget can even be considered and the media not say anything about the connection between these two issues. This whole budget situation comes at a time that is especially difficult to our small community. Just two days ago, we lost our most dedicated advocate. She was a person in recovery, who worked tirelessly to educate others on these important issues and to assist her peers in having a better life. She showed up every day, waiting for the doors to open, so she could get to work, helping and advocating for others in recovery. Sadly, like my father, she was another example of the short life-expectancy of our friends, neighbors, parents and children with mental health and/or substance use history. Last year, she sat before this very committee and asked: ”Please think twice, when voting on this budget. Think of the mental health of a lot of people. You have their future in your hands. ” How many more tragedies will we allow to occur? How many more people will we let suffer? How many more people will we lose in this fight? I encourage the committee to consider the dangers involved in cutting funding and simply hoping that people will be lucky enough to overcome their struggles. ”Lucky” in the sense that I am. And if people dying isn’t enough to make the change, consider the fact that we keep people out of the emergency room EVERY DAY. This is tough and often thankless work. The frequent cut proposals are proof of that on a macro, and wholly depressing, level. Thank you, Anthony Pierlioni Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 - An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the FY 17 February 18‘“, 2016 Andrew Kellogg West Hartford, CT Good afternoon, Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Andrew Kellogg and I reside in West Hartford. I'm here to testify on H.B. No. 5044 — An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30th, 2017. I'm opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. I currently work as a Peer Engagement Specialist. One achievement which I pride myself in is being a certified Recovery Support Specialist (RSS) in the state of CT and from my knowledge, I'm the only deaf certified RSS. I never thought I would be in this position sitting in front of you if it wasn't for the people who work at Mental Health Connecticut's Robinson House in West Hartford for one. That is because Ireceived services from Robinson House and they saw potential in me which I didn't see at first. With their encouragement over time, I applied for the Advocacy Unlimited's Recovery University program to get certified as a RSS which was achieved. I still maintain my RSS certification to this day and enjoy my work in peer engagement services. The clients really enjoy having me work with them since I can connect with them more intensively based on our living experiences. I thrive in giving back what I got while being part of the Robinson House program which can't be described in just a few words. There are other programs in Connecticut who rely a lot on funding to operate efficiently. Please know that if cuts are made, services which people in recovery value will cease then people like me will have a less shot of being successful. I strongly urge you to keep the vital services available to the residents of CT so that others like me can continue on their path to recovery and then, in turn, help even more people. Thank you for your service and for your attention to these important services and supports which people like me pride on to move on with. CON NEETICUT glfiGsi’XL RIGHTS TSFBRQJEECI, NI TESTIMONY OF KATHLEEN FLAHERTY, ESQ. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CT LEGAL RIGHTS PROJECT, INC. APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 18, 2016 REGARDING H.B. 5044, AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 OPPOSE CONSOLIDATION OF ENTIRE DMHAS LEGAL SERVICES LINE ITEM INTO AGGREGATE AGENCY OPERATING FUND LINE ITEM OPPOSE CUT TO REGIONAL MENTAL HEALTH BOARDS OPPOSE DPH CUT TO SCHOOL BASED HEALTH CENTERS OPPOSE CUT TO COMMUNITY CARE TEAMS Good evening. My name is Kathy Flaherty, and I am the Executive Director of Connecticut Legal Rights Project (CLRP), a statewide non—profit agency that provides legal services to low income adults with serious mental health conditions. I live in Newington. CLRP was established in 1990 pursuant to a Consent Order which mandated that the state provide funding for CLRP to protect the civil rights of DMHAS clients who were hospitalized, as well as people living in the community, to the extent resources permitted. DMHAS describes its mission on its website as “improv[ing] the quality of life of the people of Connecticut by providing an integrated network of comprehensive, effective and efficient mental health and addiction services that foster self—sufficiency, dignity and respect.” Connecticut Legal Rights Project improves the quality of life for DMHAS clients by representing client in legal matters related to their treatment, recovery, and civil rights; this includes representing clients who have been denied services that they both want and need. We help to promote our client’s rights to full community integration which maximizes their opportunities for independence and self—sufficiency. The service CLRP provides to DMHAS clients is a core service of the Department, and should be funded accordingly. Tonight I am testifying in opposition to the proposal to include CLRP’s entire “Legal Services” line item into the consolidated agency operating fund line item. The funding CLRP receives pursuant to the Consent Decree should not be included in the pot of money to which discretion is Connecticut Legal Rights Project, Inc. PO. Box 351, Silver Street, Middletown, CT 06457 (860) 262-5030 Pagel given to the Department as to whether or not to spend it. Both DMHAS and CLRP are obligated to follow the mandates of the consent decree, which includes the allocation of those funds. The challenge in addressing this state’s fiscal situation is a daunting one; the funding decisions that you will have to make as legislators will be difficult. The total of $70 million in cuts to DMHAS seems particularly harsh. The lack of transparency of a budget proposal that consolidates a number of specific line items into a pooled general agency operating fund makes it that much harder to give meaningful input as to the choices that should be made. These Appropriations Committee hearings are the time when I, and other members of the public, can share with you the importance of CLRP’s work in maintaining the recovery of individuals served by the Department. When people are able to receive the treatment of their choice; prepare advance directives to give voice to their choice when they become unable to do so; access opportunities for educational and vocational advancement, and maintain safe, affordable housing in the community of their choice — people are able to get better and maintain their recovery. CLRP services are effective and save the state money. Our cost per housing case is significantly less than the daily cost of care in every other setting: inpatient hospital, psychiatric facility, or emergency department. In every single one of our housing cases for the last two years. every client either had housing or access to housing at the conclusion of CLRP’s representation. As the director of my agency, I, too, have found it necessary to make cuts to address budget shortfalls when actual revenue fails to equal projected expectations. Every one of the 18 staff members at CLRP, including me, are currently taking one furlough day each month, for an effective 5% salary cut. As is the case for most non—profits, the majority of our costs are personnel—related; additional cuts to our budget will leave me no choice but to lay off staff and reduce services. Cutting the funding for CLRP to represent clients in housing cases will not only impact our ability to represent clients who have housing matters; it will impact our ability to represent clients in all other cases, because we will simply no longer have the staff available to do the work. Because the consent decree requires us to prioritize services for DMHAS clients who are hospitalized. severe cuts to our budget will mean that we will no longer be able to offer services to community clients in all areas of the state. We will have to focus our efforts in Middletown, New Haven, Bridgeport and the surrounding communities. I also want to express my strong opposition to the funding cut specifically targeting the Regional Mental Health Boards. This cut is framed as achieving efficiency through consolidation; however, the amount of the cut is so great that it will result in the essential elimination of the Regional Mental Health Boards (RMHB’s) and the Regional Action Councils (RAC’s). The system evaluation and community involvement in mental health by the RMHBs and the prevention and training efforts of the RACs are separate missions and impact a diverse cross— section of Connecticut. The Regional Mental Health Boards perform their work with a limited staff by mobilizing a large number of volunteers. The five existing boards help to bring $23 million in federal funds to the state each year. The RMHB’s have been a vital liaison between the state, local communities and providers on diverse mental health initiatives, concerns and Connecticut Legal Rights Project, Inc. PO. Box 351, Silver Street, Middletown, CT 06457 (860) 262-5030 PageZ opportunities — their “community conversations” are just one example of the ways in which the Boards help foster connections among stakeholders to reduce misunderstanding and discrimination that create barriers to treatment and community integration. I oppose the DPH budget cuts to school based health centers. Two years ago, the Governor’s Sandy Hook Advisory Commission, on which I was honored to serve, included enhancing health services at schools as one way the state can identify and address behavioral health issues in children and youth. This important mental health resource for school aged children (and their families) is already underfunded. SBHCs were cut by $467,000 in FY16. The core services provided by the centers not only help meet students’ health needs; students at schools with school—based health centers have improved academic achievement scores. Every recent report regarding mental health in Connecticut (Sandy Hook Advisory Commission, Children’s Mental Health Task Force, and Young Adult Task Force) has addressed the need to break down silos between and among agencies trying to address the behavioral health needs of Connecticut residents. Mental health conditions do not exist in a vacuum. When people cannot get their basic needs — housing, income, other supports and services — met, they often turn to hospital emergency departments for help because they do not know where else to go. Community Care Teams — comprised of hospital staff, physical health and behavioral health providers, and representatives from local social service agencies — were formed to confront the complex issues presented by frequent utilizers of emergency department services. There is already evidence that the community care team approach saves money by reducing unnecessary ED use. In determining how this state will approach its long-term budget problems. one must not overlook the importance of investment in short-term costs that ultimately result in savings. CCT interventions work — they result in better outcomes for clients, and also save money. Providing legal representation to low income adults with mental health conditions to protect their rights to housing, appeal denials of behavioral health services they want and need, and to ensure access to self—sufficiency through education and employment results in better outcomes for both the individual people served by CLRP and to all of Connecticut. People who are able to participate as full members of their communities are more involved members of their communities. You will hear from several of them tonight. Thank you for your attention, and I am happy to answer any questions you may have. Connecticut Legal Rights Project, Inc. PO. Box 351, Silver Street, Middletown, CT 06457 (860) 262-5030 Page3 The Need for CLRP’s Representation Continues to Grow CLRP's Cases Nearly Doubled in Four Years 2000 The representation of CLRP paralegals 1625‘ and attorneys is a core service which 1500 1224 12% \\\\ “““““ should continue to be funded. CLRP 1000 825 \Q \ \ rrrrrrrrrr provides comprehensive, effective and \V \ \ \ efficient services that foster self- 500 \ \ \ \ “““““ sufficiency, dignity and respect. 0 s s s s ........ 2011—12 2012—13 2013—14 2014 15 The Good News is that CLRP Representation is Cost Effective Daily Cost of Care Cost per Case ‘\\\\\\§ \\‘ flux“, '\ .vagfixx. \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \\\.\\\“ ‘ ' " ‘\\‘\\\\\\\VL . ' \‘. \‘ o \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ \ CLRP Housing s ‘5: Representation Hospitalization ($1,089) ($806) Inpatient Psych ($1,157) ER Visits ($2,152) WW Our Legal Representation is also Meaningful and Life Changing to Our Clients and their Families § ”It was truly a blessing that Connecticut Legal Rights Project was there for me when I needed legal intervention. I pray that others willfind the helping hands of CLRP when they find themselves in dire need, as I found myself in, this last year.” -Diane Blauvelt, Plain ville C. Testimony to the Appropriations Committee— February 18, 2016 Jocelyn Ault, Stratford, CT Testimony in support of the Governor’s Prevention Partnership Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillon and members of the Appropriations Committee; I am writing to support continued funding for the Governor’s Prevention Partnership. In my professional work with CommPACT (family and community engagement initiative in the turnaround school model), as well as in my decades of volunteer commitment to youth and families, I know that funding effective programs with prevention dollars equates to tax savings and fiscal strength. We ha_ve to spend our limited resources on what works and what will reduce our expenditures today as well as over time- this is an investment in the infrastructure of our social fabric that pays dividends. I have had firsthand knowledge of the support provided by the Governor’s Prevention Partnership as I have been involved as a volunteer in prevention work in Stratford for the last decade. Thousands of volunteer hours of others, along with mine, have gone to supporting this vital work. The Governor’s Prevention Partnership’s mission is to keep Connecticut's youth safe, successful and drug-free today for a stronger workforce tomorrow. The Partnership provides leadership and services to help schools, communities, youth organizations, colleges and businesses to create and sustain quality programs in three core areas—prevention of underage drinking and substance abuse, safe schools and bullying prevention, and mentoring. The work is informed by the Search Institute Survey work done in each community so that the unique challenges our youth face in their town/city are focused on. This data based approach, along with a commitment to create partnerships for collective impact, is critical to changing the trajectory of the lives of our youth and families. There is clear evidence that adults make a critical difference in the outcomes of our youth. We must commit to programs which form these vital partnerships. This not only includes parents but also corralling community resources. We must build the resiliency of our youth and families. It is only through leveraging all our resources from different initiatives that we will effectively (in both cost and outcomes) create a healthy and vital Connecticut where people want to live and work. The Governor’s Prevention Partnership is a collaborative approach to: 1. Deepen partnerships and expand prevention services to have an even greater impact. 2. Expand the number of positive adult influences in the lives of young people, which helps to reduce incidences of drug and alcohol abuse and the prevalence of bullying in our communities. I cannot be there in person to testify tonight because I will be at a Bridgeport Prospers meeting with youth and adults in Bridgeport to plan a youth summit on April 1. This work has been informed by the data the Prevention Partnership gathers. The goal is to focus youth (12- 25) on their future, giving them insight into career fields, empowering them to engage in school, and most of all, bring hope and a belief that they can be the captain of their destiny. The work of the Governor’s Prevention Partnership is a key collaborator in this initiative. We cannot operate in silos and be effective. The Governor’s Prevention Partnership work is all about collective impact in these key initiatives and supports: More young people need mentors. Approximately 2,000 youth on waiting lists in CT need a mentor. The Partnership helps to strengthen existing mentoring programs to serve more youth and provide quality based standards by: 0 Sharing specialized information on serving specific populations of youth for mentors 0 Providing best practices, trainings and design & build programs for new and existing programs 0 Collecting data and evaluating outcomes of mentoring Connecticut’s substance abuse rates. 36.7% of high school students report drinking in the last 30 days and more than 20% report binge drinking. The Partnership builds on existing partnerships to reach parents and young people themselves with drug and alcohol prevention information by: 0 Bringing Parenting for Prevention workshops to municipal employees, neighborhood communities, PTAs, etc. o Presenting and facilitating E3 programming (peer led workshops) in CT schools; 0 Raising awareness through the media about risks that young people face and measures adults can take to prevent underage substance abuse; The effects ofbullying can last a lifetime. One in four Connecticut students report being bullied. The Partnership builds opportunities with individual schools to expand student assistance programs and prevent bullying for youth with disabilities by: 0 Offering trainings and workshops on-site for educators and youth service providers on issues like bullying and harassment discrimination and the law, needs of special populations of youth 0 Providing information on cyberbullying for educators and parents 0 Assisting with surveying, data collection and evaluation Dangerous threats continue to affect young people in CT —based on survey’s done by the Prevention Partnership, we know that alcohol remains the top two substances of abuse among kids across the state. This spring and summer, Partnership staff surveyed 125 youth in 10 focus groups around the state. Those youth confirmed that perception of harm is low, with kids thinking that having a few drinks or smoking marijuana to relax is no big deal. Youth report to us that access to alcohol comes easily, with many getting it from friends or family members or even their own parents, in spite of strong social host laws in effect in our state. Another significant threat to our kids comes in the form of prescription drug misuse and heroin abuse. Research shows us that many people using heroin start with prescription drugs, moving on to heroin when after they become addicted to prescription pain relievers. More than 11% of CT’s youth report using a prescription drug for something other than its intended purpose. When we look at the story lines of rape, abuse and accidents, we find alcohol or drug use so often entwined. These are costly public health issues. | invite you to the Freshman Forum being held in Stratford on March 30 from 7-8:30. It is the kind of work that is being done in communities, with the leadership and support of the data and technical expertise of the Governor’s Prevention Partnership. It is being held at Bunnell High School. This is the 3rd year. It has been successful in both educating students and families as well as starting difficult conversations that will save not only lives but prevent injurious behaviors. Our goal is also to have parents reflect on their own behaviors around drinking and driving, drug use and ensuring they create an environment where they are not inadvertently sanctioning or providing drugs and alcohol to youth (medicine cabinets and beer in the refrigerator!). Prevention is cost effective - Effective prevention strategies across the lifespan means less use of expensive treatment and intervention services later in life. SAM HSA estimates that for every $1 spent on prevention programs for addictions and mental illness, there is a $2 to $10 savings in health costs, criminal and juvenile justice costs, educational costs, and lost productivity. | request you look at spending our precious revenue in areas which will promote a healthy and productive Connecticut. Thank you for your commitment to our communities. Jocelyn Ault 434 Laughlin Rd., Stratford, CT \\\\\\\ ‘§\‘ 30 Jordan Lane $4 ' § Wethersfield, CT 06109 §\. (860) 523—8042 \ .. ,. . . ' \V‘ .; . ~"":' «0.; (3,, 1‘,” u .»~.\,- : .4“. -. . ; n.“ ‘ \.- .- '-‘..-: : t ix): : \‘\- 2.;- :\.‘.-\.. ~ .\.‘§ 53 Testimony for Appropriations Committee Subcommittee on Health HE. 5044 - Governor’s Proposed Budget Adjustments By Jill Spineti, President and CEO The Governor’s Partnership to Protect Connecticut’s Workforce DBA The Governor’s Prevention Partnership February 18, 2016 Good afternoon, Senator Gerratana, Representative Dillon, Senator Formica, Representative Betts and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Jill Spineti and I am the president of The Governor '5 Prevention Partnership. I’m here today to ask for your support to keep the state’s prevention infrastructure intact so that our young people can grow and thrive in nurturing families and communities. For more than 26 years, our non—profit organization has brought critical resources to schools, parents, law enforcement, community organizations, school leaders, and youth so that Connecticut '5 youth can grow up free from substance abuse, underage drinking, violence, and bullying, and to ensure they have a caring adult in their lives in order to grow to their fullest potential. We are a convener, an innovator, and a catalyst for change, a funder, a thought leader and an advocate. We provide new and cutting edge approaches and support to our partners so that they may implement the most effective programs. I am joined by many of our program partners today from across the state: a mentoring provider who is part of the newly launched New Haven Mentoring Collaborative; a multi—service agency from New Britain who works with children and families whose lives have been traumatized; and, members of our team, all who do this work on a day—to—day basis who are themselves community leaders, parents, and experts in prevention. As a public—private partnership, we have been fortunate that the General Assembly and DMHAS have been leaders on prevention ' thank you for your support. The dollars that The Partnership receives from state government are met 100% by private, corporate investments. As you look at adjustments to the biennium budget, I urge you to support The Partnership and other youth prevention initiatives at the maximum funding possible. For years, we have been doing more with less. We launched the Connecticut Juvenile Justice Mentoring Network serving youth in the juvenile justice system of care with the ultimate goal of reducing recidivism; we created the first—of—its— kind youth led All—Abilities Alliance to improve school climate for youth with disabilities; and, we developed the E3 peer—to—peer initiative, an approach to prevent underage drinking, impaired driving, and youth substance abuse. I'm here today on behalf of eighteen year old Ronnie Cadogan, who is a recent graduate of Hartford High and participated in the RiseUP Group 's mentoring program, he was here a few weeks ago to advocate for continued funding for mentoring in Connecticut; I'm here representing Sean Steinlein who communicates only through eye movements and his computer, who was able to return to school because of the accepting environment offered at Woodstock Academy which was the pilot site of the All—Abilities Alliance; I'm here representing Carter Barnhart, a young woman who is 6.5 years sober, who has dedicated her life to giving back to other youth who are also suffering as the clinical outreach coordinator at the treatment center Newport Academy; and I'm here today on behalf of the countless other youth who rely on programs like ours across the state. Through the leadership of this committee, this past fall we were able to grant dollars to ten mentoring programs across the state through the Connecticut Mentoring Fund, a public—private fund that distributed grants through a competitive RFP process. With the $71,000 in award funding, an additional 374 youth are being served and close to 100 new mentors have been recruited with an anticipated 85 additional mentors over the next six months. Right now with the heroin epidemic on the rise across the state, one in three Connecticut youth who need a mentor (10th have one, and another one in four youth reported being bullied at school in the last year, there perhaps has never been a greater need for the prevention community. No one else is poised to tackle these problems as the first line of defense. Our vision for the future is to bring our programs to scale so that every school, every community group and every family feels supported and every child is connected. In the days ahead, I ask for your continued financial support. In order to be the active, timely, nimble organization that continues to stay out in front of issues, we must take strong confident steps towards innovation today. We must expand our capacity, and we can only do that through your continued support. Thank you. 35552 $pm' >255 President & CEO 860.523.8042 x 30 ii 11 . spin eti (ifipreventi on wm‘ksct. on: . \ .3 V 30 Jordan Lane \\\§\\\\\\\\\ §“§\§ \Q §“‘\\\§\§ Wethersfield, CT 06109 §\ \\\\\\\\§\§ ‘§-\3\' §\\\:‘$ (860) 523—8042 ‘ \ . \ \«96‘ ’fit‘\-\°‘\»\‘*§‘“ 855 \x r r {I Testimony for Appropriations Committee Subcommittee on Health On the DMHAS Budget H.B., 5044 An act making adjustments to state expenditures for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2017. By Hannah Granfield Program Manager, Training and Technical Assistance The Governor’s Prevention Partnership February 18, 2016 Good afternoon, Senator Looney, Senator Duff, Representative Sharkey, Representative Aresimowicz, and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Hannah Granfield, Program Manager of Training and Technical Assistance at the Governor’s Prevention Partnership, a resident of Wethersfield Connecticut and a mom of two young sons. On behalf of The Governor’s Prevention Partnership, I am pleased and humbled to submit this testimony in support of resources for youth mentoring--a proven prevention and intervention strategy to help young people navigate from cradle to career. I am pleased to speak raise my voice in support of prevention through mentoring and the benefits that youth receive from this prevention strategy. January 2016 was National Mentoring Month and more than 21,000 youth are currently being mentored but there are more than 2, 000 kids on wait lists across Connecticut. What does this mean? It means that a youth goes home to an empty home after school, it means that there might not be a support network adults who check in with a youth, and it means that that the youth is not connected. In 2016, we hope that the state of Connecticut would be supporting anything that can provide a support system to the youth as they are our future workforce. The Governor’s Prevention Partnership has served kids in Connecticut for the past 26 years with prevention programs that focus on mentoring, substance abuse, and bullying and violence prevention. We are the state’s leading advocate and resource for youth mentoring programs, delivering the research, policy recommendations, advocacy and practical data collection tools that facilitate the expansion of mentoring initiatives. The Partnership works deep in communities throughout CT to serve more than 150 mentoring programs, connecting young people who want and need caring adults in their lives. The goal: to help them realize the true power of mentoring. The Partnership has built a sustainable infrastructure that enables mentoring programs to flourish, all while leveraging resources to provide tools that local programs need to operate high-quality mentoring in three arenas: schools, communities and the juvenile justice system. We build greater awareness of the need for mentors, and raise the profile of mentoring among corporate leaders, foundation executives, policymakers and researchers. 30 Jordan Lane : rift {:iaxsfizi w {h S\.\\ A at: 3;: W / \ \~ . ‘ ~ j 10‘ gm Wethersfield, CT 06109 § \\\§\\§\§ §\\\ ‘ y} 33‘ (860) 523—8042 \ . \“ny ..~‘.- _ o \.\\‘«‘\\ r»- .. .. . a '71/1 '/ During my time at The Partnership I have had the opportunity to hear firsthand from youth, families and schools who are currently involved in the juvenile justice system who are now connected to a mentor. They have shared: 0 My probation ended 8 months ago and my mentor is still involved with my life. I am so thankful for everything he does. 0 A mother shared: “Maggie gives my daughter a perspective on life that is nurturing and supportive. Making and maintaining the relationship takes work on both sides and the trust earned is invaluable when so much else in life is not inconsistent or unpredictable. Maggie ’s temporary time with my daughter is a permanent source of confidence and independence for her. 0 And a school administrators shared: Since he has been involved with your mentoring program he is on time for school and completes his assignments. He has turned around his demeanor in the classroom and now participates. Thank you for mentoring him. Like any youth-development strategy, mentoring works best when measures are taken to ensure quality and effectiveness. Money, personnel and resources are required to initiate and support quality mentoring relationships. Programs across the state of Connecticut spend around $1, 500 to S2, and 500 per youth per match to adhere to a quality mentoring standards. They can’t do this alone with the support of The Governor’s Prevention Partnership. Think about the youth who are on wait lists or have yet to be identified as needing a mentor in their life. As a mom of two young sons and active in my own local community, I am hopeful that my boys and their friends will continue to have the opportunity to be connected to caring adults. I encourage you to continue this investing in the young people and in Connecticut’s future workforce. Thank you so much for you time and consideration. Hannah Granfield Program Manager, Training and Technical Assistance 860.523.8042 x 27 Hannahgranféeld@preventionworksctprg 30 Jordan Lane, Wethersfield, CT 06109 www.preventionworksctorg \‘1 Hartford 14-1eelthfl'ere§ 1‘ Beheviere}. Health Netwerk Connect ta healthier.” /"”r/’//; TESTEMQNY 1111 1111 1111 {1’1 1 5113111111131) ’11:: :11111 A11131111P111AT18NS CQMMWTEE Thursday, Feemery .18, 211113 113 51144, An Act Making Adjustments 19 State Expenditures for the 1' ism}. Year Ending 111m: 311, 2111.7 Senater Bye. Repreeenta‘tive Waiker, .Sena‘mr Gerrata’na, Representative Dillon and members of. the Appropriatimls Subcommittee, my name is. Dr. jimO’Deag the Vice President 0f Qperations of the Hertferd E-Ieal'thcare Behaviorai hie-3,1111 Netwerk. Our network of care inciudes the institute of Living, Rushford ’i‘reatment Center, Natchaug Hospital, and the hehaviera} health programs at our acute care hospitais ~— Hartford Hospitai, Backus. Hespital, Windham Hoepitai, MidState Medical Center, and The Htispital 01’ Central Connecticut, We are the largest priwider (3f behavioral heelthcare in the state of Connecticut. 1 have worked in behavieral healthcare in Connecticut over the last 215 years and have experience as a Cfinician and administrator in inpatient, partial hespital pregrems. outpatient treatmeflt, emergency and crisis services in both psychiatric and substance abuse pregrams. 1am here to offer testimeny an House 1311150114; 1 strongly oppose the imposition 0f budget cuts fer mental heaith and substance abuse disorder treatment services. These cuts wouid bath destabilit‘ze an already Challengedvbehaviorai hedthcaresystem and reduce Options for'individuals in our communities desperate for care and treatment. All our Citizens in Connecticut deserve access to the Right Care at the Right Time. You like-1y heard testimony this morning fmm aur D'MHAS Commissioner that the ciesure 0f 20 detox beds at CVH, for example, would 'notrestrictaccess to care for citizens needing that care « that: there is sufficient capacity eisewhere in em system to meet that need. Well, respectfully, I’ve heer'ci that song before. Five years ago, on behalf 0f the Connecticut Hespitai 11350171311011, I offered testimony regarding the ciosure of m § Hartfogfd HealthéCam §\\ Behavmml Health Network Ccnnect to healthier.“ Cedarcrest Hospital. 1 cited then in my opposition m that closure, the need for these intermediate care resources in multiplesites across Connecticut. We were premised that these would be put in place to, address our citizens’ needs with the ("leisure (3f the lmspital We were promised that there would not be long delays in accessing appropriate, Specialized care far our patients. We Were promised that there vvauld not be waiting lists. We were promised much 0f What: we were promised earlier today. These programs however have not been put in place. Cedarcrest Hospital is now clased. 3 hold here a copy of a print—out fmm ihe DMHAS website from yesterday; February 1?th. It shows a waiting list 0f 33 Citizens {if our state _, waiting for accegs to specializecl behavioral healtlmar-el A waiting list that was never going :0 stem: 33 peoplei And accnrding t0 every newspaper, community dialogue, and forum — we are in the midst 0f a heroin crisig with drug overdoses and deaths Occurring nearly every day. I respectfully ask that yen do not; enact further cuts; to mental health and substance abuse treatment services included in HE 5044. We’ve been here befsre, As my dear, departad friend Bub Davidson would tell yen ~ There’s: still time. to keep that promise you made. Respectfully submitted, lan'les F. O’fiea, Phil)” MBA \\\\\\é .-.\ a“ ~ \‘Ao‘ x0 Testimony of Erica Augustine-Mullins, Prevention Coordinator, MCSAAC Concerning Restoration of RAC Funding Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Good evening, Senator Gerratana, Representative Ritter, and Honorable Members of the Public Health Committee: My name is Erica Augustine—Mullins and I am from the city of Middletown. As Prevention Coordinator for MCSAAC, the Middlesex County Substance Action Council, I am asking you to restore funding for the Regional Action Councils of Connecticut. Our agencies’ prevention initiatives have been successful for nearly 25 years. We have educated teachers, parents, youth and young adults on the dangers of substance abuse, binge drinking, and the misuse of prescription drugs. Without your support, our agencies could not have organized seminars, workshops and forums that help keep the children and young adults in our community drug free. In January 2016, for example, MCSAAC teamed up with Rushford/Hartford Healthcare to organize a Community Opiate Forum which was standing room only. There are eight public opiate forums happening in Middlesex County alone, and other Regional Action Councils are holding similar ones around the state. The forums and the media coverage they generated have raised awareness of substance abuse in Connecticut. They forums generated new ideas and new collaborations to tackle the opiate problem. Every year, Connecticut loses hundreds of people — most ofthem young people — to cocaine and opiate overdoses. Thousands more are addicted and still more are in recovery. There is doctor shopping, pill peddling, heroin sales and the theft and diversion of narcotics that have brought a flood of opiates into our region, according to MCSAAC research. For this reason alone, for the last ten years I, Erica Augustine—Mullins, a Middletown community business owner, have devoted my time voluntarily to the board of MCSAAC. As a volunteer I organized marijuana and tobacco workshops for elementary and middle schools, was a guest speaker for prevention of underage drinking at Middletown Adult Education, participated in the production of a very successful campaign against social hosting — all to help prevent our youth from using or becoming addicted to these deadly substances. Today I am a professional Prevention Coordinator for MCSAAC and able to give even more time to this work. With my fellow RAC colleagues, we are giving our full attention to preventing addictive substances from destroying our children and our communities as a whole. Our agencies want our children to live drug free and not DIE! In closing, I want to state my belief that no family can say ”I have not been affected by one or more of these substances." We cannot express strongly enough the need for State support to keep the Regional Action Councils working with our schools, businesses, churches, and parents to prevent and reduce substance abuse in the state of Connecticut. Thank you very much for your attention. Written Testimony before the Appropriations Committee, re: DMHAS My greetings to the members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Matthew Sheehan and i live in Glastonbury, and I am forwarding this for your consideration. I understand that the state of Connecticut is facing a considerable deficit, which cannot be solved without budget cuts. I also understand the importance of balancing the state budget and upholding financial practices that affect the state’s credit ratings. However, cutting the “safety net” cannot be the solution toward addressing these challenges. I am especiaily concerned with, and greatly opposed to, the Governor's proposal to cut mental health and substance abuse treatment grants to non-profit community providers by $15.8 million. In the past, the legislature has thankfuliy made much smaller cuts to this necessary funding. But these providers are being forced to accommodate ' increasing demands with fewer allocations, Existing funding has been relatively sustainable, as the providers have worked hard to spend these dollars as efficiently as possible, but they cannot bear any further reductions. The governor's claim that the - Affordable Care Act and Medicaid can handle this has been repeatedly proven incorrect by both DMHAS and these providers. i strongly encourage you to consider these challenges from a long—term and big—picture perspective. First, services for persons with mentai health challenges and related disabilities are notiust a moral implication, but a fiscally responsible consideration. Helping more people to be able to live a “typical,” productive life is a sound investment, as the safety net will be needed for fewer individuals. When people at risk are receiving these services, doilars are saved which would instead be going to jails and hospitals. These are grossly inappropriate answers, and will also cost more money in the long run. As the state's fiscai issues are projected to continuaily escalate over time, i hope that you will understand these implications. Additionally, i ask you to take a good, hard look at each of the other cuts proposed to the DIViHAS budget, particularly those in which would save the state money over the long term or result in forgoing outside funds which also help alleviate fiscal burdens. Instead, this is the perfect time to find ways to reduce costs and expenses which are not penny~wise and pound-foolish. For example, closing the Southbury Training School is an overdue step. I understand that it may not be immediately feasible, and not a soiution to this year's budget issues. However, it wiii be helpful for upcoming fiscal challenges, improving the residents’ quality of life, and increase resources for those with current unmet needs. In the meantime, reducing overtime costs at Southbury ought to bring forward considerable savings without resulting in harm to its residents. I greatiy appreciate that you have been committed toward protecting our safety net, and I hope for the same this year. Also, i hope that this is the right time for a discussion on how funds can be spent more efficiently, to serve more people and to do so effectively. The grants for non—profit community providers are a model example of exempiary, cost- effective services, and they must not face funding cuts for this year. Thank you. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee On Governor’s proposed Midterm Budget Adjustments FY2017 H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Tekisha D. Everette, Vernon CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. I am submitting testimony as the Executive Director of Health Equity Solutions, a new organization in Hartford committed to promoting policies, programs, and practices that result in equitable health care access, delivery, and outcomes for all people in Connecticut. Our vision is for every Connecticut resident to obtain optimal health regardless of race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status. Currently, when reviewing the adjustments to the budget proposed by the Governor, it is hard to envision this future for the state. Given the fiscal crisis, I understand the difficult decisions legislators have before them; however we cannot ignore the devastation the proposed cuts will have on health equity in Connecticut. Specifically, I am concerned about the impact of the Governor’s proposed midterm budget adjustments related to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DM HAS) and the Office of the Healthcare Advocate. The proposed cuts will have a devastating impact on mental health and behavioral health support and services in Connecticut. Eliminating the inequities in mental and behavioral health starts with ensuring access to necessary high quality services. The cuts to DMHAS threatens the agency’s ability to deliver high quality, cost-effective services for individuals with mental and/or behavioral health conditions. This runs the risk of further exacerbating disparities in mental health access and outcomes rather than fostering greater equity. The proposed elimination of the Commission for Health Equity in the Office of the Healthcare Advocate is concerning. For the last two years, the Commission for Health Equity neither had staff nor has been able to hire staff, making it challenging for the commission to fulfill its mission. At a time when Connecticut has done such great work to advance the ACA, it is critical to maintain the state’s commitment to health equity by having an active and functioning body focused on health equity. It is problematic to suggest that the Department of Public Health’s Office of Health Equity can absorb the duties of the Commission. While the DPH’s Office of Health Equity does great work, it cannot be expected to fulfill the charter of the Commission and affect legislation with limited staffing. Health equity is achieved when every Connecticut resident is able to obtain their optimal health without barriers and without regard to race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status. As you face the tough decisions regarding these programs, I urge you to consider the health equity impact of your funding choices. Thank you for your time and consideration. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee regarding: H.B. No. 5044 — An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30‘“, 2017 February 18th, 2016 Senator Bye, Representative Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee, my name is Suzi Craig and I am the Senior Director of Advocacy at Mental Health Connecticut (formerly known as the Mental Health Association of Connecticut). I am here to encourage you not to not make cuts in the department of mental health and substance abuse services as designated through HB 5044. These cuts will hurt the 500,000 residents who benefit from our services, the 196,000 people in our agencies, and the health of the local economies that we are very much an integral part of. As a statewide advocacy organization, direct service provider and educator, Mental Health Connecticut helps residents improve their health and wellness, live self-directed lives, and reach their full potential. We use an evidence-based approach with four critical elements — Home, Health, Purpose, and Community — as our guide posts to helping the people we serve achieve recovery. These four elements work in concert and rely on one another. Removing one element can seriously change the potential for a positive outcome. Imagine what it’s like for someone transitioning out of supportive housing and into their first home. This is a huge step in someone’s recovery. Now imagine moving into that first home but not having the skills to cook nutritious meals, the support to find work or go back to school, or the means to rebuild trust with family and friends. All of these steps are elements of attaining the balance of Home, Health, Purpose and Community. They are intertwined and necessary to achieving sustained wellness. Just like these four elements, our work at Mental Health Connecticut and the work of so many of our colleagues is interdependent. Providing a supportive and well-rounded system of care requires the existence and support of all our sister organizations in behavioral, physical, and intellectual health. Together, we strive to integrate our worlds and provide the best possible opportunities for our friends and neighbors to be well. Impacting cuts in one area will ultimately affect the same population in other ways. We also want to bring to light the importance of supporting another population: our workforce. We have over 250 employees at Mental Health Connecticut, living and working across the state. As a whole, 1 out of 9 jobs are with nonprofits in Connecticut. Of these nonprofit employees, 67% work in the health and human service field. /” ”1171/: W J. 4 /// :4 mm ’fi M ’é / I? / // é/l é / , W W ’/ We are our own economic engine. We live and work here. We are fellow tax payers who buy goods and services. We raise our families and we stay here because we are fulfilled by our work. You might say that, just like the people we serve, we too are striving to achieve our own personal wellness while contributing to the greater good of making Connecticut an amazing place to be. As many of you know, the transformation in people’s lives — those served by our services — can be dramatic. Any cuts will be devastating and will damage the stability we’ve worked so hard to achieve. As you move forward with the difficult work ahead, please remember that what remains invisible to most of Connecticut is the living, breathing truth for so many of our friends and neighbors, and is critical to the health of our economy. Just as our mantra of ”Home, Health, Purpose, and Community,” must work together to achieve wellness, so too must the core elements of our complex and integrated foundation: a robust and collaborative system of care, access to that care that then becomes a doorway to progress for our residents, and a workforce that stays and thrives in Connecticut. Help us continue to build a positive future for our state and help support our efforts so we can all get beyond these very difficult times. Thank you for your time and for your service. Suzi Craig Senior Director of Advocacy Mental Health Connecticut, Inc. 61 South Main Street, Suite 100 West Hartford, CT 06107 Office: 860-529-1970, ext. 205; Mobile: 860-384-4480 scraig@mhconn.org REAL “3:35 QEAL HQPE , . _ .i _ Teettmehy Submitted te the Apereerietfehe Cemmittee in Seeeett ef Feeding fer fiftehtef Heetth erre Sehetehee Uee Servteee HE. Ne. 5344: Ah Act hfiehthg Aegeetmerite te State Exeeeeiteree fer the Fteeet Yeer Ehefhg June 3th fo‘t? Geee Evening, hi3: heme fe Heather {Setee ehe i em the PreeteiehthEQ ef Semmeeity tteetth Reeeereeet CHR etevteee mehtef heetth ehti eehetehee eee eehrteee te ett eeee, serving ever 2:3,me feetvteeete ehe femitiee e yeer. We eiee erevtee teeter eere, eeeeertee heeeiee ehe hehevietei heeith heme eereieee. We serve the meet eerieeeiy tit eeieite eee ehiiereh fitting in the eemmeeity. if we efeee ereereme as e reeeit ef thte budget they wtti heve hewhere efee te tem fer heie. 69% ef eer etiehte ere eh hfeeteete er Meeteeiefhteeteete, 3% err fitteeteete. Q‘tti ere ehiheeree, theieeihe these reteeeee frem erteeh. htehy ef yee wiii remember that test yeer we eeme te yee eehfeg fer yeer heie te reetere feeding fer mehtei heetth ehe eehetehee eee eemieeet ‘t’ee eeeregeeeety reeeeheee by reeterthg the meierity ef the feeding ehe eeheeeeeritty etreieee meter eteteetieee te the eeteetiertt treetmeet eyetem fer the meet eerieeety iii. Yee efee ereeeee ESE te imeiemeet the hfedieeie tete frrereeeee fer hehevierei heeith eervieee thet hee etreeey heee eeereerietee. Beth ef theee efferte were necessary te evete eieeere ef eeeeee te eeteetieet eewteee ih merry ieeetiehe threegheet the etete. Se, here we ere eeeih, but new with e ereeeeeti heeget that te fer weree thee whet wee ereeehteei ieet yeer. By eer eetfmetee, the hunter: eereiee eyetem weete eheeteer etmeet ?5% ef the ereeeeetf eete. Thfe means the meet vetherehte ettteeee ef the etete ere heihg eehee te eheeieer the imeeet frem theee eete. Thte ie jest het eeeeetehie. {$93 {3933' HELL RQAQ *5 WtNDfiQR '5 CY {thiJ‘ES T: 31:6351135‘3? e g; fieflffi’itfifl? WWW‘Ct-i RHEAL’E‘H ,GRG ieieie $°?‘i £58,334. Gene ageing greeie fer rneniei iieeiiii ene eebeienee uee eeruieee are eiieekeri. This cut is $15.8 rniiiienn This funding eiieeerie eere rneriiei neeiiii end euizieieriee use ireeirneni fer the uninsured and fer services riei reimbursed by Medieeie er ether iiiirri eeriy peyere. Te give yeu e eenereie exempie, ine euie ie {iiii‘i weuie ieiei $4.3 iniiiien er 13% ei eur grenie, We weuie need to Bey eii eeerexirneieiy 'i’iJ staff which is e 19% reeiieiieri ei eer eerie; ieree. We weuie‘ eieee eee er mere ei eur euieeiieni eiiniee enri n'iuiiieie ether eregrerne ie be determined. We weuie eieee eeeeee ie eer euieeiieiii eiiniee ie enyene wire is eeirieiiree er requires eemeiieeieii eere. This: weeiizi vieieie everything we eiene fer but we weuie have ne eheiee. We ere net in e eeeiiieri ei subsidizing the eieie’e iineneee erei jeeeereize eur rerneiriirig eeruieee. 3,090 --» 4,058 eiiiieireris ierniiiee enri eeuiie weeiii be denied eeruieee wiiii deveeieiing eeneeeueneee. We irnpiere yeu re pieeee iinri e eeiuiien ie the eieie’e fineneiei ereeieme that eeee nei hurt iheee What) have newnere eiee ie iurri ier iieie, Nfiem‘xamiiifiizem E‘iJQihs The Smarter Choice for Care TESTIMONY OF Catherine Rees, Director, Community Benefit Middlesex Hospital FOR THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Thursday, February 18, 2016 HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 Good afternoon members ofthe Appropriations Committee. My name is Catherine Rees, Director of Community Benefit at Middlesex Hospital, and I appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony regarding HB 5044. I am here on behalf of Terri DiPietro, Director of Outpatient Behavioral Health Services, whose written testimony you have received. For those of us who focus on community health, meeting the clinical and psychosocial needs of those who struggle with mental health and addiction issues continues to be an area of critical importance. The proposed $16 million reduction in grants for mental health and substance abuse services will have highly adverse repercussions for the well—being of our communities. Today I will talk about utilization and ultimately the increased costs that will result from the proposed budget cuts. But this isn’t about utilization and costs — this is about people whose lives have oftentimes been shattered by the devastating, life threatening affects of mental health struggles and substance abuse, who wake up every day wondering where their pain came from and when it will end. Nobody chooses to have mental health issues or addictive disease. But everybody deserves to have the chance to lead stable, balanced and meaningful lives. These budget cuts will have profoundly negative consequences for someone’s mother, father, daughter, son, brother, sister. Among the services at risk is the 20—bed detox unit at Connecticut Valley Hospital in Middletown. We urge you to consider the highly negative impact the closing ofthese essential beds will have. The CVH Merritt Hall detox unit is an important partner in patients’ recoveries and provides the critical step prior to engagement in recovery services in the community. These beds meet the needs of high—acuity patients who present with complex medical co—morbidities and require detox to be provided in a medical setting. Without them, hospitals would need to 1 provide medical detox, which will increase costs, but more importantly, will interfere with progress along the continuum of recovery from detox to rehab to outpatient services. Another distressing adjustment is the proposed $3 million cut to the grant program authorized to establish Community Care Teams. Over the past several years hospitals and community services have worked extremely hard, despite limited resources, to build effective and efficient infrastructures that connect complex behavioral health patients to appropriate services. The Community Care Team model has a proven track record for improving quality of life and reducing costs. The Middlesex County Community Care Team is comprised of 14 provider agencies that meet every week for an hour at Middlesex Hospital to address the critical clinical and social determinants of health concerns for frequent visitors to the ED who struggle with mental health issues and addiction. We work together to identify the barriers and challenges our patients experience and, using a care coordination model, develop wrap—around care plans to connect patients to appropriate services within the community, followed by monitoring until patients are well—established in their recovery. When ”slips” happen, the team quickly coalesces around the patient to re—establish recovery as quickly as possible. We are an intervention and prevention model. Costs are ultimately reduced by decreasing ED visits, but the real testament is the extraordinary personal successes for our patients: reconnection with family, obtainment ofjobs, feelings of self—worth. Quite simply: Community Care Teams work. The proposed budget cuts would collapse the strong and meaningful progress that has been made by our Community Care Teams and other critical partnerships and programs; would negatively impact lives; and, again, would ultimately dramatically increase the State’s costs via increased ED utilization. While EDs are expert at managing crises in the moment, they are not equipped to provide the kinds of services that patients experiencing mental health and substance abuse need to achieve recovery and manage their chronic illnesses. Continued funding for adequate outpatient treatment programs are needed for people to start and achieve theirjourney in recovery. Those who struggle with serious mental health issues and addictive disease desperately need support and appropriate care. It is critical to sustain the successful yet already resource—poor systems that are in place for this vulnerable population, not jeopardize them though de—funding. Written Testimony before the Appropriations Committee, re: DMHAS My greetings to the members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Matthew Sheehan and I live in Glastonbury, and I am forwarding this for your consideration. I understand that the state of Connecticut is facing a considerable deficit, which cannot be solved without budget cuts. I also understand the importance of balancing the state budget and upholding financial practices that affect the state’s credit ratings. However, cutting the “safety net” cannot be the solution toward addressing these challenges. I am especially concerned with, and greatly opposed to, the Governor’s proposal to cut mental health and substance abuse treatment grants to non-profit community providers by $15.8 million. In the past, the legislature has thankfully made much smaller cuts to this necessary funding. But these providers are being forced to accommodate increasing demands with fewer allocations. Existing funding has been relatively sustainable, as the providers have worked hard to spend these dollars as efficiently as possible, but they cannot bear any further reductions. The governor’s claim that the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid can handle this has been repeatedly proven incorrect by both DMHAS and these providers. I strongly encourage you to consider these challenges from a long-term and big-picture perspective. First, services for persons with mental health challenges and related disabilities are not just a moral implication, but a fiscally responsible consideration. Helping more people to be able to live a “typical,” productive life is a sound investment, as the safety net will be needed for fewer individuals. When people at risk are receiving these services, dollars are saved which would instead be going to jails and hospitals. These are grossly inappropriate answers, and will also cost more money in the long run. As the state’s fiscal issues are projected to continually escalate over time, I hope that you will understand these implications. Additionally, I ask you to take a good, hard look at each of the other cuts proposed to the DMHAS budget, particularly those in which would save the state money over the long term or result in forgoing outside funds which also help alleviate fiscal burdens. Instead, this is the perfect time to find ways to reduce costs and expenses which are not penny-wise and pound-foolish. For example, closing the Southbury Training School is an overdue step. I understand that it may not be immediately feasible, and not a solution to this year’s budget issues. However, it will be helpful for upcoming fiscal challenges, improving the residents’ quality of life, and increase resources for those with current unmet needs. In the meantime, reducing overtime costs at Southbury ought to bring forward considerable savings without resulting in harm to its residents. I greatly appreciate that you have been committed toward protecting our safety net, and I hope for the same this year. Also, I hope that this is the right time for a discussion on how funds can be spent more efficiently, to serve more people and to do so effectively. The grants for non-profit community providers are a model example of exemplary, cost- effective services, and they must not face funding cuts for this year. Thank you. Stephanie R. Paulmeno, MS, RN, NHA, CPH, CDP, CCP CEO, Global Health Systems Consultants, LLC: A Public Health Consulting Firm Since 2009 9 Rockland Place, Old Greenwich CT, 06870 203-326-0400 "' spaulmeno47@yahoo.com www.GlobalHealthSystemsConsultants.com Connecticut General Assembly Appropriations Committee 300 Capital Avenue, Hartford, CT 16106 Re: H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017: The Governor's Biennial Budget Dear Legislators: I would like to address the segment of the proposed budget recommendation to consolidate the State’s 5 Regional Mental Health Boards and the State’s 13 Regional Action Councils. I have had the high honor of serving for the last 10 and a half years as the Chairman ofthe Lower Fairfield County Regional Action Council, Communities for Action. I oppose this segment of H.B. 5044 for the following reasons and | ask that you take my points into consideration when voting upon this bill: o The role ofthe State’s Regional Action Councils (RACs) and the Regional Mental Health Boards are quite different and serve a different purpose. 0 The Regional Action Councils provide a tremendous resource to numerous health, mental health, social justice, law enforcement, institutions of higher learning and grades Pre—K through 12, places of worship, and social services agencies across the state through: > Collaborative building between agencies > Capacity—building of the staff and leadership of individual agencies > Numerous training programs on topics that DMHAS has placed under the scope ofthe RACs such as: I Suicide prevention and postvention I Substance abuse prevention education and resource distribution I Smoking Cessation programming for the general population as well as specifically for the population segment that also lives with mental illness. I Legislative Breakfasts and events are held, which many of you may have participated in, that aims to not only provide an opportunity for our vast membership to not only hear from and speak directly with their legislators at the local state and national level, but also to provide those legislators with facts on substance abuse, suicide and mental illness challenges that may come before them. (Our RAC, Communities 4 Action) provided legislators with a large directory ofthe many topic experts in our Council who are prepared to help them with briefs, fact sheets and other data compilation for their use) I Grant writing, training on grant writing, and the securement ofgrant funding for local communities I Parent, student, teacher and leadership training on how to incorporate the development of assets in our young people I Supporting the development of parent groups such as the Fathers’ Forum, Youth groups, annual no to low cost behavioral health conferences that bring CEUs to the professionals who work with our populations in the areas of mental health, wellness, addictions, suicide, family counseling, and alcohol and drug counseling > An annual data compilation of statistics on drug and alcohol use, suicide rates, and the level of activity by each town or city in addressing this within each RAC’s catchments area, which helps the Council and the Towns to better focus their energies in areas where it is needed. > Organizing grass roots efforts to help local communities take the lead in addressing their mental health and addiction services problems > Supporting local programs to better serve their communities > Bringing in Block Grant Funding to local communities The Regional Action Councils raise the vast majority of their funds from grant—writing, but the funds they receive from government sources are essential to them, to the communities, agencies and organizations they serve, and to the Government itself. It is an evidence—based fact that for every dollar spent on prevention, which is what the regional action councils are all about, $25 is saved in treatment costs. Many of the people in treatment require state funding to help pay for their care. We are in the midst of an unprecedented addiction crisis where prevention and access to well services and resources is essential. I would not be opposed to consolidating the Regional Action Councils into fewer than 13 councils, as this could represent a much needed cost—saving, and I would suggest that ifthis is done, that the factor used to determine reductions would be through looking at the productivity of the existing RACs and selecting those who have offered the greatest value for money spent. My background is in both public health and mental health, so I am offering you an expert opinion here. I currently have owned and operated a public health consulting firm since 2009 and served in local public health for seven years prior to that. Thank you for your consideration and I hope you will opt not to combine the Regional Action Councils and the Regional Mental Health Boards as they are different and serve different functions. Respectfully, Stephanie R. Paulmeno Testimony for the Appropriations Committee On the Governor’s proposed budget DMHAS expenditures and recommendations February 18, 2016 Good evening Senator Beth Bye, and Representative Toni Walker, Co—Chairs; and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Leigh Busby and I am a registered voter in the town of New Haven CT. I am here to testify on H.B No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to DMHAS and any mental health services and supports, as well as housing supports and services, legal services, home and community—based services and any grants for substance abuse services. These services are vital for those of us who need them. I myself benefit from services provided to me through Cornell Scott Hill Health center and Fellowship Place in New Haven which gives me the tools I need to manage my personal issues. They provide a source of stability as well as opportunities to socialize with peers and the community at large. Through programs like Fellowship Place "Artship Program" Ihave been able to interact with others I would not likely otherwise interact with except through this program. My art has been displayed at places like New Haven Lawn Club and "CWOS". Since excepting my disability Ireturned to counseling and am getting the legal representation that I need to obtain Social Security disability and I now live in a HUD Housing complex and am no longer homeless. I am writing this letter as I can not be there to testimony.Mental Health services are so very much needed and should not be something to be cut.|n the past several years it has come to CT in the news and national news as to the increased need for our children and loved ones who suffer daily with debilitating mental illnesses that take over their lives and those among them.Horrible stories,great stories of recovery and all those in between.The problems that my loved one has are changing day to day and could be minute to minute.|t's heartbreaking and frustrating,confusing and infuriating.To have to face cuts in funding for mental illness is a cruel idea for all these that are suffering and those that don't.please hear this!Stop even thinking about cuts to help , housing and anything else you are thinking about cutting.Think of those you are hurting, whose lives depend on state services and those who will die without it. Eileen Kulmann Our mental health services are gravely flawed. We have an adult son, Mike, who has been hospitalized 5 times!! They keep passing the buck to one Dr or another. No one seems to care. It seems that at our last family meeting, the IOL Dr and clinicians made my husband and I feel that everything was our fault. It was very unprofessional. This system needs an overall. They need to understand that us as family members know our loved ones better than they do and that most of the patients present themselves well and fool the doctors. We are at our wits end. Call anytime. Collette Serra, 860—999—2868. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STA TE EXPENDITURES FOF? THE FISCAL YEAF? ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. February 18, 2016 John Lewis, Ansonia, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Paula Brozak and I am a registered voter in Derby, CT. I am here to testify on HB. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS budget and any mental health services and supports. l have been coming to Valley Social Club for 3 years. | get very depressed when | stay home. Coming through the social club’s door has changed my life. I look forward to coming to the social club every day. Please keep the enough money in the budget to save our services and supports that we count on. TESTIMONY OF SAMANTHA BURTON—APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE February 18, 2016 My name is Samantha Burton and I am a registered voter from Bridgeport. I am addressing HB 5044, Governor’s Bill “An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017” and specifically the budget earmarked for the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. I was working as a bartender from 2002 to 2003. I really enjoyed my job. I had opportunities to meet the most amazing people. But the bar closed and I was out of a job. I was living with my mother at that time. I was going out every day looking for a job. I couldn’t find work. Even though I enjoyed bartending I wanted a 9 to 5 job. Ibegan to become discouraged as I looked for work. I started to isolate myself from family and friends. I began to be very paranoid that my neighbors were after me. I informed my mother what was going on and she told me no one was going to harm me. My mother encouraged me to go to a beauty salon to get my hair done. When I was in the beauty salon I heard my neighbors’ voices again. It was like they followed me. I informed my mother what was going on and she brought me to a hospital immediately. When I was in the hospital, I was diagnosed with schizophrenia. I thought to myself, “I will take medicine for a couple of months and the voices will go away.” I was doing well for a couple of months. When I decided to stop taking my medication, I started to hear voices again. But this time they were families’ voices, and the voice of psychic Silvia Brown, who appeared on Montel William’s show regularly. It was like the voices had special codes that nobody knew about. Then the voices went from being friendly to being frightening. When the voices were friendly they told me that I have a special power from God and they told me that I can read people’s minds and make things move. When the voices were frightening they told me there was no God and they wanted my soul. I informed my mother and she brought me to the hospital. They admitted me for the second time. During my hospital stay, I tried to escape and I even became delusional. I thought I saw a Pope touching my mother’s hair. When I was back home, I isolated myself and felt as though I couldn’t take it anymore. My case manager suggested that I go to a clubhouse called “Bridge House,” that helps people with psychiatric disabilities. In 2005 I became a member of Bridge House although I didn’t want to be there. I wouldn’t socialize with anybody. But because of my faith and the love and support that I received from my family, they persuaded me to give the Bridge house a chance again. Bridge House has so many different units. They have an education unit, a member bank unit, a housing unit, and an employment unit. I volunteered in so many different units and even made friends with some of the members. Bridge House even helped me to get my first TEP (Transitional Employment Program) job which is 6 to 9 months and helps you to get back to the working field. You have a job coach that is with you until you feel comfortable enough to do the job by yourself. I was so excited to be working at the Catholic Center. People were so nice and I felt so confident. I was making my own money and giving back to the community. I felt as though I could do anything. The medication started to work and the voices went away. It is important that Bridge House continues to be supported in our community and by our state, because there are so many people living with mental illness—whether it is a family member or friend who feels like an outsider, who feels neglected, and discriminated against because of their diagnosis. Bridge House makes you feel loved, and you are special. Bridge House teaches you to be productive and live productively. Your family and friends may have walked out on you but Bridge House’s door is always open to you. Bridge House makes you feel safe. Everybody cares about you—from the staff to the members. The staff works tirelessly every day advocating for the members of Bridge House. The vast majority of people recover from mental illness. They are doctors, lawyers, nurses, teachers, and advocates. People with mental illness have dreams and goals like everybody else. I am so proud to be a member at Bridge House. Bridge House continues to be a positive, encouraging place in people’s lives, including mine. For all the people who live with mental illness, take the lyrics from singer Matthew Wilder’s song, “Ain’t nothing gonna break my stride, nobody gonna hold me down, Oh! No. I got to keep on moving.” Sincerely, Samantha Burton TESTIMONY BEFORE THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members ofthe Appropriations Committee. My name is Maryse Capobianco and I am a registered voter in Wethersfield I am here to testify on the Governor’s proposed midterm budget adjustments related to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. I understand the fiscal crisis and that these will be hard decisions for you as legislators, but I want to express my deep concern about and opposition to the deep and devastating proposed cuts to mental health and behavioral health services and supports. These services are extremely important to me as a parent. My son, David, displayed symptoms of schizophrenia when he was 17 yrs. Old. I did not know what to do. I was lost and devastated. It was by chance we found ourselves at Intercommunity in East Hartford and that would be the beginning of help and a diagnosis. But it was not the end of the difficulties one lives with when dealing with mental illness. David would be in and out of hospitals for the next 14 years. David thought of and talked about suicide often. He was depressed all the time. Life never seemed to get better for David. Through the years his drug habit escalated, in part to offset the side effects ofthe tremors his medications gave him. Hospitals knew David had a drug addiction problem but he was sent home each time and advised to get help. He tried a few outpatient programs but didn’t work for David. He needed extensive in—patient treatment. I found out Husky D would have given David the inpatient help he needed but he didn’t qualify because he was on Social Security Disability. If he had been classified as low income he would have been able to get the inpatient services he so desperately needed. As his depression and drug problem worsened so did hisjudgment. David was full blown delusional, hearing voices, psychotic and using drugs daily the last time he saw his psychiatrist. I needed a referral. Instead David was sent home and I was given a phone number to call. The next day my son went missing. That was December 11th. He hasn’t been seen or heard from since. I live daily with thoughts that he killed himself. Hopefully someday David will be found, and if/when you hear about this in the news, I pray that your very next thought is how glad you are that you did not cut funding for those who still so desperately need these services. It may be too late for my son, but it is not too late for the many families who live in our towns and communities all over the state of ct who struggle with all that comes with mental health and addiction problems. Those with mental health disabilities are at a disadvantage. They can’t fight for themselves. They depend on us. They can’t ask you for help,...but I can. Please reconsider the proposed cuts to the department of mental health and addiction services. Thank you so much for listening to me today. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee In Opposition to Governor Malloy’s Budget Cuts to DMHAS Thursday, February 18, 2016 Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Riley Cederbaum, and I am a registered voter in the town of Seymour. I am here to testify on H.B. No. 5044, an Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. Programs whose funding would be combined into one big pot of money subject to the proposed $34 million cut include Housing Supports and Services, Young Adult Services, and Home and Community Based Services. I urge you to keep crucial services available to the residents of Connecticut. A service I listed above is Young Adult Services, a program that I receive a lot of support from. With Young Adults I have an amazing case manager and a young adult’s team. With their help I’ve worked hard to get my license and a part time job, along with working daily on my recovery. Young Adults have introduced me to the Social Club, where I am supported even more. With funds cut, Young Adults and the Social Club’s benefits will be minimized and the supports I have will be limited. The daily encouragement I have from these services is an overwhelming abundance of groundwork I need to continue building a healthy life. To be without these supports would impact not only my therapy but would affect my life in recovery. Thank you for your attention to those important services and supports. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Joe DeFrancesco, Enfield CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Joe DeFrancesco and I am a voter in the town of Enfield. I am here to testify on House Bill No. 5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year ending June 30th 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any Mental Health Services. I am concerned about proposed cuts to the DMHAS budget because the Regional Mental Health Boards, the Boards, are the liaisons to the public and they would be hit financially and in effect, wiped out, if the budget is kept the way it is being proposed. The Boards and a branch of their cause, RCAC, Regional Catchment Area Council, help educate consumers of mental health services and their families. They also help with Housing Supports, Employment Supports, Peer Supports, Warmlines, and Specialized Young Adult Services, Jail Diversion and Mobile Crisis Services- something the Boards have helped out with for years. This is my story: In 1984-87 I had a couple of bad years, followed by a breakdown, later diagnosed as Schizophrenia. I was committed to a local Hospital for one week and observed. Later I was sent to Cedar Crest, a State Hospital, for observation and treatment. | behaved and after one week I was given a little freedom to walk around the ward and building called Step Two. After 18 days I was released into the community. I went home to my parent’s house. I was lucky I had them to help me out. Without the Boards, and the DM HAS budget to provide programs and services, there would be no one to help the people being released in the community between Hospitals and regular Outpatient treatment and programs, like there was for me. | now accept my diagnoses and ask for help at CHR, Community Health Resources, and an agency site, the Second Wind Clubhouse. Without all of CHR’s programs, services, and capable people, I would be living on the streets or in the woods somewhere. The Boards educate the public on both sides, the consumers of Mental Health Services and their families, and the Legislators. They help with early intervention for many medical disorders, give us hope for recovery, help us search for recovery, help with money management, housing supports, employment supports, peer supports and Warmline supports. This is why we need to make sure the Regional Mental Health Boards and other crucial mental health services continue to be fully funded. Thank you for your time. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STA TE EXPENDITURES FOF? THE FISCAL YEAF? ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. February 18, 2016 Lynn Evans, East Hartford, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Lynn Evans and I am a registered voter in the town of East Hartford, CT. I am here to testify on HB. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports because my husband and I depend on these services for basic needs such as medical, physical and mental health needs. Without medical and mental health services we would not be able to see our social worker or benefit from lnterCommunity/Common Ground. It would set us back. Please do not cut this budget. It puts more stress on the mental health of individuals. I have a great peer support system through lnterCommunity Common Ground Learning Center. I urge you to keep these core services and thank you for your attention to these important supports. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Susan Maxwell Waterbury, CT Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Susan Maxwell and i am a registered voter in Waterbury, CT. lam here to testify on H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. lam opposed to any cuts to mental health services and supports. With the supports l’ve received through the years, I have come a long way in my recovery. i haven’t been hospitalized in over nine years because of the supports i receive from the Independence Center. I work part-time, am a leadership council member at the independence Center and live a fulfilling life despite my disability. if we didn’t have the services provided—Including Mental Health Connecticut’s Independence Center, The Regional Mental Health Board, and Connecticut Legal Right’s Project, many mental health consumers would not have the services needed to recover. it seems like the elderly and the disabled are the first to get cut in the budget. Mental health has come a long way, with our providers and our doctors, and with the right medication, we can be on the right path to our recovery. It would be detrimental to thousands of people who live independently in the community if you cut funding. Please consider the lives that would be negatively affected. Thank you for your time. Susan Maxwell Testimony before the Appropriations Committee In Opposition to Governor Malloy’s Budget Cuts to DMHAS Thursday, February 18, 2016 Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. Our names are Robert Miselis, Shannon Callery, Joan Gallagher, Aaron Hayes & Ani Levy We are second-degree student nurses at the University of Saint Joseph in West Hartford, Connecticut. We are here in support of individuals living with mental health illnesses in the State of Connecticut. As future nurses we have had, and continue to have, the honor and pleasure of meeting and working with these strong individuals living with mental illness. We are here to respectfully request that you reconsider the devastating proposed budget cuts to the state agencies tasked with ensuring that this population has the tools they need to succeed. In general, we are certain that these proposed immediate funding cuts will drastically increase the state's long-term expenditures for the future and more importantly cause a ripple effect to the entire community. Specifically, these cuts would adversely affect the mental health community in the following ways: 1. The proposed cuts to the School Based Mental Health Programs are unacceptable, as they would have a drastic impact on children experiencing mental health illnesses. It is the mental health services that these children receive through school nurses and in school- based clinics that keep them focused and provide them the tools that they need to succeed. Without these services these children are at risk for failing out of school and contributing to homelessness in the future. These children represent the future workforce in our state and it is our duty to do everything we can to protect them and their future. Cuts to DMHAS’ budget would double the caseload of the already thinly spread clinicians assigned to adults coping with mental health illness throughout our state. These individuals stay in control of their lives because they know and trust clinicians who ensure that they take their medications, stay connected to preventative care, maintain their health and remain safe in their homes. These clinicians are a safety net to assist individuals in avoiding a crisis and ending up without a home. These cuts would drastically increase emergency room and in-patient visits as individuals seek care they would otherwise receive from clinicians who are currently funded with the monies that will disappear, ultimately creating a temporary solution to a long-term problem. We have gathered specific and quantifiable statistics that we want to share with you. Given the short time we have with you today, we respectfully request to meet with you or your staff to provide you our evidentiary support for our requests today. Thank you for your time and attention to this crucial matter. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee Governor’s Proposed Biennial Budget February 18, 2016 Robert Pearston — Cromwell, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Robert Pearston, | vote in the town of Cromwell, represented by Paul Doyle and Christie Carpino. I am the parent of a son who is diagnosed with schizophrenia, living in the community with services provided by River Valley Services in Middletown. I participate in a NAMI run support group and I am active with their public policy committee. My son was diagnosed at the age of 15, and what followed was years of struggle to understand, treat, and come to terms with his illness. There is no such thing as a ”cure” for schizophrenia, but there is recovery, where with medication, support and understanding a nearly normal life is possible. My son has achieved this at age 25. He lives in the community, works 2-3 days a week in a small office where they understand his strengths and weaknesses, supplying most of the IT and technical support for the group as well as routine data entry, invoicing and inventory tasks. He lives in an independent housing unit populated largely by the elderly, and has become the person everybody in the building comes to with smartphone, cable box or computer problems. He is a child care provider at our church, and has a particular rapport with the several autistic/special needs children in the Sunday School. He is able to do this with section 8 housing support, medication from Husky ”C” and counseling and psychiatric support from River Valley Services in Middletown. He has, like any person in recovery, the occasional rough patch, and as recently as last week had to call the Mobile Crisis Intervention Unit. This unit, which operates, I believe, out of Wheeler Clinic, spent an hour on the phone with him, and a costly possible ER visit/Hospitalization was avoided. My question to the Appropriations committee is, quite simply, which of these supports do want to remove? The alternatives to maintaining an integrated, successful life in the community are either long term institutionalization, which this state has fortunately abandoned, or a spiral of homelessness, stigma and escalating interactions with law enforcement. Far too many of our persons with disabilities are receiving their treatment from the Department of Corrections. Dollars saved by arbitrarily cutting the DMHAS, Housing or DDS budgets will come back to the state in unnecessary hospitalization, law enforcement and corrections department expenses, and that’s only the dollars. The human and moral costs are greater and harder to calculate. This committee gets that, they’ve proven it in the past. What I’m asking for this time is for the committee to not only preserve but also protect these vital human services. To craft this off year budget legislation in a way that it cannot be reduced/eliminated by an arbitrary percentage imposed by a Governor or Commissioner. Thank You. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Cynthia Williams, Waterbury, CT Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Cynthia Williams and i am from Waterbury, CT I am here to testify on H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any cuts to mental health services, and want to express my appreciation for NAMI Connecticut and the Independence Center and how they have supported me. Four years ago, I was viciously attacked and stabbed in my one good hand during a robbery attempt. | now celebrate being a survivor. Without the support of these mental health services, I would not be able to address the trauma that I survived—many times in my life. Without these programs, people would just sit around in their houses and not have any place to go. This would cause people to become more depressed and end up in hospitals-which are more expensive. It makes no sense to cut mental health services and not address the needs of so many. Please think of all the people here advocating for mental health services and know that it is only a small portion of how many are really out there. Thank you for your time. Cynthia Williams Testimony before the Appropriations Committee Angela Cassandra Benson February 18, 2016 Waterbury, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and esteemed members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Angela Benson and I am a registered voter and live in Waterbury, CT. I am here to testify on H.B. No. 5044 and lam opposed to any cuts to mental health services and supports. I was first diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder, Borderline Personality Disorder, Anxiety, and gender identity disorder in 2000. I have been using the Independence Center for about six years and | feel that these services have helped me to stay out of the psychiatric hospital for almost 9 years. Taking these services away would leave me no place to go for the help to keep me out in the community. l have also used Connecticut Legal Rights Project and currently work with our local mental health board in the Consumer Action Group in Waterbury. I have helped run the meeting there on a monthly basis and feel that my input is valued for bringing the information back to consumers. All of the information pertains to mental health and how any changes can affect people receiving serVIces. Please do not make any cuts to mental health services, including Connecticut Legal Rights Project, or the Regional Mental Health Boards. Thank you, Angela Benson Testimony before the Appropriations Committee Vanessa McGee February 18, 2016 Waterbury, CT Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Vanessa McGee and I am a registered voter and live in Waterbury, CT. lam here to testify on H.B. No. 5044 and l am opposed to any cuts to mental health services and supports. 12 years ago I was out there all alone with nowhere to go and no services. I ended up at Connecticut Valley Hospital where I received services and treatment. Now | live independently in the community and worked at Wendy’s for five years and have good doctors. If you decide to cut the budgets, all of the services I have, including services at the Independence Center would not be available to me, and I probably would end up back in the hospital. Please consider my requests, do not cut mental health budgets. Thank you, Vanessa McGee 18-20 Trinity Street Room 202 Hartford, CT 06106 Tel: 860-240-0080 Fax: 860-240-0315 Email: a aacdficoactgov Website: Chair Trung Le Vice-Chair Sylvia Ho Secretary Uswah Khan Treasurer Alan Tan Commissioners Arlene Avery Theodore Feng Theodore Hsu George Mathanool M. Angela Rola Arvind Shaw An-Ming Truxes Henry C. Lee (Honorary) Executive Director Mui Mui Hin-McCormick Legislative Analyst Alok Bhatt STATE 03? CGNNESTEQUT ASfifiPJ PA CIAW'C $1342.93}?! {DEN AfiYAIRS (fOMM’JSSION February 18, 2016 Senator Beth Bye Representative Toni E. Walker Appropriations Committee Legislative Office Building Room 2700 Hartford CT, 06106 Testimony Opposing H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 Dear Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and honorable members of the Appropriations Committee, My name is Mui Mui Hin-McCormick, I am the Executive Director of Asian Pacific American Affairs Commission (APAAC). I also serve on multiple boards and coalitions; in particular the North Central Regional Mental Health Board and Chair of the Catchment Area Council (CAC) 23. CAC’s offer a common ground for consumers, family members, and providers to work together in support of their communities. On behalf of the Asian Pacific American Affairs Commission and the North Central Regional Mental Health Board I am submitting testimony opposing the H.B. No. 5044 regarding the proposed DMHAS cuts that would eliminate the Regional Mental Health Boards (RMHB). Similar to other agencies, these RMHBs have limited funding and resources; welcoming opportunities to collaborate with agencies and communities. These agencies also share common goals of addressing disparities in underserved communities. For over 40 years RMHBs have evaluated hundreds of programs, assessed the needs of the community, been the voice for the community and influenced the mental health and addictions service system continuously. The RMHBs produce results and touch thousands of lives on a low budget. With an average of 2 staff members each, and about 500 dedicated volunteers across the state, RMHBs make a difference for individuals, families, and systems. The RMHBs represent an impressive return on investment. The $584,000 in state funding to the RMHBs helps bring in $23 million in federal funding for mental health and addiction services. NCRMHB is one of five regional mental health boards established by the Connecticut General Assembly in 1974 to study local needs, evaluate state funded mental health programs and make recommendations to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS), local providers, and government officials for improved and/or expanded services. NCRMHB seeks to involve consumers of behavioral health services (local citizens living with mental health or substance use disorders, family members, and others who know and care about them) in its review, evaluation, and advocacy activities. In my previous work as a clinical director of a community based outpatient program, I know firsthand about the existing barriers providers are challenged with on a daily basis. There is so much more work that needs to be done in all of our diverse 1849 1’ 'rinity Street, Hartford, (710615136 T95. (8450,} 240—3038., Fax {869,} 2401€13I5 Eullfaii: apam’@cgact,gav Website _ http:/[riapamxmm! ASfififiJ PA Cffififi’ Afia’EKiimfi! AfiYAIRS (fOMM’JSSION communities when it comes to mental health and addiction issues. The work can’t be done with the restricted funding and lack of resources. This is why, the RMHBs are needed in our communities as they are not only a resource but an advocate for those that are not able to advocate for themselves. Thank you for the opportunity to provide written testimony. I hope you strongly consider reinstating funds for the Mental Health Regional Boards as they are critical supporters of our diverse communities; focused on improving the quality of life for all of our Connecticut residents, valuing the skills and experience of each person. Sincerely, Mui Mui Hin-McCormick Executive Director Asian Pacific American Affairs Commission 1849 1’ 'riniiy Street, Hartford, (710615136 T95. (8450,} 240—3038., Fax {869,} 2401€i3ifi Evil/fail: apam’@cgacr,gav Website _ http:/fr'iapaac.Cram! My name is Danielle Herbert. I am testifying on H.B. 5044. I am a registered voter from West Hartford, a sixteen-year employee of the North Central Regional Mental Health Board, a family member of someone who lived his adult life with a severe mental health disability and I am opposed to the proposed elimination to the RMHBs. RMHBs were created by state statute (Sec. l7a-484) over 41 year ago to advise DMHAS by evaluating state funded mental health services and programs. Our 500 volunteer members are composed of providers of mental health & addiction svcs, clergy, police, social workers, family members, concerned citizens and people in recovery. This diverse group of dedicated grass-root level volunteers ensure that a broad wealth of knowledge and experience are utilized in advising DMHAS and empowers people and families living with mental illness to advocate for themselves and others, and for improvement and efficiency in services. The Regional Boards are essential in safeguarding that services are delivered effectively and efficiently. As I said, I have worked for the RMHBs for many years and as many people in this room know that when working in the non-profit sector that the work is not done for the high salaries but for the heartfelt commitment to the cause that is dear to us. My brother was a person who lived with a severe mental health disability and unfortunately past away last year. I was his trustee, his caretaker and I loved him. I know from experience how the mental health system works and know that without the work of the RMHBs that people like my brother’s voice might not be heard. He gave other members a perspective on housing issues that they may have never known. So what will the state loose? Information collection and priorities development by a large diverse group of volunteer citizens. Development of community partnerships for solutions on young adult needs, transportation, wellness, and health equity. Evaluation and guidance on best practices, consensus building, and coordination of numerous projects. A self-advocating platform. The RMHBs help leverage $23M in federal funding. During periods of short funds when services are being reduced, oversight is more important to ensure that services be effectively and efficiently provided. Please do not end the hard work of these small RMHB staffs and the many volunteers who have made the system more efficient and effective. I know you are making difficult choices but we get feedback on a grassroots level with a 2% paid workforce (10 staff and 500 volunteers), and we help bring in 23 million dollars to the state so why would you consider eliminating a program that helps the people it serves so much and helps bring in millions of dollars to the state. Please preserve the Regional Mental Health Boards. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee On Governor’s proposed Midterm Budget Adjustments FY2017 February 18, 2016 Terri Pearsall Putnam, CT Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Terri Pearsall and I am a registered voter living in Putnam, CT. I am submitting testimony on the Governor’s proposed midterm budget adjustments. I am deeply concerned about and opposed to the deep and devastating proposed cuts to mental health and behavioral health services and supports. It seems that proposed cuts fall disproportionately on human and social services, and specifically heavy on mental health and substance use services. Mental health is part of overall health and a critical one at that. Thus, having previous cuts annualized and specific news ones instated will make it hard, or impossible for many, to get the appropriate and needed care early on but instead require higher cost services to be used, like emergency rooms, inpatient hospital stays or worse. Crucial to—be—annualized and newly proposed cuts include housing supports and services, young adult services, discharge and diversion services, home and community based services and employment opportunities. Equally concerning is the proposal to roll most services into one budget line item because it would be impossible for me and the other advocates, and the public at large, to understand what is being proposed, creating uncertainty and confusion. Let me bring to your attention that these cuts concerning the mentally ill will definitely affect the health and well being of many, many individuals in the state of CT. Your cuts are all about dollars and my concern is about a quality and healthy life for my son and many others suffering with mental illness. Without the current level of services and the same level of support he is receiving now, his mental health state will deteriorate rapidly. I’ve seen it happen too many times over the last 20 years. With these cuts I foresee his current mental health provider having to down size which will drastically reduce the services they can offer. Without his current level of services, he will undoubtedly fall through the cracks and end up hospitalized again and again. The old saying: ’an ounce of prevention is worth a pound cure’ is appropriate for this situation. His current services and support cost considerably less than a 30 day hospitalization and then another 30 or better days of rehab. Multiply that by the number of the mentally ill people living in the state of CT and you will be spending far more than the cuts you are planning on. Some of the affected might even end up in jail costing even more than a hospitalization. As a taxpayer in this state, I urge you to protect the health and wellbeing of our CT residents by supporting essential services, supports and housing. Thank you for your attention to my testimony and these crucial services, Terri Pearsall \\ . ‘§‘\- 5“ \\\§%\\}\ §§§ 7*: $‘“\\§'\'“‘ 30 Jordan Lane § ,\~§\\\\\‘ \\ \s‘s , . 39%;: x _ W§ 3M; ‘ \vw Wethersfield, CT 06109 (860) 523-8042 Testimony for Appropriations Committee HB5044 Subcommittee on Health Governor’s Proposed Budget Adjustments By Jacqueline Longo, Program Coordinator, Youth Leadership The Governor’s Partnership to Protect Connecticut’s Workforce DBA The Governor’s Prevention Partnership February 18, 2016 Good evening distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Jacqueline Longo and I am here as the Program Coordinator for Youth Leadership at The Governor’s Prevention Partnership. I am pleased and humbled to submit this testimony in support of resources for youth prevention. I am excited to be here today as a voice for Connecticut youth and for the prevention of underage drinking and the abuse of marijuana, prescription drugs, and other substances as these are growing issues in our state. Alcohol stills remains the top two substances of abuse among kids across the state. This spring and fall, I surveyed 125 youth in focus groups confirming what research shows us — perception of harm is low. Kids think that underage drinking and smoking marijuana is no big deal. These youth, when given the chance will open up, will talk and tell you exactly what is going on in their lives. They use drinking and smoking as a form of coping. One young man, a sophomore, told me that he can’t stay home during his free time because he will think too much about everything. So he goes to his friend’s house and he does whatever they are doing so he can be welcomed and escape his home life. One freshman girl from East Hartford told me that she felt proud of herself the first time she turned down drugs. However, she didn’t turn the drugs down the second time or any time after that. Unfortunately due to her environment, using has become a normal part of her life. The 2013 CT Youth Risk Behavior Survey shows us a sobering reality: in the last 30 days, 36.7% of youth have drank alcohol and 26% have smoked marijuana. Youth report to us that access to alcohol comes easily, with many getting it from friends or family members, even their own parents, in spite of strong social host laws in effect in our state. Another significant threat to our kids comes in the form of prescription drug misuse and heroin abuse. Research shows us that many people using heroin start with prescription drugs, moving on to heroin after they become addicted to prescription pain relievers. This month’s headlines from New London show us the stark reality of this problem — more than 20 overdoses, many of them young people. \ . §‘\' 5“ ,\\\Q~\\\\\\\\ $3: 5: §\\§§\$ 30 Jordan Lane §§x§ ““57 - C 7 “"355 W th r 1d CT 06109 (860) 523-8042 More than 11% of CT’s youth report using a prescription drug for something other than its intended purpose and according to the National Institute of Drug Abuse, 45% of youth believe it is ok and not harmful to take prescription drugs when they are not prescribed to themselves. Over 50% of those who have abused prescription drugs got them from a friend or relative and 22% got them from a doctor and misused the prescription. This year, The Govemor’s Prevention Partnership made great strides in supporting young people to make healthy decisions. We supported 25 Students Against Destructive Decisions Chapters reaching around 7,000 students around the state in working with middle and high schools to provide information about the effects of alcohol and substance abuse and the dangers of driving under the influence. With support from the Department of Transportation and DMHAS, we launched E3: Encourage, Empower, Engage, an alcohol and substance abuse prevention program run by kids for kids in 6 schools and communities reaching about 2,000 students. One sophomore aged girl told me during one focus group “I wish I had stricter parents like some of these other kids. Because at least they would know where I am and what I am doing. This would keep me out of trouble. Instead I can do just about anything and no one says anything to 77 me. The Partnership has launched a parents webinar series, open to all parents and youth providers to learn more about how to prevent underage drinking, prescription drug abuse, marijuana, and bullying as these issues are so prevalent in the lives of youth and parents are the first line of defense to prevent these behaviors from occurring. We provide tips and tools, along with the new findings so our Connecticut parents are up to date on all the latest information. Prevention is a cost effective tool for our state. Effective prevention strategies across the lifespan means less use of expensive treatment and intervention services later in life. SAMHSA estimates that for every $1 spent on prevention programs for addictions and mental illness, there is a $2 to $10 savings in health costs, criminal and juvenile justice costs, educational costs, and lost productivity. On behalf of Connecticut youth we thank you for your past support of our prevention work in all areas and ask you for your continued investment in prevention as underage drinking is still an issue and other drugs are making their way into the lives of youth. Thank you, Program Coordinator, Youth Leadership (860)523—8042, ext. 23 Y ‘ . iv:-.‘\<1:'s.‘x: ~ ~ ._ «N: ‘ ,7 rw‘ “A.“ m i {Lukas}: if: \:\:«,{I_ 4 “ ' ' T V 5mm (“0), “mm, 1... v m.- :,:\..~_-.: H \21 .tx-bx“ >111, «um-.- i): E; o (mm: ux Wethersfield, CT 06109 30 Jordan Lane \\\\\ \.\\\e‘ H\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\Ao .v.\\\A \\\ ¢\\\ \ A . \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ .. ‘ w\\ \\\\\\. \\\\\\\\\.\\\\\\u\\\\. \\ \\\\\\< (860) 523-8042 x Testimony of Willow Dealy Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Good evening, Senators and Representatives! My name is Willow Dealy. I live in Torrington & i get by on minimal Social Security Disability. I go every day to Prime Time House, certified by Clubhouse International. Without this community where i am accepted whether i'm having a depressed or anxious day, without this opportunity to contribute my services to others in need like myself, i would be home staring at the 4 walls, which would probably drive me to a suicide attempt. I've tried to be employed, over & over & over again, and i fall on my face every time, because of my mental illness. I need the meaningful volunteer work that Prime Time House gives me, because they understand that i'm often sick. I have Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, because all through my childhood my father threatened my life & abused me in every way. I have become afraid of people, so that i cannot even make friends. I have nightmares at night, and flashbacks & depression during the day. I need a place that is safe & supportive. It's hard to do the daily things to take care of myself. Therefore i also take recovery classes at Western Connecticut Mental Health Network in Torrington. Unfortunately, any field that involves people who cannot fend for themselves because of poverty or disability, that field attracts compassionate people who genuinely want to help, b_ut it also attracts people who crave power, even the little power they can exercise over the dispossessed. Good is done, but wrongs are also committed. In such a case we need legal help to bring justice to bad situations. The Connecticut Legal Rights Project helps people like me, with low funds and mental disabilities, and they are funded outside Western Connecticut Mental Health Network, so there is not a conflict of interest. When i went to CLRP, the paralegal person really understood my problems & wanted to help. She is also helping me create an advance directive, which is needed by people with mental disabilities because when we go into the hospital, this document states which treatments we know will help us & which treatments or facilities will make us worse. It speaks for us when we cannot speak for ourselves. Cutting funding to Prime Time House would devastate me, & i know my fellow members feel the same. What would we do? Cutting funding to CLRP would invite certain people to trample on us, because we have so much difficulty fighting for our own rights. We don't have transportation, either, to go to some other city. We have so little, & we struggle so much with even ordinary things. Programs such as these keep us out of the hospital & out of jail. Hospitalization is much more expensive than sane, productive involvement in our communities. If we were not in these programs, we would be out on the streets, getting drunk, getting high, committing crimes. This is destructive to ourselves, our communities, our families & loved ones, and our children, who need us to be our healthy selves. Further, this state made a commitment to closing the old mental hospitals, which were horrible, & using the money much more cost-effectively in the home communities of such vulnerable people like me. Programs in the community are vital to keeping us out of institutions. Please support the club- houses in this state that are certified by Clubhouse International, & please support the Connecticut Legal Rights Project! Testimony of Mary W. Winslow Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 My name is Mary W. Winslow, I represent Torrington, CT, and have lived there for 23 years. Torrington has a psycho—social clubhouse by the name of Prime Time House, of which I hope you are familiar. I have been a member of PTH for some 20 years and have advocated for people with mental health issues since then. I feel that I am in a position to tell you more about what the clubhouse has to offer. Prime Time House is a place where they assist you with employment, education, housing, socialization, and meaningful relationships. By meaningful relationships, I mean they offer a place to go. Therefore, I feel that I am in a position to present to you on this subject. Prime Time House services some 18 communities in the Northwest corner of CT, therefore some of you legislatures may be familiar with PTH. I have been a member of PTH for 20 years and I moved to Torrington from Fairfield County when I was struggling with my own mental illness. At PTH I found people who were struggling also. I attended regularly there for some years until I had sufficiently recovered to the point where I could find other avenues of support, namely friends, family, and the like. I was able with Prime Time’s help to find part—time employment and now I would like to be able to give back to those people who mean so much to me. My diagnosis is BiPolar, manic depression, which means that I suffer from mood swing disorders from devastating lows to extreme highs. Those lows caused me to consider taking my own life several times. It could have devastating where I would shop to excessive extremes. Had sexual encounters, which also could have been devastating. NOW, why am I here ....... I am here because we have been dealt a bad rap!!! Clubhouses, mental health facilities, even the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS), I am going to say this ...... YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES !!!! Ashamed that you have NOT supported these programs in a way to help people with mental illness so that they can conduct themselves and have rewarding lives. We have all seen the devastation that has occurred in Newtown and cities and towns all over the country. Rewarding lives, where they can work and support themselves so the state does not have to. You have closed all of the state hospitals some years ago promising to put the monies into the communities, but where did that money go? There is a non—profit organization called, Keep the Promise, which is in existence to have the state support people with mental illness. Perhaps you are familiar with it. There is another non—profit, which is equally as important, if not more so called, Connecticut Legal Rights Project (CLRP), with whom I have just completed my Advance Directive, my wishes for the rest of my life. It is a legal document. It has been notarized and several of the employees of Connecticut Legal Rights Project (CLRP), came to my home where we worked on preparing such a document. Something like this would have cost perhaps S1500, if I were to go to a private lawyer. Many of people with mental illness because they can not work are living on disability are unable to afford such services. I know this because |just had my Will done just after the death of my son, Christopher Hickey, who took his own life after a bout with mental illness. The results of all this could be devastating. Let me say that DMHAS which supports Prime Time and CLRP, has unfairly gone awry. CLRP is a necessary watchdog for people with mental illness. Whether in the community dealing with housing issues to in patient work at Connecticut Valley Hospital, where there are young adults who are committed involuntarily. Probably treated without the dignity that they deserve who need conservators to assist them. CLRP also appeals Social Security denials in order to get an individual the benefits that they may be entitled to in order to survive out in the community. In conclusion, I would like to say thank you for this opportunity to speak on behalf of people with mental illness and I hope that you will take my remarks seriously and to heart. Please know that I purposely made my remarks succinct so as to NOT to detain you any further. pm \\'\\\\\\\_:\ RY“ “S cqtmyst far community c M P page %/// // ,//,/// 3' Testimony before the Appropriations Committee on the Governor’s Proposed Budget Adjustments- HB 5044 DMHAS Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Robert Francis, Executive Director Regional Youth Adult Social Action Partnership (RYASAP) -Bridgeport, CT Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Robert Francis, the Executive Director of RYASAP, a non-profit organization serving the Greater Bridgeport area. I am opposed to the proposed cuts to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. Ifthe cut of$1.3 million and consolidation of the Regional Action Councils passes, it would have a harmful effect on the communities that my organization serves, harm the prevention infrastructure that has led Connecticut to be considered among the country as an innovative and model state, which will lead to a loss in future Federal dollars to address emerging issues associated with substances, namely opiate, underage alcohol, and marijuana use and addiction. I urge you to restore these harmful cuts to ensure crucial services are available to the residents of Connecticut. RYASAP was started as a prevention coalition, which won support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The success of the partnership and the foundation support inspired the SAM HSA ”Drug Free Community” grants. The model was then replicated state-wide to what we have known as the ”RAC”. DMHAS adopted the Regional Action Council concept to ensure that the Local Prevention Councils in all 169 communities received the technical assistance that they need to implement community strategies to prevention substance abuse and encourage positive wellness strategies. As a member of the Connecticut Prevention Network, all 13 Regional Action Councils throughout Connecticut: 0 Fund and Support Community Prevention efforts through Local Prevention Council Programing. 0 Provide Data and Technical Assistance to Municipalities and Community Groups with Surveys and Needs Assessments studies to track trends. 0 Assist Municipalities and community organizations in obtaining additional funding for substance abuse prevention efforts. 0 Report Prevention and Treatment gaps to DMHAS o Advocate for Legislative Action and Public Policy Development 0 Promote Evidence-based Substance Abuse and Mental Health Prevention Training. Although we have seen successes in prevention during these 25 years, there is still more work to be done: 0 With the steady increase of marijuana use among youth, more education and awareness programs have to be developed to counteract its low perceived risk among our most vulnerable residents. 0 Although we have seen a steady decrease of cigarette use (5% of our regions youth, S|S 2014), many youth are picking up e-cigarettes for the first time and at alarming rates (24%, S|S 2014). E-cigarettes are not regulated by the FDA and is marketed to youth through deceptively attractive advertising and fun flavors. More education and training is needed at the community-level to address this emerging trend. 0 As opiate addiction has become a prevalent issue facing the majority of CT communities, RACs have led efforts to reduce access to prescription drugs through the increase of available Prescription Drop Boxes at our Police Departments, advocating for legislative action for more first responders to carry the lifesaving drug, Narcan, and providing targeted education for prescribers, parents, and relators. 0 Studies show that the more assets that young people have, the less likely they are to engage in a wide range of high-risk behaviors and the more likely they are to thrive. Research shows that youth with the most assets are least likely to engage in four different patterns of high-risk behavior, including problem alcohol use, violence, illicit drug use, and sexual activity. When they have higher levels of assets, they are more likely to do well in school, be civically engaged, and value diversity. All Local Prevention Councils value the survey work provided through the RAC to best gauge their local prevention efforts. Please think carefully about the ripple effect the lack of funding to the RAC will have on building and sustaining prevention efforts throughout our communities. Robert M Francis, Executive Director, RYASAP 2470 Fairfield Avenue Bridgeport CT 06605 Connecticut Juvenile Justice .Ailicnce 3:. Parent Leadezl'z -. h.p Pairing insii tufie )3. v:::~ Public .AEhesC-snnecticut :12: Re a forstwe iusfice ~:=:~ Safe sleep: Smoke Nssminafpimho or ~::I~ Ybufhil‘lic r C—ELC: AL “: QUTH ADU “LT 33*: KZLAL {IRON “‘LARTMERRLLLP 2430 Fairfield Avenue, Bhdgepmrt, CT mam}: €34? - phone 17303-5 F-P EL: "? I fox: ECKASSS-Pi l8: Webs ite: W‘s“: w nit-asap Gag \\\\ \ \\.\\\\ \\ ;///Lz //// ’1 ”’4 / / // 4} W I// W/ /// /i/ I// //// //// ////.// ///://..,/ TESTIMONY OF Thomas J Steen, Executive Director, Capital Area Substance Abuse Council and Member of the Connecticut Prevention Network H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. Department of Mental Health & Addiction Services— Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillon, My name is ThomasJ Steen and I am the Regional Action Executive Director for the Capital Area Substance Abuse Council (CASAC) which serves the towns of Avon, Bloomfield, Canton, East Granby, Granby, Farmington, Hartford, Hartland, Newington, Rocky Hill, Simsbury, Suffield, West Hartford, Wethersfield, Windsor, and Windsor Locks. On behalf of the Connecticut Prevention Network (CPN), I am here today to strongly oppose the grave cuts to regional action councils that will decimate the current prevention network structure. IMPACT: The current proposal could equate to almost 80% cut which would mean most ofthe RACs would be unable to survive such a drastic cut including CASAC. WHAT WOULD BE LOST? 0 Community mobilization and grant collaboration 0 Substance abuse awareness, education and prevention initiatives such as opioid prevention activities 0 Behavioral health awareness and promoting the use of Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to treatment. 0 Mental health and suicide prevention awareness and training 0 Media advocacy, program development, legislative advocacy 0 Leverage funds for local initiatives and conduct fundraising activities to fill gaps 0 Community needs assessment with surveys, data collection and trainings 0 Develop a biannual epidemiologic report of substance use/abuse and recommendations for changes to the community environment Solution: The Connecticut Prevention Network requests the proposal being considered be rejected and maintain the current structure and funding level. We urge you to reject the severe budget cuts to regional action councils and keep in place the current CT Prevention Network structure. Thomas J. Steen, Executive Director Capital Area Substance Abuse Council 200 Day Hill Rd. Suite 120 Windsor, CT 06095 tsteen@casac.org www.casac.org nonsmmm \x\\\\\\-§ s Testimony of Ingrid Gillespie, President of the Connecticut Prevention Network and Executive Director of Communities 4 Action concerning funding for Regional Action Councils in H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. Department of Mental Health & Addiction Services- Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana, Representative Dillon and members of the Appropriations subcommittee, my name is Ingrid Gillespie and I am President of the Connecticut Prevention Network. I am offering testimony in strong opposition to the proposed cuts to the regional action councils. The Connecticut Prevention Network (CPN) is an association of the state’s 13 community partnership Regional Action Councils (RACs) that work to provide every community in the state with education, training, and advocacy for substance abuse prevention and related community concerns such as behavioral health, violence, gambling, drunk driving, prescription drugs and illicit opioid abuse and suicide. We are recognized as highly effective, community-based partnerships operating on average of a 1-2 paid staff team and many, many volunteers. The need for prevention continues to grow, especially in light of the opioid crisis affecting communities across Connecticut. Some of Connecticut Prevention Network’s opioid abuse prevention and harm reduction initiatives include: 0 Continuing to support the medication drop box program where unwanted medications are safely disposed of and not accessible for potential abuse. In 2010, CPN in partnership with the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection, developed and implemented the medication drop box pilot in 4 communities. Today, 55 communities have a medication drop box and the number is growing. In 2015, 23,541 pounds of unwanted medications were collected. 0 Providing medical grand round trainings on opioid addiction and use of brief screening tools. 0 Hosting 20+ community forums on opioid abuse and misuse. These forums have been catalysts for communities to take action at the local level and have informed state level initiatives. 0 Presentations on prescription medication abuse to over 3000 adults and students 0 Training more than 500 people in the use of narcan 0 Active partner on many collaboratives that address the opioid crisis across the continuum of prevention, intervention, treatment and recovery Connecticut Prevention Network also focuses on suicide prevention and mental health promotion. To date CPN members have trained close to 10,000 youth and adults in QPR (Question, Persuade,Refer), an evidence-based gatekeeper suicide prevention training. These initiatives are a very small representation of what we do. How we do our work includes: Building relationships with key community leaders to affect change Providing capacity building support to local prevention councils in over 150 towns. Effectively, mobilizing at the local and regional level. Because of our many relationships, we are able to quickly bring together people around an issue. An example of this is are the town hall and call-to-action forums addressing opioid abuse. Using data-driven assessment, planning, implementation and evaluation processes that address local conditions and align with federal indicators to measure progress. This has resulted in: o Producing needs assessment used to inform state application for federal funds and to identify and address priority areas at the regional and local levels. 0 Collectively procuring over $11 million in federal, private and local funding for use at the sub-regional and municipal level AND more than $850,000 in in-kind donations per year during the past 4 years. Together with the Regional Mental Health Boards, biannual regional assessment of mental health and addiction services. This report and participation in the DM HAS planning council are required in the state application for federal funding of $23 million. The efficacy of our network allows us to do our work more effectively. We have an internal communication and capacity building system that allows us to: O O O Actively participate as CPN on over 13 state-level task forces and committees More effectively use our collective expertise and resources within our regions Develop pilots that can be implemented state wide e.g. medication drop boxes and SBIRT (screening and early intervention initiatives) Successfully advocate for prevention legislation e.g. banning of sale of powdered alcohol Enhance local efforts to implement state policies. For example, ensuring local pharmacists and prescribers are aware of narcan and addiction training. This is related to Public Act 15-198 An Act Concerning Substance Abuse and Opioid Overdose Prevention. So why is our work important? Consider: 90 percent of Americans who meet the medical criteria for addiction started smoking, drinking, or using other drugs before age 18. (Source: National Center of Addiction and Substance Abuse- CASA) Connecticut spends 16.7% of its budget addressing the negative consequences of substance abuse and addiction. The costs are primarily in health care, judicial and education systems (Source: CASA) ”For every dollar invested in prevention, $10 is saved in societal costs.” (Source: Community Prevention Initiative: Power of Prevention) Therefore, if the budget by the proposed $736,000 this will decimate the CPN infrastructure and ultimately cost Connecticut an additional $7.36 million in long term costs. As a supporter of fiscal responsibility, CPN urges you to reconsider this budget cut and support a prevention infrastructure that is presently saving dollars and producing revenue. Thank you for your time and attention. Ingrid Gillespie Communities4Action 680 Main Street, Suite 204 Stamford, CT 06902 Ph: 203-588-0457 TESTIMONY TO APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE OF THE CONNECTICUT GENERAL ASSEMBLY RE: February 18 DMHAS Testimony —Regiona| Action Councils My name is Marcia McGinIey and I am the School Social Worker at Regional School District #11, Parish Hill/Middle High School in Chaplin. I have worked with Northeast Communities Against Substance Abuse (NECASA), the Regional Action Council in Northeast Connecticut for many years and would like to highlight how this organization has helped Parish Hill Middle/High School. It is first and foremost import to highlight that NECASA is the ONLY support that our school receives to provide drug/alcohol prevention initiatives within the school. This is detrimental to the youth of our communities; Chaplin, Hampton and Scotland. The tri-towns do not have a Youth Service Bureau or community agencies that provide support to children and families; therefore, the only prevention, education and positive engagement activities that students receive is through the school. The District Eleven Substance Abuse Prevention Council has been in existence for at least 16 years. This council exists due to the funding provided by NECASA. Without the funding and support that NECASA provides we would not be able to provide the following prevention, education and engagement activities to our students. *Education and prevention: The Second Step Curriculum is taught to all 7th and 8th grades students through the school year. The curriculum is an evidence based curriculum that teaches drug/alcohol prevention, social skills, anger management, etc. Without funding through NECASA this curriculum would not be able to be provided to the 7th and 8th graders at Parish Hill. *Positive Youth Engagement: Extra Curricular activities are funded through NECASA. This is an area that is very important in order to provide students with positive role models, engagement and new learning experiences. The school budget does not allow for extra- curricular activity funding. *Outreach/Education: NECASA has also been very active at our school through drug/alcohol trainings to our students, attending our annual Health Fairs and acting as community experts to students working on their Senior Capstone Project, a graduation requirement. In addition, NECASA has provided numerous trainings to area professionals. In a time with increased issues regarding drug use/abuse, especially in the northeast corner of Connecticut, funding for NECASA is detrimental in fighting the disease of drug addiction. Northeastern Connecticut benefits from having NECASA here to help us and to leverage funding for needed prevention services. | ask that the Appropriations Committee keep the Regional Action Councils as vibrant and appropriately funded in the FY 16-17 budget. Testimony Submitted to the Appropriations Committee: HE. No. SD44 AN ACT MAKENG ABJUSTMENT$ TC} $TATE EXPENDTTURES‘s FOR THE FTSQAL YEAR ENDENG JUNE 3K}, 291?" DMHAS Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing $uhmitted By: Wendy Bentivegna Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillon, my name is Wendy Bentivegna and i am the Grant Director at Positive Directions, the Center for Prevention and Counseling, in Westport, CT. i am here today to strongly oppose the grave cuts to Regional Action Councils that will deciniate the current prevention network structure. As the co-chair of my Local Prevention Council, the liairiield Cares Community Coalition {FC}, as well as the Director ofthe li'airfield County Alliance to Prevent Substance Abuse {FCAnPSi-i, a tri—community collaboration), l have been fortunate to work with and have the support of 3 RACs in Fairfield County. These coalitions are collaborative efforts among a wide variety of local youth serving organizations and community stakeholders who worlt to reduce underage drinking and substance use through prevention education, and to bring programs that foster positive youth development. The RAE Directors provide invaluable support in a variety of ways. They keep us informed of the latest drug trends; coordinate, facilitate and pay for the Search lnstitute's Youth Attitudes and Behaviors Survey and the reports that community groups use to inform their efforts, including the Eommuniiy ReadinessAssessment‘for Substance Use Prevention, the Priority Setting Regional Profiie and contrihute to the Priority Services Report for Men tai Health & Addiction Sen/ices; provide technical assistance and trainings for coalition and community members. Without the RAC's support, both financial and technical, the survey would not be conducted and we would lose valuable data. This data is critical to our prevention work as it identifies our youth’s strengths and areas of concern, allowing us to focus our efforts and to evaluate our programs and their effectiveness. Further, this data is a key component of the State grant process which helps fund much of our prevention work. For these reasons, as well as many others, l urge you to oppose the Governor’s proposed cuts to the combined block grant "Agency Operations” account at DhlllAS, specifically as they relate to the Regional Action Councils. Thank you for your time and consideration of these important services and supports. Wendy Bentivegna, Grant Director Positive Directions 420 Post Road West Westport, CT 06880 wbentivenga@positivedirectionsorg Testimony to Appropriations Committee of the Connecticut General Assembly RE: February 18 DHMAS testimony-Regional Action Councils My name is Doug Cutler and I am the Project Director the Putnam PRIDE (Partnership to Reduce the Influence of Drugs for Everyone), a Drug Free Communities Grant Program Recipient. I have worked with Northeast Communities Against Substance Abuse (NECASA), the Regional Action Council that services the Northeast Connecticut region, for many years and would like to highlight how this organization has helped the Town of Putnam and more particularly, our Substance Abuse Prevention Coalition, Putnam PRIDE. NECASA was instrumental in providing the impetus for the Town of Putnam to obtain our federally funded DFC Grant. Without the help of Bob Brex, and his knowledge of the federal grants available to communities like Putnam, we would have not been able to successfully obtain our current DFC funded coalition. In addition to our DFC Grant, NECASA also provided invaluable advice on helping Putnam to obtain two subsequent federal grants dealing with substance abuse prevention; a STOP ACT and Mentoring Grant. Over the past several years NECASA has provided Putnam PRIDE with many additional benefits. When PRIDE was tasked with providing the schools with a health fair, NECASA stepped in to assist with the planning and recruitment of health providers that were needed to complete the task, even assuming a key role as an instructor for one of the health fair stations. NECASA has provided many outside resources for PRIDE assisting us with trainers. In particular Bob Brex has brought State Police Drug Trends Trainings to Putnam. We continue to utilize this training once a year to provide our law enforcement, school personnel and community leaders with up to date information on the current drugs being used by youth and adults in the state. In the past few years our Coalition has had the opportunity to provide TIPs Training to alcohol servers in the community. NECASA has been a valuable resource in locating the most experienced trainers for these sessions. NECASA, acting as the Regional Action Council disperses funds for the Local Prevention Council and has provided many thousands of dollars for an after school program, our local SADD organization and other events. NECASA has also provided technical assistance with reports to both state and federal government agencies; helped with developing our School Survey Instrument and evaluation process. Northeastern Connecticut benefits from having NECASA here to help us and to leverage funding for needed prevention services. I ask that the Appropriations Committee keep the Regional Action Councils as vibrant and appropriately funded in the FY 16-17 budget. Testimony of Lynn A. Faria, Coordinator for Healthy Meriden 2020 Chairperson, Meriden Community Vision Vice Chair, South Central CT Substance Abuse Council Director of Community Relations, MidState Medical Center H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Department of Mental Health & Addiction Services — Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillon, my name is Lynn Faria, (I am a registered voter in the city of Meriden), Coordinator for Healthy Meriden 2020, Chair of Meriden Community Vision, Vice Chair of the South Central CT Substance Abuse Council, and Director of Community Relations for MidState Medical Center and I strongly oppose the significant cuts to regional action councils that will dismantle the current prevention network structure. The RACs partner with the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) to assess local needs and assist communities to address substance abuse issues with realistic programs and initiatives that are aimed to reduce the impact of drug abuse and provide resources for those persons who are already in need of treatment. The RACs are chartered by CT State statute and work with local and statewide partners as part of a unique prevention framework that is cited as a model by federal departments. As a founding member ofthe RAC for south central Connecticut, I, along with my collaborative community partners, have seen the huge need for these community prevention services. It is through these community collaborative relationships that we are able to realize collective impact. Our communities have recently participated in community health needs assessments that have supported the fact that Connecticut is faced with an overwhelming number of young people addicted to prescription drugs and heroin. A multi—faceted approach is needed that reaches from the State government to the individuals in each community. The RACs continue to work directly with DMHAS and our local communities to provide education on opiates, Naloxone, and treatment options. Importantly, the RACs have been able to move quickly to address local needs including medication drop boxes, opiate discussion forums and trainings for emergency responders. In this region of the state, SCCSAC has been addressing opiate issues since collaborating with a Brown University study in 2011 that pinpointed prescription drug abuse in central CT. In 2015 alone SCCSAC provided education on opiates to 500 people as well as mental health and suicide awareness to more than 1000 persons. SCCSAC has also worked directly with faith communities throughout the state to educate congregations on substance abuse, problem gambling, changes in marijuana use and laws, mental health awareness and suicide prevention. Through the area community health improvement plan, we have been able to support these varied initiatives. I urge the Legislature to reject the severe budget cuts to RACs that would remove the services to local communities at this critical time. Thank you for the opportunity to address your subcommittee. Please accept the written testimony attached Testimony of Marlene F McGann, MSCJ Executive Director of South Central CT Substance Abuse Council Connecticut Prevention Network H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Department of Mental Health & Addiction Services — Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillion, my name in Marlene F McGann and I am the Executive Director of the South Central CT Substance Abuse Council (SCCSAC), a regional action council serving the nine towns from Meriden to Madison. I strongly oppose the significant cuts to regional action councils that will dismantle the current prevention network structure. The RACs partner with the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) to assess local needs and assist communities to address substance abuse issues with realistic programs and initiatives that are aimed to reduce the impact of drugs abuse and provide resources for those persons who are already in need of treatment. The RACs are chartered by CT State statute and work with local and statewide partners as part of a unique prevention framework that is cited as a model by federal departments. Connecticut is faced with an overwhelming number of young people addicted to prescription drugs and heroin. The opiate overdose deaths in our state have reached unprecedented levels and a multi-faceted approach is needed that reaches from the State government to the individuals in each community. The RACs continue to work directly with DMHAS and our local communities to provide education on opiates, Naloxone, and treatment options. Importantly the RACs have been able to move quickly to address local needs including medication drop boxes, opiate discussion forums and trainings for emergency responders. In this region of the state, SCCSAC has been addressing opiate issues since collaborating with a Brown University study in 2011 that pinpointed prescription drug abuse in central CT. In 2015 alone SCCSAC provided education on opiates to 500 people as well as mental health and suicide awareness to more than 1000 persons. SCCSAC has also worked directly with faith communities throughout the state to educate congregations on substance abuse, problem gambling, changes in marijuana use and laws, mental health awareness and suicide prevention. With tightened budgets, school systems and direct service providers have turned to the RACs to provide trainings for staff members on emerging issues and to act as a neutral convener promoting collaborative efforts in the region. The CT Prevention Network of Regional Action Councils urges the Legislature to reject the severe budget cuts to RACs that would remove the services to local communities at this critical time. Marlene F. McGann, MSCJ Executive Director South Central CT Substance Abuse Council (formerly MAWSAC) - serving the communities of Branford, East Haven, Guilford, Hamden, North Branford, North Haven, Madison, Meriden, Wallingford 5 Brookside Drive, Wallingford, CT 06492 203-303-3391 mawsac@aol.com www.sccsac.org "Health is not an individual achievement, but a community responsibility" Dear Senators and Representatives —— I have had the privilege of sitting on the board of directors for the South Central CT. Substance Abuse Council for several years. Over the last few years we have seen an increase in budget cutting for the programs which this Council offers to our communities. This year it is appalling to see the radical cuts that the Governor is planning on making to the RACS and I appeal to each of you to reject the budget as set forth. Each day the news programs begin with the number of deaths which Connecticut has had since January lst, 2016, due to drug overdoses. On Sunday, a thirty—six year old man from Wallingford died as a result of an overdose —— he was the son of very dear friends so, it is now effecting me and my family. The deaths due to opiate overdoses have reached heightened levels and we need to address this. The programs which the SCCSAC hosts are all well attended, whether they are for training purposes for emergency responders, mental health providers or school systems We need to keep these programs alive to provide the necessary training to these service providers and to turn the addiction problem in our state around. I urge you all to dig down deep and reject the budget cuts to the RACS and pray that you personally will not be faced with a death in your family or a loved one's family due to the lack of services offered within our communities. Sincerely, Judi Gallagher Testimony of Rayallen Bergman, B.S. H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. Department of Mental Health & Addiction Services- Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillon, my name is Rayallen Bergman and I am the Program Coordinator at Southeastern Regional Action Council and a resident of Putnam, CT. I strongly oppose the significant cuts to Regional Action Councils that will devastate the current network that has been developed between prevention and treatment providers, and has led to a connectedness throughout our region in Southeastern Connecticut. The current ”heroin and opioid epidemic” has created such a draw in the numerous media outlets across the state. However, we tend to forget about the current state of prevention and treatment that has been created through the development of Regional Action Councils in Connecticut. While Connecticut is a national leader in prevention, 25+ years of diligence and dedication (continuously overlooked) were put in by Regional Action Councils (RAC), fortifying this connected network. Without the existence of these Regional Action Councils, this network would not have been forged. There are no other entities in Connecticut that handle this formidable task. This network has changed the dynamic and system of care throughout the region of Eastern Connecticut and I can speak to this personally. Mental health and substance abuse have been shared experiences in many aspects of my life and other members throughout the community; affecting family, friends and neighbors while growing up in Eastern CT. The change in response to these issues is so evident, such as the access to care, education of providers and the connections between agencies would not have existed without these Regional Action Councils. The ability to contact anyone of these agencies and trust that they have the resource or will be able to connect you directly with the correct resource, is a shared relief among many residents in this region. There has been a call for help around this opioid and heroine epidemic, but the response by Southeastern Regional Action Council in the community, aside from my personal work, has created a shared network of educated responders able to manage this issue. RAC’s have leveraged the funding for local coalitions to develop educational forums with experienced professionals, as well as the disbursement of information on where to go and what to do. Alongside education, a few communities have communicated stories where SERAC’s Narcan disbursement to Police Departments and trained community members, have literally saved lives. The ability to survey the youth in the region to gauge the issue from Middle School and up, from nearly 20,000 students, gives us a clear scope on the issue present and trends developing in youth. For example, prescription drug prevention has been in place for numerous years, since our network is well aware of the connection between prescription opiates and opium based drugs (i.e. heroin, fentanyl). However, the budgets to support this work of education around substance abuse prevention has continuously been sacrificed in the past, even after great strides. I am sure these points are well-known among Legislators but as community members, we pride ourselves on the connectedness, created within this network. A question that residents ask, is why dismantle this network’s core agency, when the RACs are the most important piece in response to this epidemic and trends that arise? Aside from the epidemic, there are too many initiatives to account for, that have placed CT as a leader in the field of prevention. We cannot overlook the impact these agencies have on our state, let alone our region, when the evidence is clear. I request rethinking the already incredibly small amount of infrastructure and funding that exists for prevention, versus the devastation that will occur from the current cuts proposed. The prevention funding cuts outlined in Governor Malloy’s proposed budget would reduce the overall budget of the RACs by 80%. These cuts would decimate the RAC funding and would significantly impact the resources, technical assistance and services they provide to our communities. We know, for every $2 spent in prevention, society saves $10 in intervention and treatment costs. We need to reject ANY cut to Prevention and propose INCREASED sustainable funding sources so that we can deal with these issue, without the handcuffs of funding to local communities. Sincerely, Rayallen Bergman B.S. Testimony of Rayallen Bergman, B.S. H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. Department of Mental Health & Addiction Services- Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillon, my name is Rayallen Bergman and I am the Program Coordinator at Southeastern Regional Action Council and a resident of Putnam, CT. I strongly oppose the significant cuts to Regional Action Councils that will devastate the current network that has been developed between prevention and treatment providers, and has led to a connectedness throughout our region in Southeastern Connecticut. The current ”heroin and opioid epidemic” has created such a draw in the numerous media outlets across the state. However, we tend to forget about the current state of prevention and treatment that has been created through the development of Regional Action Councils in Connecticut. While Connecticut is a national leader in prevention, 25+ years of diligence and dedication (continuously overlooked) were put in by Regional Action Councils (RAC), fortifying this connected network. Without the existence of these Regional Action Councils, this network would not have been forged. There are no other entities in Connecticut that handle this formidable task. This network has changed the dynamic and system of care throughout the region of Eastern Connecticut and I can speak to this personally. Mental health and substance abuse have been shared experiences in many aspects of my life and other members throughout the community; affecting family, friends and neighbors while growing up in Eastern CT. The change in response to these issues is so evident, such as the access to care, education of providers and the connections between agencies would not have existed without these Regional Action Councils. The ability to contact anyone of these agencies and trust that they have the resource or will be able to connect you directly with the correct resource, is a shared relief among many residents in this region. There has been a call for help around this opioid and heroine epidemic, but the response by Southeastern Regional Action Council in the community, aside from my personal work, has created a shared network of educated responders able to manage this issue. RAC’s have leveraged the funding for local coalitions to develop educational forums with experienced professionals, as well as the disbursement of information on where to go and what to do. Alongside education, a few communities have communicated stories where SERAC’s Narcan disbursement to Police Departments and trained community members, have literally saved lives. The ability to survey the youth in the region to gauge the issue from Middle School and up, from nearly 20,000 students, gives us a clear scope on the issue present and trends developing in youth. For example, prescription drug prevention has been in place for numerous years, since our network is well aware of the connection between prescription opiates and opium based drugs (i.e. heroin, fentanyl). However, the budgets to support this work of education around substance abuse prevention has continuously been sacrificed in the past, even after great strides. I am sure these points are well-known among Legislators but as community members, we pride ourselves on the connectedness, created within this network. A question that residents ask, is why dismantle this network’s core agency, when the RACs are the most important piece in response to this epidemic and trends that arise? Aside from the epidemic, there are too many initiatives to account for, that have placed CT as a leader in the field of prevention. We cannot overlook the impact these agencies have on our state, let alone our region, when the evidence is clear. I request rethinking the already incredibly small amount of infrastructure and funding that exists for prevention, versus the devastation that will occur from the current cuts proposed. The prevention funding cuts outlined in Governor Malloy’s proposed budget would reduce the overall budget of the RACs by 80%. These cuts would decimate the RAC funding and would significantly impact the resources, technical assistance and services they provide to our communities. We know, for every $2 spent in prevention, society saves $10 in intervention and treatment costs. We need to reject ANY cut to Prevention and propose INCREASED sustainable funding sources so that we can deal with these issue, without the handcuffs of funding to local communities. Sincerely, Rayallen Bergman B.S. To Appropriations Committee Members: As the Commissioner of Social Services for the Town of Greenwich, I am writing to the Committee to ask that you seriously reconsider the proposed budget cuts to Regional Mental Health Boards and RACs. These agencies have once again been included as line item cuts in the Governor's budget. I am certainly not questioning that there is a serious problem with the state budget and without raising taxes requires significant cuts in state services. Unfortunately, these cuts will have dramatic consequences for many of the vulnerable state residents relying upon the services provided by state departments such as DMHAS. So if there has to be cuts they need to be determined in as intelligent and sensitive way as possible. Who better to provide that kind of objective feedback and advice than the Regional Mental Health Boards and RACs? These advisory agencies were set up to provide the state with planning, evaluation and education services that assist in establishing quality behavioral health programs and services for each region. They evaluate state funded programs and provide invaluable information to the state on the operation and effectiveness of these programs' services. The Regional Mental Health Boards and RACs mission is to ensure that programs are meeting the needs of behavioral health clients and demand accountability from state operated and funded programs. They are your "eyes and ears" in the community and without them will leave a void that will significantly diminish services to behavioral health clients. Taking out the Regional Mental Health Boards and RACS seems like an easy decision but destroys one of the most important features of a robust and responsive government; citizen advisory boards that provide an important and integral role in grass—roots participation and keeping state funded services accountable. I once again respectfully ask that you reconsider the cuts that would virtually close the Regional Mental Health Boards and RACs. Sincerely, Alan D. Barry, Ph.D. Commissioner, Department of Social Services Town of Greenwich To Appropriations Committee Members: As the Commissioner of Social Services for the Town of Greenwich, I am writing to the Committee to ask that you seriously reconsider the proposed budget cuts to Regional Mental Health Boards and RACs. These agencies have once again been included as line item cuts in the Governor's budget. I am certainly not questioning that there is a serious problem with the state budget and without raising taxes requires significant cuts in state services. Unfortunately, these cuts will have dramatic consequences for many of the vulnerable state residents relying upon the services provided by state departments such as DMHAS. So if there has to be cuts they need to be determined in as intelligent and sensitive way as possible. Who better to provide that kind of objective feedback and advice than the Regional Mental Health Boards and RACs? These advisory agencies were set up to provide the state with planning, evaluation and education services that assist in establishing quality behavioral health programs and services for each region. They evaluate state funded programs and provide invaluable information to the state on the operation and effectiveness of these programs' services. The Regional Mental Health Boards and RACs mission is to ensure that programs are meeting the needs of behavioral health clients and demand accountability from state operated and funded programs. They are your "eyes and ears" in the community and without them will leave a void that will significantly diminish services to behavioral health clients. Taking out the Regional Mental Health Boards and RACS seems like an easy decision but destroys one of the most important features of a robust and responsive government; citizen advisory boards that provide an important and integral role in grass—roots participation and keeping state funded services accountable. I once again respectfully ask that you reconsider the cuts that would virtually close the Regional Mental Health Boards and RACs. Sincerely, Alan D. Barry, Ph.D. Commissioner, Department of Social Services Town of Greenwich Testimony of Sheryl Sprague, Certified Prevention Specialist 13 Ledgewood Drive Glastonbury, CT 06033 H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Department of Mental Health & Addiction Services — Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillion, my name in Sheryl Sprague and I serve as a Board of Director member for two RACs (Regional Action Councils). I am the Vice President of ERASE (East of the River Action for Substance Abuse Elimination) and a board member of the South Central CT Substance Abuse Council (SCCSAC). As a person who has worked for 19 years in Connecticut in the field of substance abuse prevention, I strongly oppose the significant cuts to regional action councils that will dismantle the current prevention network structure. The RACs partner with the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) to assess local needs and assist communities to address substance abuse issues with community specific programs and initiatives that are aimed to reduce the impact of drugs abuse and provide local resources for individuals who are already in need oftreatment. Local Prevention Councils depend on that supportive, collaborative relationship of the RACs. The data collected by RACS that is in—turn provided to local prevention councils has supported many Federal Drug Free Communities grant applications in our state, resulting in millions of dollars of revenue for substance abuse prevention. Connecticut is faced with an overwhelming number of young people addicted to prescription drugs and heroin. The opiate overdose deaths in our state have reached unprecedented levels and a multi—faceted approach is needed that reaches from the State government to the individuals in each community. The RACs continue to work directly with DMHAS and our local communities to provide education on opiates, Naloxone, and treatment options. Importantly the RACs have been able to move quickly to address local needs including medication drop boxes, opiate discussion forums and trainings for emergency responders. In this region of the state, SCCSAC has been addressing opiate issues since collaborating with a Brown University study in 2011 that pinpointed prescription drug abuse in central CT. In 2015 alone SCCSAC provided education on opiates to 500 people as well as mental health and suicide awareness to more than 1000 persons. SCCSAC and ERASE have also worked directly with communities throughout the state to educate community members on substance abuse, problem gambling, changes in marijuana use and laws, mental health awareness and suicide prevention. As a Board of Director member ofthese Regional Action Councils I urge the Legislature to reject the severe budget cuts to RACs that would remove the services to local communities at this critical time. Testimony of Angela Rae Duhaime, M.A. H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. Department of Mental Health & Addiction Services- Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillon, my name is Angela Duhaime and I am the Community Educator at Southeastern Regional Action Council and a resident of Norwich, CT. I strongly oppose the grave cuts to regional action councils that will decimate the current prevention network structure. As I sat at a roundtable last evening at Lawrence & Memorial Hospital, with Congressman Courtney, Senator Blumenthal, and Director Botticelli (ONDCP) alongside with numerous concerned citizens to discuss the “heroin and opioid epidemic” my mind raced with thoughts, answers, and solutions. However, I regretfully must report that the call for prevention was yet again unheard. If you have seen the news article in The Day, a symbolic picture even shows me with a raised hand politely waiting my turn. I was there by invitation on behalf of SERAC (Southeastern Regional Action Council) in my role as a Community Educator. I know very well that many of you are familiar with the work of the Regional Action Councils especially SERAC. I want to thank you for your continued support over the years and unfortunately here I am asking for it yet again. So as Ipatiently waited my turn to be heard and never was, I am sending you my perspective of the “drug epidemic” that has been waging on for decades. My heart does more than just go out to those who have lost a loved one to drug addiction and suicide. It is one of the most painful tragedies to witness and to have as part of your life story. I empathize with your pain because Ihave personally experienced this tragedy more than I can count on two hands and professionally I am called to action every single day. It is truly one of the most painful experiences frankly because we know it IS preventable. At the core of law enforcement, education, healthcare, treatment, friends and family we believe “something” or “someone” can change this. . . .and you are absolutely correct. While we may never save every single life as a measurable outcome, countless lives are saved and changed every single day in Southeastern CT. WE can change this. Prevention is a science based multi—tiered framework that creates measurable outcomes. The current rates of youth substance abuse in our region right now are showing lower than state and national rates. Why? Do you know how many communities in our region are actively implementing prevention strategies? Thirteen out of the 20 towns in the southeastern region. That is more than half of the region. Do you know how many youth were surveyed in the school systems in this region between 2014—2015? The answer is 6,856. So I am here to put this in perspective for you. There is hope! A tremendous amount of hope. First let us be honest and start calling this what it truly is. . . A Mental Health and Substance Abuse Crisis. The regional action councils are responding to this crisis. SERAC trains hundreds of individuals across all sectors EVERY year in mental health first aid, suicide prevention, problem gambling awareness, and substance abuse prevention. We have even expanded to provide multi—tiered prevention and intervention through a voluntary Trauma Response Team, distribution and training for 200 NARCAN kits, and the expansion of safe disposal sites (which there are 10 alone in our region!). I could go on for pages with numbers and statistics but we are not waiting for a call to action. We heard it a long time ago. We are in action. The trouble with the battle cry for prevention to be heard is that our first point will continue to remain that this is everyone’s crisis. It does n_ot belong to any single sector to solve. The answer is different across all our communities; the science is the same. The cry for prevention is in fact calling every single person to act. We can no longer accept countless missed opportunities to save lives. It is the responsibility of every citizen to do something about the mental health and substance abuse crisis in CT and across America. So Iinvite you to join us and expand our efforts if you are ready to act. It is deplorable that any proposal sitting on a desk in Hartford includes any cut to the already incredibly small amount of infrastructure and funding that exists for prevention. The prevention funding cuts outlined in Governor Malloy’s proposed budget would reduce the overall budget of the RACs by 80%. These cuts would decimate the RAC funding and would significantly impact the resources, technical assistance and services they provide to our communities. We know, for every $2 spent in prevention, society saves $10 in intervention and treatment costs. NO other agency is doing the prevention work that the RACs do. These cuts would prevent SERAC and other RACs from leveraging other funding sources into our region to address these issues. It would eliminate the ability to support and enhance local prevention initiatives. It would also eliminate local efforts to combat and prevent suicide, opioid overdoses, prescription drug misuse and youth substance use around the state. Prevention should longer sit patiently at the roundtable with their hand raised awaiting their turn to speak. This has been going on far too long. We need to reject ANY cut to prevention and propose INCREASED sustainable funding sources so that we can all get back to work and resolve the true crisis at hand. Sincerely, Angela Rae Duhaime, M.A. §\\\‘““““\\\ \\\\\“ \\\“' \\\\\““\ \x\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ \.\\\\\\\ \ \ \_ 5,? We?“ W®®N g" ‘3' teem? » ‘_ t \\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ ........ 1 ........ WW atttifiiii X \ . > ...... ........ W \\\\\\\\\\\\ $9; 5 III/fl Qatari Barrett, RN fiireotoi’, Communityfiutteech & Perish Nursing Griffin Hoepitei 5 KB. tie. 5-344 AN ACT MAWNG ABJUSTMENTS TS SifiiE EXPENDBTURES FQR THE FESSAL YEAR ENfliNG JUNEai), EMF. Department of Manta! Heaiiii ct Addieiion SeriGES~ Regional Action Councii Funding February 1’8; 20? 5 Aopmnrieiione Subcommiiiee on Heeiz‘it Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Waiter, Senetorfierreta me and Representatiiie Diiian, my neme is Deon Sartett and i am the Dinettes“ ni Communiw Cutreech 3:, Parish Nursing at Griffin Hospit’ai. i am here today to strongly oppose the grave cuts to regionai action coun'ciistnat wiii decimete the current prevention network structure. The Veiiey Parish Nurses are urging you to restore the proposed funding cuts to the Regienei Action Councii’s. Biissai'e’e Greater Veiie‘y Suestance Abuse Action Councii {GVSAACE emit-ides vital erevention services to our communities. They are very active and engaged in many initiatives that work to improve the heheviorei heaith- Systems and prevent substance abuse, suicide and. improve mentei weiiness. For the past 25 years, they have cenaiucted community and sche‘oi assessments. that outiine critieai behaviorai heeith issues anti went in coiieboration to address identified issues. GVSAAiZ provides \rainahie resources such as nurse anti medicai staff trainings, studentend parent programs, teehnicei assistance, curricuium deveinnment, and capacity boiieing, They have been in the forefront at the opioid epidemic since 201%. Last year they iieitfii two successfui iorumswitn en oeioiti werkgroup- being-formeo‘ as the eutcome. This workgreup has» worked inane inhanoi with the community to advocate and enhance prevention messages to help end the epidemie. in adoitiony the ”Drug Trent-:55”, “Mentei Heeith First Aid Trainings“, anti ”Suicide Prevention Trainings” have enhanced the skiiis‘oi my nerigii nurses to better serve our communities. inxado‘ition, they have heioi sub~regionei pienning meetings that identified gaps in the substance abuse and mentai heaith services. in our region. These initiatives: heii} our communities eien and aodiess gene and barriers in sewiees.» We recognize that this budget session is ditfimit but the smeii amount at fuming the fiegienai Action Councii’s reeeivesimneets the entire continuum of eerie from behaviorai heeith services inciuding orevention, treatment, and recovery; having an overaii impact on people in need. We know that prevention and eariy interv‘ention saves iives. i ask you to. remember that the smeii investment we make in prevention, we save mum more in heaithcare costs. if we did not have the Greater Vaiiey Suhstence Abuse Action Council in our community, we wouid not he inior‘meefi or equipped to address the current opioid epidemic. They are cruciai in tinting together key community eeitnere to aderess substance abuse and behaviorei heeitn issues. Reseectiuiiy Sititm’iittedr Dmfimnetf Been Barrett, RN , Skeeter, Community Outreach ,i Veiiev’ Perish Norse Program Testimony of Rayallen Bergman, B.S. H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. Department of Mental Health & Addiction Services- Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillon, my name is Rayallen Bergman and I am the Program Coordinator at Southeastern Regional Action Council and a resident of Putnam, CT. I strongly oppose the significant cuts to Regional Action Councils that will devastate the current network that has been developed between prevention and treatment providers, and has led to a connectedness throughout our region in Southeastern Connecticut. The current ”heroin and opioid epidemic” has created such a draw in the numerous media outlets across the state. However, we tend to forget about the current state of prevention and treatment that has been created through the development of Regional Action Councils in Connecticut. While Connecticut is a national leader in prevention, 25+ years of diligence and dedication (continuously overlooked0, were put in by Regional Action Councils (RAC), fortifying this connected network. Without the existence of these Regional Action Councils, this network would not have been forged. There are no other entities in Connecticut that handle this formidable task. This network has changed the dynamic and system of care throughout the region of Eastern Connecticut and I can speak to this personally. Mental health and substance abuse have been shared experiences in many aspects of my life and other members throughout the community; affecting family, friends and neighbors while growing up in Eastern CT. The change in response to these issues is so evident, such as the access to care, education of providers and the connections between agencies would not have existed without these Regional Action Councils. The ability to contact anyone of these agencies and trust that they have the resource or will be able to connect you directly with the correct resource, is a shared relief among many residents in this region. There has been a call for help around this opioid and heroine epidemic, but the response by Southeastern Regional Action Council in the community, aside from my personal work, has created a shared network of educated responders able to manage this issue. RAC’s have leveraged the funding for local coalitions to develop educational forums with experienced professionals, as well as the disbursement of information on where to go and what to do. Alongside education, a few communities have communicated stories where SERAC’s Narcan disbursement to Police Departments and trained community members, have literally saved lives. The ability to survey the youth in the region to gauge the issue from Middle School and up, from nearly 20,000 students, gives us a clear scope on the issue present and trends developing in youth. For example, prescription drug prevention has been in place for numerous years, since our network is well aware of the connection between prescription opiates and opium based drugs (i.e. heroine, fentanyl). However, the budgets to support this work of education around substance abuse prevention has continuously been sacrificed in the past, even after great strides. I am sure these points are well-known among Legislators but as community members, we pride ourselves on the connectedness, created within this network. A question that residents ask, is why dismantle this network’s core agency, when the RACs are the most important piece in response to this epidemic and tredns that arise? Aside from the epidemic, there are too many initiatives to account for, that have placed CT as a leader in the field of prevention. We cannot overlook the impact these agencies have on our state, let alone our region, when the evidence is clear. I request rethinking the already incredibly small amount of infrastructure and funding that exists for prevention, versus the devastation that will occur from the current cuts proposed. The prevention funding cuts outlined in Governor Malloy’s proposed budget would reduce the overall budget of the RACs by 80%. These cuts would decimate the RAC funding and would significantly impact the resources, technical assistance and services they provide to our communities. We know, for every $2 spent in prevention, society saves $10 in intervention and treatment costs. We need to reject ANY cut to Prevention and propose INCREASED sustainable funding sources so that we can deal with these issue, without the handcuffs of funding to local communities. Sincerely, Rayallen Bergman B.S. Testimony of Jennifer L. DeWitt Executive Director, Central Naugatuck Valley Regional Action Council Connecticut Prevention Network H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. Department of Mental Health & Addiction Sen/ices- Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillon, my name is Jennifer DeWitt, and I am the Executive Director at the Central Naugatuck Valley Regional Action Council (CNVRAC), one of 13 Regional Action Councils across the state who together, form the Connecticut Prevention Network, also known as CPN. I am here today to strongly oppose the grave cuts to regional action councils that will decimate the current prevention network infrastructure. This measure would equate to an almost 80% cut in Connecticut’s sub stance abuse prevention infrastructure, decimating mine, and other RACs across the state, which would cease to exist if this funding cut goes through. The impact that this cut would have to our current bare-bones prevention infrastructure would be insurmountable. On the one hand, our state is working hard to effect change and to STOP the opioid problem that has occurred here in CT as well as the rest of the nation. Your regional action councils and our tireless network of local prevention councils and other volunteer community partners are working to educate the public, to increase access to care, to curb prescription drug abuse, to advocate legislatively, to work with law enforcement, school districts, chief elected officials, health care providers, consumers, and any and every one affected by this problem and having an impact on its change. Then on the other hand, this cut would essentially pull the carpet out from under these efforts. There is a continuum of care when it comes to substance abuse and mental illness. That continuum is PREVENTION, intervention, treatment, and recovery. Please note, that in this continuum, prevention is the FIRST line of defense against the potentially life threatening effects of a substance use disorder and serious mental health conditions. And please allow me to share for a moment, the ownership that is taken when I speak of “my” regional action council. I have been the Director of the CNVRAC for more than 12 years, and prior to this I spent a decade working in direct service as a clinician for a local treatment provider. What I learned over the course of that decade and which led me to my Fri-warning substance abuse, ndsfictimes and writer Eatsmigfiiii Siefrawiws‘ 2Ch;se RiverRoad \‘v’aterbury, CT Qifi’flefii Rhflfifiifi‘i’fiméfim Faxflhflwebffii www.envrac.erg current role in prevention, is that if I wanted to st_op addicted, hurting, traumatized individuals and families from walking through my door in the first place, I had to get to the root causes of their pain and suffering and prevent these things from occurring in the first place. Yes, Itake ownership of my Regional Action Council, because I have seen first-hand over the past 12 years, how community collaboration, volunteerism, and environmental prevention strategies actually do affect change. I work closely with each of the 12 towns that I serve as their RAC Director, providing education, training, technical assistance, support with local-level data collection, implementation of evidence- based prevention practice, and links to regional, state, and federal prevention campaigns and efforts that some of my communities might not otherwise have awareness of or access to, given, how very little funding and attention already goes towards prevention efforts. Together, and in just our service area alone, we have - presented and discussed the DMHAS Video Back from the Brink: The Need for Narcan, to Local Prevention Councils, CNVRAC Steering Committee, CNVRAC Prevention Committee, and other partners - disseminated 1000 Opioid Overdose Prevention Information Wallet Cards across CNVRAC - performed legislative advocacy and had personal communication with Senators Blumenthal, Esty, Markley, Kane, Hartley, and Representatives Butler, Conroy, Nouj aim, and Minor regarding the Comprehensive Addiction & Recovery Act and each of its steps: treatment alternatives, naloxone training, SBIRT (Screening for Brief Intervention & Referral for Treatment), medication-assisted treatment, and improved Prescription Monitoring Program tracking - performed outreach to pharmacies in the CNVRAC service area to identify those carrying Narcan, to raise awareness about training to prescribe, and to place Medication Drop Box Site placards at pharmacy pick-up windows - been working with school officials in one district to develop a comprehensive plan to present to chief elected officials to address opioid overdose prevention at the school & community level - been working to develop a plan and seek funding to provide naloxone training in collaboration with NWRMHB at local health departments and to provide naloxone kits to training participants - disseminated Opioid Detox Facilities list to CNVRAC e-mail recipients (LPCs, community partners, other committees) - disseminated list of pharmacies currently carrying Narcan to all CNVRAC e-mail recipients - delivered 17 Mental Health First Aid trainings, serving approximately 500 participants, Training includes educational unit on substance use disorders including opioid use and overdose response plan In closing, none of the grassroots work that is currently done on the local level would happen without the support and structure of the entire Connecticut Prevention Network. These 13 agencies are Connecticut’s first line of defense, and perhaps the most critical structure to maintain if you plan to include prevention as part of your ongoing care of CT citizens affected by substance abuse and addiction. We urge you to reject the severe budget cuts to regional action councils and to keep intact the current CT Prevention Network structure. WATERBURY PUBLIC SCHOOLS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION j'oszpti (R, German —Snpemisor (203) 57443051 email: iaorman®waterbnnnkl2.ct.us Health. Moves. Minds. Testimony for Public Hearing - Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 IN SUPPORT OF REGIONAL A CTION COUNCILS My name is Joe German. I am the Supervisor of Health and Physical Education for the Waterbury Public Schools and I represent the Mayor’s Task Force Against Substance Abuse in the City of Waterbury. I urge you to OPPOSE the currently proposed 79% budget reduction to regional action councils (RACs), and encourage full restoration of current RAC funding moving forward. In its present form, the proposed effectively defunds all thirteen regional action councils from $1.1 million to slightly less than $230,000. it would surely decimate the current system of regional action councils, and severely impact the volunteer “boots on the groun ” in our communities that rely so heavily upon them to deliver meaningful prevention services. As you are aware, the Connecticut Prevention Network (CPN) is comprised of the state’s 13 community partnership Regional Action Councils (RACS) that work to provide every community in the state with education, training, and advocacy for substance abuse prevention and related community concerns such as behavioral health, violence, gambling, drunk driving, prescription drugs, opioid addiction and suicide. In Waterbury alone, our regional action council, the Central Naugatuck Valley Regional Action Council (CNVRAC), has served as an integral and irreplaceable partner in the development of the following initiatives: - Promotion & coordination of comprehensive youth risk behavior and resiliency surveys conducted with all students in grades 6—12 throughout Waterbury Public Schools 0 Promotion & coordination of district—wide youth—led analyses of local-level risk and protective factors affecting adolescent substance use, education, risk of suicide, bullying, safety, and other areas affecting health and wellness of young people 0 Coordination and development of local-level Drug Endangered Child (DEC) Alliances between Waterbury Police Department, Department of Chiidren & Families, and the statewide DEC office Promotion & Coordination of DEC training for Waterbury Law Enforcement, Schooi Administration and Pupil Personnel Services Staff, area social service agencies, probation, parole, DCF Caseworkers, and other related professionals Coordination of a permanent Medication Drop Box installation at Waterbury Police Department and ongoing promotion of this cost-effective opioid deterrence measure Professional Development for teachers and Bridge To Success service agency staff provided on 40 Deveiopmental Assets for Youth; Opioid Abuse Prevention Forum; Financial Wellness for Seniors and Problem Gambling Prevention Across the Lifespan; Local Prevention Council “101”; Local Prevention Council Capacity Buiiding; Local Prevention Council TA: Prevention Strategies & Effective Service Delivery and Mental Health First Aid training, among others. Development and dissemination of Opioid Overdose Wallet Cards to prevent opioid overdose deaths Coordination & Delivery of Innovative Media Campaigns on Prescription Drug Abuse Prevention Membership and Advisement to the Waterbury Bridge To Success Partnership Membership and Advisement to the Waterbury School Health and Wellness and Council Membership/Advisement to the Waterbury Support for Pregnant and Parenting Teens Advisory Council Contributing Partner to the Waterbury Public Schools Substance Abuse Prevention Curriculum Development Committee Contributing Partner to the Waterbury Public Schools PK-12 Health and Wellness Curriculum Revision Committee Contributing Partner to the Waterbury Health & Physical Education Research-Based Prevention Curriculum Selection Committee (resulted in acquisition/implementation of K -12 LifeSkills Developmental Curriculum) Organizational support to the Waterbury Youth Council Logistical support to the Waterbury “Teens Who Care” Foundation It should aiso be acknowledged that the activities of the Central Naugatuck Valley Regional Action Council were directly attributable to the award selections of Waterbury by the ING Foundation in 2012 and 2013 as one of America’s Top 100 Communities for Youth. In closing, I OPPOSE the proposed budget cuts under consideration. As an eleven (11) year volunteer Chairman of the Mayor’s Task Force Against Substance Abuse, I rely heavily upon my RAC for the quality actionable research, resources and coordination of services I simply cannot generate independently given the scope of my other professional responsibilities. If you elect to surrender the elimination of regional action councils, countless important, proactive and cost-effective local prevention services will be lost state-wide and most certainly in Waterbury. Waterbury needs to preserve what fragile prevention infrastructure we have left, and we M, not want, the Central Naugatuck Valley Regional Action Council to help do that. 1 need the Central Naugatuck Valley Regional Action Council to help do that. As the House Appropriations Committee, you have the power to avert this negative outcome. We look to you to be visionary, acknowledge our communities’ prevention service needs, and act to preserve the tools to supply them. Thank you for your time and consideration. Yours truly, Joseph R. Gorman Supervisor of Health and Physical Education Chairman, The Mayor’s Task Force Against Substance Abuse City of Waterbury Testimony of Christine Miskell DVM MPH H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services — Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health — Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillon; My name is Christine Miskell. I am an Epidemiologist with the Southeastern Regional Action Council (SERAC) and a resident of Colchester, CT. I am writing today to express my strong opposition to the proposed cuts to prevention funding in Connecticut. In 1989, Connecticut legislators recognized the need for coordinated prevention activities in order to address the issue of substance abuse and other addictive behaviors at a local level. As a result, the Regional Action Councils (RACs) were created. Since then the RACs, including SERAC have been doing a tremendous amount of work on shoestring budgets in order to affect real change to benefit the residents of communities throughout the State. Every day the RACs work in communities across the State to reduce the impact of substance abuse and other addictive behaviors by educating communities about the risks of substance use and other addictive behaviors, by working to prevent or delay the onset of substance use among youth, by working to promote mental health and by promoting positive coping skills and resiliency. Under the budget proposed by Governor Malloy, the already diminutive amount of money allocated to these prevention efforts will be cut by 80%. This cut will result in a small savings in the overall State budget but will effectively eliminate the ability to provide coordinated prevention efforts across our State. Everyone has heard the calls to address the epidemic of heroin overdoses. We are all aware of the changes in attitudes perceptions and use of marijuana throughout our country and our State. None of us can forget the tragedy that occurred at Sandy Hook. 10f2 In 2014 and 2015, SERAC surveyed nearly 7000 youth in grades 7—12 in southeastern Connecticut. Those youth have told us a lot about what we need to do to address these issues. Heroin Epidemic Those already struggling with an addiction deserves treatment and the opportunity to recovery. Sadly, that road to recovery can be a long and difiicult one. In 2015, SERAC received a donation of 200 naloxone autoinjectors. They were distributed to residents, treatment providers and law enforcement ofiicers in the hopes of preventing overdose deaths. To this day, we are aware of at least 5 individuals (sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, parents) whose lives have been saved due to the availability of these autoinjectors . The true answer to this epidemic lies in the prevention of the addictive behaviors. In the SERAC survey 0.3% of youth report ever having used heroin but 8.4% report having misused a prescription pain medication to get high. We all know about the link between prescription opiate misuse and subsequent heroin addiction. As a result, SERAC is working to raise awareness about the dangers of prescription drug misuse. We have succeeded in getting prescription drug disposal boxes set up in 10 of the 20 communities in our region. These drop boxes promote safe disposal of unused prescription medications and reduce the likely hood of diversion and misuse. Mariiuana Misinformation In the SERAC survey, 9.1% of youth report having used marijuana in the past 30 days. That is nearly the same as the percentage of youth who report having used alcohol in the past 30 days (9.7%). Throughout the country, the legalization of the use or marijuana for medicinal purposes and the legalization of recreational marijuana use are contributing to misconceptions among adults and youth about the harms associated with marijuana use. SERAC is working with local communities to raise awareness about the fact that marijuana is addictive that marijuana use by youth can have a negative impact on brain development and that marijuana impacts reaction time and decision making both of which can result in unwanted consequences such as unplanned pregnancies, motor vehicle accidents, other injuries and death. Mental Health Promotion For many, substance use and subsequent addiction can be a misguided attempt at coping with stress or filling a void. In the SERAC youth survey, more than 1 in 10 youth report having seriously considered attempting suicide in the past year. Through our youth programs, SERAC is working to promote positive coping skills, stress management and resiliency among youth in Southeastern Connecticut. SERAC also provides training in Mental Health First Aid, Youth Mental Health First Aid and Question, Persuade, Refer (QPR) suicide prevention to increase the changes of early detection and intervention for those who may be struggling with mental health issues. We cannot let these and the many other efforts of the Regional Action Councils disappear. NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO CUT PREVETION FUNDING Respectfully submitted Christine Miskell DVM, MPH 20f2 Testimony of Giovanna Pisani, Director of Mid-Fairfield Substance Abuse Coalition, Program of Human Services Council Connecticut Prevention Network H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. Department of Mental Health & Addiction Services- Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Madam Chair, Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana and Representative Dillon, my name is Giovanna Pisani and I am the Director of Mid—Fairfield Substance Abuse Coalition at the Human Services Council in Norwalk, CT. I am writing today to strongly oppose the grave cuts to regional action councils that will decimate the current prevention network structure. I am concerned about the proposed budget cuts because; Norwalk, Westport, Wilton, and Weston will have no substance abuse coordination or prevention services. Connecticut continues to say that we are in an Opioid/Heroin epidemic. Then, we cannot afford NOT to have prevention dollars. There is federal funding available but is already so competitive, and the chances for coalitions to receive federal funding will be impossible. In 2015, Community Prevention Network (CPN) established 55 medication drop boxes in CT with more on the way. CT has collected 23,541 pounds of substances from these collection boxes. CPN has held more than 20 community forums on opioid abuse, opioid misuse and trained more than 500 people to use Naloxene (Narcan) —— an overdose reversal syringe). My coalition and other regional action councils have collaborated with the towns we serve and held School Resource Officers training on Drug Recognition Awareness. The training covered drug trends for adolescents, methods of drug use, paraphernalia used with specific drugs, signs of impairment and impairment tests. The Connection Prevention Network is the only organized prevention network in the state. We coordinate and disseminate information to all 13 Regional Action Councils. in the past we have been a leader in pushing legislation on emergingr prevention issues. Those efforts include classifying synthetic marijuana and salvia as illegal drugs. developing laws and regulations governing e—cigarettes, strengthening the laws surn‘ntnding prescription drug monitoring and reporting, expanding the availability of Narean and banning the sale of powdered alcohol. We actively engage in policy advocacy at the local, state and federal levels. We urge you to reject the severe budget cuts to regional action councils and keep in place the current CT Prevention Network structure. To the Committee: My name is Anthony Salvatore, Town Manager for the Town of Cromwell, and until recently, Chief of Police in Cromwell. I am also President of the Board of MCSAAC — the Middlesex County Substance Abuse Action Council. Tonight I’m here to speak on behalf of Connecticut’s Regional Action Councils. We cannot afford to lose them. There is a significant alcohol and drug—abuse problem in Connecticut; that is no secret. There is also a limited amount of money for treatment. Treating addiction is very important; I do not want to diminish that need. But it’s my contention that preventing people from becoming addicted in the first place is of primary importance. Preventing addiction to alcohol, cocaine, painkillers, and heroin is an efficient use of tax dollars, and one that reduces crime and human suffering. What do I mean by prevention? Prevention is everything we do to stop the use of drugs before a person becomes a full-blown addict. There are predictable stages to substance abuse. Every addict was once clean. For whatever reason, he or she experimented with a drug, moved to psychological dependency, and wound up physically addicted. Every step along that path, there were opportunities: opportunities to stop, rethink, avoid the drugs, and find better ways to cope. Prevention capitalizes on those opportunities. For example, my organization, MCSAAC, goes into workplaces to show employees how Percocet and heroin are basically the same thing; they hit the brain in the same way. If there’s a young man in that employee group with an injured back, he’ll have the opportunity to learn the facts, ask questions, and air his concerns. The next time he talks to his doctor about back pain he’ll ask about alternative therapies. T hat ’s prevention. Or take the teenaged daughter of an alcoholic father. Binge drinking every weekend helps her escape her home environment. MCSAAC trains school staff to use DMHAS’ S—BIRT tool (Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment). The girl is steered toward an after— school support group for teen drinkers. Years later she’s a healthy and successful adult. T hat ’s prevention. These are just a few of the dozens of prevention strategies employed by MCSAAC and other Regional Action Councils. Preventing destructive habits is better than treating them. Have you seen the graph of opioid deaths in our state over the past fifteen years? It trends nowhere but straight up. Where will it end? Personally, I don’t want to see the expansion of Rushford or Merritt Hall Addiction Services. I don’t want Middlesex Hospital to need more addiction doctors. I want to see those numbers come down. Prevention strategies are a tested, proven, and inexpensive part of the fight against substance abuse. The Governor’s proposed budget will decimate the prevention infrastructure in Connecticut as we know it. As a town manager, a former chief of police, and a family man, I ask that you not let that happen. Please restore funding to the Regional Action Councils. inemisac@aoi.com Tuesday February 16-r 20:16 2:82 PM AppTestimeny Feb 18 DMHAS testimow — Regionai Action Eminciis Pieeee accept the written testimony atiaehed Testimerw at Madame F McGann, MSG} Executive Director of Seuth Centrei CT Substerice Abuse Ceuncii Connecticut Preventien Netwerk HE. Net 5044 AN ACIT MAKiNG AQJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENQiTURES FOR THE FISGAL YEAR ENERNG JQNE 30, 2131‘? Department of Mental Heeith & Addiction Sewices —- Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 20153; Appreprfatiens Subcommittee ant-tealth Ptibiiei-{earing Senator Bye, Representative Weiiter, Senater Gerretana and Representative Dittien, my name in. Marlene F McGann and i am the Executive Director of the South Central CT Substance Abuse Ceuncii {SCOSAC}, a regionai action councii serving the nine towns from Meriden te Madisen‘ i strongiy eppese the significant cuts to re‘gienei action ceunciis that wiii dismantie the current preueniion neiwertk structure. The RACE; partner with the fiepartment of Meniei Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) to assess iecai needs and assist cemmunities to address substance abuse issues with realistic programs and initiatives that are aimed to reduce the impact of drugs abuse anti provide reseurces far these persons who are aiready in need of treatment. The RACs areehariered by CT State statute and werk with lace! and statewide partnere as gait of a unique prevention framework that is cited as a modei by teeterei departments. Geeneeticut is faced with an evemheiming number of young people addicted to prescription drugs and herein. The epiate overdese deaths in our state have reached unpreeeciented ieveis and a muiti faceted appreach is needed that reaches from the State government to the i‘nsividuais in each cemmunity. The RACS centinue to mark directiy with {DMHAS and our ioeai communities to provide educatien on Opiates, Neioxene, and treatment epiiens, importantiy the RACS have been abie to move quicifiy to address Ease! needs inci‘uding medicatien {imp boxes, opiate discussien ierums and trainings fer emergency responders. ' In this region 0"? the state, SCCSAG has beer} addressing epieie issues since eoiiabcrating with a Brown University study in 201’! that pinpointed prescription drugebuse in centre! (31“.. in 2015 atone SCCSAC provided educatien err opiates to 500 peopie as weii as mentei health and suicide awareness te more than ’iOOG perserzs. SCCSAC has aiso worked directiy with faith eemmunitiee threegheut the state to educate cangregatiens en substance abuse, probiem gembiing, changes in marijuana use and iaws, mentai heaith awareness and suicide preventien. H With tightened budgets, school systems and direct service providers have turned to the RACs to provide trainings for staff members on emerging issues and to act as a neutral convener promoting collaborative efforts in the region. ' The CT Prevention Network of Regional Action Councils urges the Legislature to reject the severe budget cuts to RACs that would remove the services to iocal communities at this critical time. Martene F. lVchann, iVlSCJ Executive Director South Central CT Substance Abuse Council (formerly MAWSAC) — serving the communities of Branford, East Haven, Guiiford, Hamden, North Branford, North Haven, Madison, Meriden, Waltingford ' 5 Brookside Drive, Wallingford, CT 06492 203-303-3391 mawsac@aol.com www.sccsac.org "Health is not an individual achievement, but a community responsibility" WATERBURY PUBLIC SCHOOLS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION j'oszpti (R, German —Snpemisor (203) 57443051 email: iaorman®waterbnnnkl2.ct.us Health. Moves. Minds. Testimony for Public Hearing - Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 IN SUPPORT OF REGIONAL A CTION COUNCILS My name is Joe German. I am the Supervisor of Health and Physical Education for the Waterbury Public Schools and I represent the Mayor’s Task Force Against Substance Abuse in the City of Waterbury. I urge you to OPPOSE the currently proposed 79% budget reduction to regional action councils (RACs), and encourage full restoration of current RAC funding moving forward. In its present form, the proposed effectively defunds all thirteen regional action councils from $1.1 million to slightly less than $230,000. it would surely decimate the current system of regional action councils, and severely impact the volunteer “boots on the groun ” in our communities that rely so heavily upon them to deliver meaningful prevention services. As you are aware, the Connecticut Prevention Network (CPN) is comprised of the state’s 13 community partnership Regional Action Councils (RACS) that work to provide every community in the state with education, training, and advocacy for substance abuse prevention and related community concerns such as behavioral health, violence, gambling, drunk driving, prescription drugs, opioid addiction and suicide. In Waterbury alone, our regional action council, the Central Naugatuck Valley Regional Action Council (CNVRAC), has served as an integral and irreplaceable partner in the development of the following initiatives: - Promotion & coordination of comprehensive youth risk behavior and resiliency surveys conducted with all students in grades 6—12 throughout Waterbury Public Schools 0 Promotion & coordination of district—wide youth—led analyses of local-level risk and protective factors affecting adolescent substance use, education, risk of suicide, bullying, safety, and other areas affecting health and wellness of young people 0 Coordination and development of local-level Drug Endangered Child (DEC) Alliances between Waterbury Police Department, Department of Chiidren & Families, and the statewide DEC office Promotion & Coordination of DEC training for Waterbury Law Enforcement, Schooi Administration and Pupil Personnel Services Staff, area social service agencies, probation, parole, DCF Caseworkers, and other related professionals Coordination of a permanent Medication Drop Box installation at Waterbury Police Department and ongoing promotion of this cost-effective opioid deterrence measure Professional Development for teachers and Bridge To Success service agency staff provided on 40 Deveiopmental Assets for Youth; Opioid Abuse Prevention Forum; Financial Wellness for Seniors and Problem Gambling Prevention Across the Lifespan; Local Prevention Council “101”; Local Prevention Council Capacity Buiiding; Local Prevention Council TA: Prevention Strategies & Effective Service Delivery and Mental Health First Aid training, among others. Development and dissemination of Opioid Overdose Wallet Cards to prevent opioid overdose deaths Coordination & Delivery of Innovative Media Campaigns on Prescription Drug Abuse Prevention Membership and Advisement to the Waterbury Bridge To Success Partnership Membership and Advisement to the Waterbury School Health and Wellness and Council Membership/Advisement to the Waterbury Support for Pregnant and Parenting Teens Advisory Council Contributing Partner to the Waterbury Public Schools Substance Abuse Prevention Curriculum Development Committee Contributing Partner to the Waterbury Public Schools PK-12 Health and Wellness Curriculum Revision Committee Contributing Partner to the Waterbury Health & Physical Education Research-Based Prevention Curriculum Selection Committee (resulted in acquisition/implementation of K -12 LifeSkills Developmental Curriculum) Organizational support to the Waterbury Youth Council Logistical support to the Waterbury “Teens Who Care” Foundation It should aiso be acknowledged that the activities of the Central Naugatuck Valley Regional Action Council were directly attributable to the award selections of Waterbury by the ING Foundation in 2012 and 2013 as one of America’s Top 100 Communities for Youth. In closing, I OPPOSE the proposed budget cuts under consideration. As an eleven (11) year volunteer Chairman of the Mayor’s Task Force Against Substance Abuse, I rely heavily upon my RAC for the quality actionable research, resources and coordination of services I simply cannot generate independently given the scope of my other professional responsibilities. If you elect to surrender the elimination of regional action councils, countless important, proactive and cost-effective local prevention services will be lost state-wide and most certainly in Waterbury. Waterbury needs to preserve what fragile prevention infrastructure we have left, and we M, not want, the Central Naugatuck Valley Regional Action Council to help do that. 1 need the Central Naugatuck Valley Regional Action Council to help do that. As the House Appropriations Committee, you have the power to avert this negative outcome. We look to you to be visionary, acknowledge our communities’ prevention service needs, and act to preserve the tools to supply them. Thank you for your time and consideration. Yours truly, Joseph R. Gorman Supervisor of Health and Physical Education Chairman, The Mayor’s Task Force Against Substance Abuse City of Waterbury Testimony before the Appropriations Committee on the Governor’s Proposed Budget Re: Proposed cuts to Regional Mental Health Boards Members of the Appropriations Committee: My name is Joanne Linarte and I am writing to testify on the Govemor’s Proposed Biennial Budget. I am opposed to the proposed cuts to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, in particular Southwest Regional Mental Health Board in Norwalk. As a resident of Norwalk, and a Part Time employee of SWRMHB, I see the need for their existence in the community. I have answered the phone, to people in distress facing many issues that have lead them down the path to near suicide. Ihave been in the office when many people, of all walks of life, have come seeking out support groups with no other source of," what to do", or " where to go" to teach them how to cope with their situations. Ihave been involved in the Mental Health Awareness Outreach Resource Tables, and Programs, that are held throughout CT., that we help support with our much needed materials. I have even met postal workers who have requested information from me, for services simply because they see our return address on the package, I was there to mail. I have passed out information for adults as well as the information about the Youth services and website to members of my church and prayer group. What I am saying is that, at this time, when there is such a "Great Need" for Mental Health Support in throughout the country, it is the WRONG time to restrict their work, by crippling them, by cutting their budget. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports. Respectfully Joanne Linarte Norwalk Resident Testimony Presented To The Appropriations Committee In Response To: THE GOVERNOR’S PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE 2016-2017 FISCAL YEAR by Cheryll Houston, Deputy Director On behalf ofthe Southwest Regional Mental Health Board February 11, 2016 Chairman Bye, Chairman Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee, My name is Cheryll Houston (resident of Fairfield) and I am writing to you today as the Executive Director ofthe Southwest Regional Mental Health Board (SWRMHB). The Regional Mental Health Boards were designed to represent the community’s voice: our Catchment Area Councils bring together consumers of mental health and supportive services, their family members, service providers, and appointed representatives ofthe towns we serve. It is safe to say that all of us recognize the very difficult budget situation the state faces this year, and we thank you for your efforts to balance the many needs of your constituents. I am deeply troubled by Governor Malloy’s adjustments to the second year ofthe two—year budget; specifically, the proposed $55 million cut in funding from the Department of Developmental Services, the $61 million cut in funding from the Department of Social Services and the $71 million cut in funding from the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. We realize that the Governor’s goal of balancing the budget is important. However, it cannot be done at the expense of citizens desperately in need of more services, not less. Last year, CT social service providers lost tens of millions of dollars in state funding — painful cuts that impacted core health and human service delivery across the board. More cuts in service provision simply cannot be absorbed by the individuals and families in greatest need of our state’s assistance and support. These proposed spending cuts will further destabilize the state’s supportive service system, and will seriously impact our state’s most vulnerable citizens. Social services are already stretched thin — further reducing or eliminating funding for hospitals, community health centers, school-based health clinics, asthma treatment, and respite programs cannot be the answer. I urge all members ofthe Appropriations Committee to recognize that human services in CT are chronically underfunded and any financial cuts will prove devastating, seriously reducing or eliminating essential services for thousands of individuals desperately in need- including many of your constituents - across the state. Thank you. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee on the Governor’s Budget Public Hearing Date: February 18I 2016 Joyce Platz — Fairfield, CT 06824 Re: Proposed cuts to Regional Mental Health Boards Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee: My name is Joyce Platz and I am writing to testify on the budget. I strongly oppose the proposed cuts to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, in particular the drastic cut in funding for the Regional Mental Health Boards and the Regional Action Councils. I am writing to you as Immediate Past President and now member of the Executive Committee of the Southwest Regional Mental Health Board, Board of Directors. I can attest first-hand to the importance of the work of the Regional Mental Health Boards, in our communities for some of Connecticut’s most vulnerable citizens, those with serious mental illnesses. Our work is focused an advocacy, reducing stigma, providing equal representation of diverse groups of stakeholders, ensuring that the services in the community are of the highest quality and most importantly, that all services are readily available and accessible to all members of our community regardless of their ability to pay. Not only are the Regional Mental Health Boards a valuable resource to our local communities, but they are also the conduit to implement and administer the State mental health needs assessment which is requirement of receiving our federal funding, in essence the required leveraging agent for $23 million in federal funding for our state.. There is not a day that goes by unfortunately that we don’t read in our newspapers or on social media or hear on the news reports of a tragedy as a result of mental health issues. It is not long ago that our State was so seriously impacted by the tragedy of Sandy Hook. That event should continue to serve as a wakeup call to every citizen of Connecticut about the need for expanded of mental health services, as well as on- going training and education for our communities. The mission of the regional mental health boards is to ensure services are of the highest quality by on-going review and monitoring; that they are available to all persons who need them; advocating on behalf of those impacted by mental illness so that they may have a voice in the development and provision of the services they need and lastly but no less important, working towards reducing stigma, so that no individual or family is ashamed to get the mental health services they need. The proposed cuts by the Governor would totally eliminate this vital advocacy and monitoring arm of our mental health system. I urge you to restore these harmful cuts to ensure crucial services are available to the residents of Connecticut. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports. Joyce Platz 339 Alma Drive Fairfield, CT 06824 Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. February 18, 2016 John Sembrakis, West Hartford CT Dear Legislators and to whom it may concern: My name is John Sembrakis and I am a registered voter in West Hartford. My testimonial is in regards to how much it costs to hospitalize a mental health consumer when he or she has not been taking their medications. I was diagnosed in 1985 and I kept on going off medication once a year for six years. The average cost to treat a consumer that has gone off medication is $50,000.00 a year. Thus in my case it was $300,000.00 in six years. In 1991 a social worker came to me and said that it was one thing to go off medication to be free of responsibility, but that I should think about the financial and emotional cost to providers and others. I have not been hospitalized since 1991. During that time, I have achieved many things (But it is not so important to discuss that). You as providers, by law, cannot force consumers to take their medication, however, consumers should be convinced (legally) to stay on medications. It is my hope that both consumers and providers address this issue with a zealous and passionate approach. The Regional Mental Health Boards help people in recovery find ways to stay healthy by allowing opportunities for involvement and for improving the mental health system. l have been part of the North Central Regional Mental Health Board for a long time and I am now the Chair of GAG 18, which includes West Hartford. Without the Regional Boards, I don’t know where I would be today. Please save core services like the Regional Mental Health Board. Thank you. John. Testimony for February 2016 Public Hearing on the Governor’s Proposed Budget for DMHAS, DPH, & DSS Thank you Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and members of the Appropriations Committee, for this opportunity to be heard. My name is Vered Brandman, and I’m a Norwalk resident and a person in recovery from mental health issues. My current diagnosis is Major Depression with PTSD and an eating disorder. I’m 28 years old and while I’ve had symptoms most of my life, it wasn’t until I was 20 years old that I was able to get real help that helped. Since 2007 I’ve been involved with several groups that provide support, education, and advocacy opportunities for people like me. I’ve included a few of them in my written testimony, but I’d like to focus on just one today. Last spring I was nominated to the Board of Directors for the Southwest Regional Mental Health Board, one of Connecticut’s five state—mandated private—non—profits. I’ve been in recovery for almost nine years, and I’ve had more opportunities to connect with others, have my voice heard, and be part of some of the community solutions to mental health and addiction challenges in the three years I’ve been involved with my Regional Mental Health Board than in the first six years of my recovery. I’ve learned so much thanks to the Southwest Regional Mental Health Board, and I’ve received so much encouragement and support—in particular from our current Executive Director, Margaret Watt—and I was deeply touched when one of my peers—another person in recovery—nominated me to the Board of Directors last spring. At my Regional Mental Health Board, I am not a patient. I am not a client. I’m not even a “consumer,” though our bylaws do require that the consumer population have strong representation on the Board, and that is the perspective everyone knows Ibring to the table. At my Regional Mental Health Board, I am a Board Member, with insight based on experience that no one will doubt or question. I am, and my experience is, deeply valued at the Regional Mental Health Board, and I would challenge anyone to name another impartial organization, one not tied to big—pharma or the insurance industry, where I would be able to sit at the table alongside my peers in recovery as well as family members and providers working in the community to improve our existing system of care. What the Regional Mental Health Boards do best, beyond the tasks they are mandated to perform, is this: they provide a table for the community to sit at, they provide seats and a microphone when needed so that anyone—a person in recovery, a professional working in the field, a family member, or a concerned citizen—can be part of identifying problems and implementing solutions. Iknow Regional Mental Health Boards might seem expendable because they by definition do not provide direct—care services, but I guarantee that they are anything but expendable. Regional Mental Health Boards are what enables cross—agency collaboration in every region of our state, and without that, our “safety net” of public—and private—sector agencies, advocacy organizations, and activists would fall back into chaos, with no one to provide oversight or a place for community members to be heard and hear others in turn. Thank you for this opportunity to be heard. Testimony Presented To The Appropriations Committee In Response To: THE GOVERNOR’S PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE 2016-2017 FISCAL YEAR by Cheryll A Houston, Deputy Director On behalf ofthe Southwest Regional Mental Health Board February 11, 2016 Chairman Bye, Chairman Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee, My name is Cheryll Houston (resident of Fairfield) and I am writing to you today as the Executive Director ofthe Southwest Regional Mental Health Board (SWRMHB). The Regional Mental Health Boards were designed to represent the community’s voice: our Catchment Area Councils bring together consumers of mental health and supportive services, their family members, service providers, and appointed representatives of the towns we serve. It is safe to say that all of us recognize the very difficult budget situation the state faces this year, and we thank you for your efforts to balance the many needs ofyour constituents. I am deeply troubled by Governor Malloy’s adjustments to the second year ofthe two-year budget; specifically, the proposed $55 million cut in funding from the Department of Developmental Services, the $61 million cut in funding from the Department of Social Services and the $71 million cut in funding from the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. We realize that the Governor’s goal of balancing the budget is important. However, it cannot be done at the expense of citizens desperately in need of more services, not less. Last year, CT social service providers lost tens of millions of dollars in state funding — painful cuts that impacted core health and human service delivery across the board. More cuts in service provision simply cannot be absorbed by the individuals and families in greatest need of our state’s assistance and support. Following the tragedy at Sandy Hook, the Advisory Commission presented a comprehensive final report that specifically mentioned the importance of providing mental health services to families in need. More than half ofthe 198—page report relates to mental health issues, and the importance of building "systems of care that actively foster healthy individuals, families and communities.” The report also points out that "approximately half of young people qualify for some behavioral health diagnosis by the time they reach 18." Yet less than one year later, it seems as though the hard work ofthe Sandy Hook Commission has been completely disregarded. Instead, the Malloy administration has repeatedly cut funding for outpatient mental health and substance abuse treatment. He has justified these debilitating cuts by arguing that more state residents have health care coverage and providers can recoup funding by billing insurance. Unfortunately, the Governor’s mathematics don’t work. The rates paid by Medicaid generally fall below the cost of providing services, and the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services supports that finding. Simply said, this year’s funding cuts will force desperately needed results-based programs to close. Hospitals will be inundated with people seeking care through emergency rooms (a far more expensive option), and those emergency rooms are already struggling with their own funding cuts. These cuts further destabilize a supportive service system that is already stretched thin — further reducing or eliminating funding for hospitals, community health centers, school- based health clinics and respite programs cannot be the answer. I urge all members ofthe Appropriations Committee to recognize that human services — particularly mental health services - in CT are chronically underfunded and any financial cuts will prove devastating, seriously reducing or eliminating essential services for thousands ofindividuals desperately in need across the state. Please protect your constituents and protect CT’s most vulnerable citizens by protecting funding for human services in CT. Thank you. Baubmeai fiegmmi Naomi éixi‘esefih Beam Testimony before the Abprobriations Committee on the Governor’s browsed budget DMHAS expenditures and recommendations February 18, 2016 Good evening, Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and members of the Appropriations Committee, My name is Margaret Watt, resident of Norwalk and Executive Director of the Southwest Regional Mental Health Board. I want to start by thanking you for your hard work last year to restore funding for essential human services, and to acknowledge that the task you face of trying to meet our state’s needs without enough money to go around is daunting. In the short (and medium) term, the state needs to save money to address a terrible deficit. But in the long term, we will lose more than we gain if we do so not only by reducing funds system-wide, but also by dismantling entire structures that have been put in place to protect the community and provide oversight. CT’s mental health system has been a pioneer in adopting the Recovery Orientation, in providing pathways for people in recovery to work within the system to help their peers, and in thinking outside the clinical box to bring effective, low-cost peer programs such as the Hearing Voices Network to our state. However, the morefunding is cut, the greater the risk that we lose supportive services that are non-clinical. Treatment services will still have to happen, so we will have to chip away at—or even undo—the evaluation, coordination, and prevention services that are critical to ensure a high-quality system. We will beforced to retreat back to a more traditional model—which isn’t necessarily as effective or cost-effective. CT will go from being a model of forward thinking to being the state where even a tragedy like Sandy Hook couldn’t move the needle. One reason CT’s mental health system is strong compared with other states—and even that DM HAS is strong compared with some other state agencies—is that 40 years ago, the legislature established the Regional Mental Health Boards. The Regional Boards are a formal mechanism for providing communities with a way to oversee programs and advocate for their region’s mental health needs. The Regional MH Boards are unique in serving as a hub for connecting all stakeholders in the mental health community and empowering them to share issues and ideas, assess needs, develop initiatives, and evaluate what’s working and what’s needed. No one else brings together consumers, providers, and appointed town representatives from across the region around the topic of mental health. We get calls from families, program directors, social workers, and town human services departments because we are recognized as such a resource. We truly are ”the community’s voice in mental health.” I’d like to give an example of how the overall service system, including the regional boards, plays a role in people’s lives. There’s a young woman I know whose earliest symptoms of mental illness started around age 10. She went to a very competitive college, but had to leave due to her mental health problems and thoughts of suicide. It was almost a decade-long, painstaking road to recovery, but today she is one of the key founding voices in TurningPointCT.org, the website by and for young people in CT, and she is starting her own nonprofit advocacy organization. . V...“';_-_-_V\_~.\\““\““\w_;: m Baufimeai Riggigmai Mmmi i2x§§s2%§§§% 32mm I'IIIIIIIJ.’ Along the way, she received services from hospitals, nonprofit provider agencies, and clubhouses. She used DMHAS’s Young Adult Services, she received Supported Education services while attending community college, and she received disability benefits. All of these are areas where funding is needed and cuts have already been felt. This young woman also became an advocate. She received training to become a Recovery Support Specialist and a QPR suicide prevention trainer. And she joined the Southwest Regiona Mental Health Board as part of our Catchment Area Councils. On the CAC she has been able to work on community education initiatives, mental health screenings, and focus groups, and she was so valued that she was elected to our Board of Directors, where her perspective is informed by her many experiences using all these areas of the service system. I know that, for her, a huge part of her recovery was about being a part of the Regional Mental Health Board. In a recent survey, she wrote that SWRMHB is: ”A place for all of us to come together: people receiving mental health & addiction services, our providers, our family members, and interested lay-people who are committed to improving visibility, access issues, and quality of services. Everyone is an equal — psychiatrists, program managers, people in recovery — our voices are all treated as equally informative to our collective goals.” The Regional Mental Health Boards’ work assessing the region’s needs helps bring in $23 Million in federal funding to the state—at a total cost of $584,000 for all 5 Boards. The Governor’s proposal would cut our funding to less than $10,000 per Board as part of a ”consolidation” cut. That level of cut does not allow us to consolidate; it puts us out of business. When that happens, who will be there to impartially represent the needs of the different stakeholders? Please ensure that this visionary grassroots structure is not dismantled permanently. Thank you. The Regional Mental Health Boards are truly "the community’s voice in mental health." (Caption: Images proposed by Regional MH Board members to capture the role we play: the sun radiating energy; the hub of a wheel; a megaphone for the community; the latticework that allows the garden to thrive) 18-20 Trinity Street Room 202 Hartford, CT 06106 Tel: 860-240-0080 Fax: 860-240-0315 Email: a aacdficoactgov Website: Chair Trung Le Vice-Chair Sylvia Ho Secretary Uswah Khan Treasurer Alan Tan Commissioners Arlene Avery Theodore Feng Theodore Hsu George Mathanool M. Angela Rola Arvind Shaw An-Ming Truxes Henry C. Lee (Honorary) Executive Director Mui Mui Hin-McCormick Legislative Analyst Alok Bhatt STATE 03? CGNNESTEQUT ASfifiPJ PA CIAW'C $1342.93}?! {DEN AfiYAIRS (fOMM’JSSION February 18, 2016 Senator Beth Bye Representative Toni E. Walker Appropriations Committee Legislative Office Building Room 2700 Hartford CT, 06106 Testimony Opposing H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 Dear Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and honorable members of the Appropriations Committee, My name is Mui Mui Hin-McCormick, I am the Executive Director of Asian Pacific American Affairs Commission (APAAC). I also serve on multiple boards and coalitions; in particular the North Central Regional Mental Health Board and Chair of the Catchment Area Council (CAC) 23. CAC’s offer a common ground for consumers, family members, and providers to work together in support of their communities. On behalf of the Asian Pacific American Affairs Commission and the North Central Regional Mental Health Board I am submitting testimony opposing the H.B. No. 5044 regarding the proposed DMHAS cuts that would eliminate the Regional Mental Health Boards (RMHB). Similar to other agencies, these RMHBs have limited funding and resources; welcoming opportunities to collaborate with agencies and communities. These agencies also share common goals of addressing disparities in underserved communities. For over 40 years RMHBs have evaluated hundreds of programs, assessed the needs of the community, been the voice for the community and influenced the mental health and addictions service system continuously. The RMHBs produce results and touch thousands of lives on a low budget. With an average of 2 staff members each, and about 500 dedicated volunteers across the state, RMHBs make a difference for individuals, families, and systems. The RMHBs represent an impressive return on investment. The $584,000 in state funding to the RMHBs helps bring in $23 million in federal funding for mental health and addiction services. NCRMHB is one of five regional mental health boards established by the Connecticut General Assembly in 1974 to study local needs, evaluate state funded mental health programs and make recommendations to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS), local providers, and government officials for improved and/or expanded services. NCRMHB seeks to involve consumers of behavioral health services (local citizens living with mental health or substance use disorders, family members, and others who know and care about them) in its review, evaluation, and advocacy activities. In my previous work as a clinical director of a community based outpatient program, I know firsthand about the existing barriers providers are challenged with on a daily basis. There is so much more work that needs to be done in all of our diverse 1849 1’ 'rinity Street, Hartford, (710615136 T95. (8450,} 240—3038., Fax {869,} 2401€13I5 Eullfaii: apam’@cgact,gav Website _ http:/[riapamxmm! ASfififiJ PA Cffififi’ Afia’EKiimfi! AfiYAIRS (fOMM’JSSION communities when it comes to mental health and addiction issues. The work can’t be done with the restricted funding and lack of resources. This is why, the RMHBs are needed in our communities as they are not only a resource but an advocate for those that are not able to advocate for themselves. Thank you for the opportunity to provide written testimony. I hope you strongly consider reinstating funds for the Mental Health Regional Boards as they are critical supporters of our diverse communities; focused on improving the quality of life for all of our Connecticut residents, valuing the skills and experience of each person. Sincerely, Mui Mui Hin-McCormick Executive Director Asian Pacific American Affairs Commission 1849 1’ 'riniiy Street, Hartford, (710615136 T95. (8450,} 240—3038., Fax {869,} 2401€i3ifi Evil/fail: apam’@cgacr,gav Website _ http:/fr'iapaac.Cram! Testimony for February 2016 Public Hearing on the Governor’s Proposed Budget for DMHAS, DPH, & DSS My name is Vered Brandman, and I’m a Norwalk resident and a person in recovery from mental health issues. My current diagnosis is Major Depression with PTSD and an eating disorder. I’m 28 years old and while I’ve had symptoms most of my life, it wasn’t until I was 20 years old that I was able to get real help that helped. Since then I’ve been a client at a Social Club (Keystone House in Norwalk), a member at a Clubhouse (Bridge House in Bridgeport), I’ve completed my Associate’s Degree, gotten certified as a Recovery Support Specialist through Advocacy Unlimited, served as Project Coordinator for TurningPointCT.org, and more. Last spring I was nominated to the Board of Directors for the Southwest Regional Mental Health Board, one of Connecticut’s five state—mandated private—non—profits. You’re going to hear about the different services the Regional Mental Health Boards provide, so I’ll stick to the pieces that have impacted me the most: my Regional Mental Health Board has been an impartial hub, a neutral place for me to connect with advocates living and working in my part of the state—people like me who are in recovery; people who work in the mental health and addiction system, both in the private and public sector; our loved ones; and concerned citizens representing their towns. My Regional Mental Health Board isn’t an office, it is a network—it connects advocacy organizations, service provider agencies, the people they serve, and the people who love us, so that we can all work together from our different vantage points towards a better mental health and addiction services system. They are, as Imentioned earlier, an impartial hub for any organization, agency, group, and individual in the region to come and be heard, to come and be part of the changes we all know our system of care needs. The Regional Mental Health Boards may seem less important than direct care services, but they are not—please resist proposed cuts the Regional Mental Health Boards. I’ve learned about more organizations, advocacy opportunities, trainings, and initiatives in the past three years since connecting with my Regional Mental Health Board than in the previous six years of my recovery, to say nothing of the four years before that when I was in and out of ineffective treatment. I can’t overstate the importance of the resource my Regional Mental Health Board is to me, every day. But just as importantly, my Regional Mental Health Board acknowledges my role as a community resource for others. My Regional Mental Health Board—as an organization and through the individual people involved in it, particularly the Executive Director Margaret Watt—has provided tremendous encouragement and support in my efforts to become a valuable resource to my peers in recovery and to my community at large. Please protect the budgets for DMHAS and the Regional Mental Health Boards—we are all doing What we can to make our service system more effective. The proposed budget cuts will destroy four decades of coalition building and will leave community members with no place to go to be heard. Testimony on the Appropriations Committee Hearing on DMHAS & DPH Budget February 18, 2016 Melissa C. Ferrara Killingworth CT Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Melissa Ferrara and I am a registered voter in the town of Killingworth as well as the Killingworth town representative on the Region II Regional Mental Health Board and the founder of the Changing Minds Advocacy Group. I am writing to testify on the Governor’s Proposed Budget Cuts to the Regional Mental Health Boards. I am opposed to the proposed cuts to the Regional Mental Health Board and those to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. The proposed $584,000 cuts would defund the Regional Mental Health Boards which were created 40 years ago by the CT legislature and are stronger than ever today! The RMHBs are the community’s voice in the oversight, coordination, and evaluation of the behavioral health system. The state will lose critical services that the boards consistently and effectively provide. These services include needs assessment and planning for behavioral health services, evaluation of the behavioral health service system, community education and engagement, and the opportunity for equal representation and empowerment of consumers, family members, and providers so assure improved services for all. The RMHBs produce amazing results and touch thousands of lives on a relatively low budget. With an average of 2 staff and hundreds of volunteers, the $584,000 in state funding helps to bring in $23 million in federal funding! One of my roles on the RMHB is that I organized and participated in Community Conversations about Mental Health in my town of Killingworth. This is a wildly successful nationwide program where caring, invested community members work together to identify goals and complete projects that ensure persons with mental health issues in their community have access to quality services and support so they can lead healthy, purposeful lives. These projects are usually completed with donated time and talents avoiding the need to request state and federal funding. Our Community Conversations has resulted in the creation of an advocacy group whose mission is to provide education and awareness about mental health, increase mental health training opportunities for our first responders, town officials, clergy, teachers and community members, and work alongside existing organizations to reduce the stigma of mental health. In doing so, we hope to promote a caring community where those who need services feel empowered to seek out services. All of this has occurred because of the support, guidance, and resources of our regional mental health board. I urge you to prevent these harmful cuts to ensure crucial services are available to the residents of Connecticut. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports. jimmmi iiimiimmi "'ifii iziiiiii iimiiii iiimii ii xiiii. iii ‘i‘ixmmii mm * Marxian iii“ Emmi} ° Simiifiii iii iii} * imam army? {maximum Testimony of Jennifer J. Gross, Executive Director Eastern Regional Mental Health Board, Inc. Before the Appropriations Committee of the Connecticut General Assembly February 18, 2016 Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and the members of the committee. My name is Jennifer Gross. I am a registered voter in the town of Ledyard, and the Executive Director ofthe Eastern Regional Mental Health Board, which has served the 39 towns in Eastern Connecticut for over 40 years, helping local citizens to make a direct impact on how and where they access mental health services. The consolidation of the state’s five Regional Mental Health Boards (RMHBs) and 13 Regional Action Councils (RACs), as proposed by Governor Malloy’s budget, with its accompanying cut of $1,277,213 (equal to twice the budget for all five RMHBs), will effectively decimate the Regional Board system. We are actively communicating with the Regional Action Councils to open a conversation regarding the possibility of consolidation. But any consolidation effort takes time and thoughtful planning, and can take months or even years, due to the need to align missions, allow for negotiation between Boards of Directors, and deal with red tape. The RMHBs and the RACs were created at different times and for different purposes, and have clearly delineated functions, structures and missions within Connecticut state statutes. The proposed consolidation impacts not just two or three organizations, but eighteen. In the end, numerous people will certainly lose their jobs, taking with them years of accumulated experience and vital relationships in their communities, and will result in minimal savings, if any, for the taxpayer. As you already know, the RMHBs are already operating on a shoestring budget, at an irreplaceable value to the state and its citizens. The Eastern Regional Mental Health Board, for example, has 1.5 paid staff who leverage about 100 volunteers across Eastern Connecticut, atjust $106,557 annually, truly a bargain for the people of our state, when you consider what we accomplish. Our current activities accurately illustrate how effectively we involve local citizens, many of whom have lived experience with mental health Issues, in communicating vital information - to the state about strengths and unmet needs In mental health services, feedback about existing programs and recommendations for improvements to the system. No other entity knows the local communities the way the RMHBs do, nor can they offer what we do at such a huge savings. For example: 0 We are about to embark on our biennial Priorities and Planning Process, a community needs assessment that the RMHBs and the RACs conduct together by region, and which is a required element in the state’s application for a federal grant that brings in $23 million annually. 0 We are nearing completion on a region—wide evaluation of Young Adult Services (YAS), a state— funded program designed for young adults 18—25 with a history of mental health issues who have more complex service needs. 0 Just this morning, we conducted the first of a series of young adult focus groups around Eastern Connecticut intended to gather information on how young people view mental health issues, how and where they get information, how they access services, and how they communicate with one another about mental health. This project is a companion piece to our YAS evaluation, and feedback will help us to better serve young adults in the community at large who may have unidentified mental health needs. 0 We are in the planning stages of a series of Community Conversations that will address the specialized, and often unmet, mental health needs of older adults in Eastern Connecticut, and brainstorm a set of local solutions that can be carried out by participants. 0 We have started filming on a video project intended to educate the community at large about how lack of affordable and accessible transportation options in Eastern Connecticut prevents those living with mental health problems and poverty from gaining independence. By including all stakeholders, we will educate the community about the complexity ofthis issue. We will also offer creative solutions. Recently, I read a piece about black hole approach illusion, the phenomenon famously experienced by John F. Kennedy, Jr. nearly 17 years ago, when he lost sight of the horizon during a storm and became visually and spatially disoriented, causing his plane to nosedive into the ocean and resulting in the deaths of all three people on board. Because he had not yet learned how to use the instrument panel, he was flying under Visual Flight Rules, rather than Instrument Flight Rules. Had he known how to use the instruments, he probably would have been able to regain control of the airplane. This lifesaving skill is known as ”recovery from unusual attitudes," and is based on the pilot’s essential understanding that his instruments and the data they provide are the only thing that matter when the horizon is lost from view. I’m sure you can see where I’m going with this, and that it’s not really about flying an airplane. It’s about preserving an existing structure (the RMHBs), keeping Connecticut’s mental health system on course, and relying on its efficacy when we can’t see the horizon due to a storm like this budget crisis. Defunding the RMHBs, the system’s navigation panel, for the sake of short—term savings will have untold costs in the long—term, in both money and lives, and will serve only to further weaken a mental health system that is in grave danger of collapse, due to decades of chronic underfunding. The community—based independent oversight and feedback loop provided by the RMHBs is part of what makes Connecticut’s state—funded mental health system a national leader in providing consumer and family oriented services, and DMHAS a uniquely responsive, effective, and innovative agency within our state. In this time of limited resources that threatens local programs with staff and funding cuts, let us not fall victim to our own black hole illusion. Our communities need the Regional Mental Health Boards now more than ever to ensure that services are recovery—oriented, cost—effective, and accessible to all who need them. Please restore full funding to the Regional Mental Health Boards, and to other vital DMHAS funded programs. Thank you for this opportunity to testify. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, xx\\\\\\ \\ww\\xx\\\\\\ \ \ xxxxwxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxwwwwwxxxxxxwxxwwx\x\x\xxxxxxxxx\xxx\wxxwx\x\x\xxx\xx\x\x\xxxxxxx\x\x\x\x\x\xxxxxxx\x\x\x\x\x\x\xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx\xxxxxxxxxxxxx\x\xxxxwxxx\x\xxxxxxxxwwwx\x\xxx\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\xxx\x\x\x\x\x\xxx\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\x\wwwxxxxwwxxxxwxxxxxxxxwwwxxxxxxwwxdgxxxwwxxxxwwxx§§ S xx. x .x “\x\ S x. . x .x .W . S . .x\xx: \x.\x\ W“ S. .. . .. S .\\x\. x W. m“ . WS x. . S x. . Wx X S x“ “x “S xx R S. w. “S x. . x S“ xxx, x “S \x . xxxxx x x\ S x... \\xxx S tx .. SW S \.,\xx\\x WS “W m xxxxxxxxx. . Wm x.x . W\ N“. S W“ SW xxx S N“. x\\\x\\\\x. N“ S, .x S xW. Wx S. S \W W\ x .x \ .x x .x x .x \ . .x WNW \\\\\\\\x “xixxxxx mm “W x\\\\\\xx . .x\\\xxx.. xx. J... R w. x\\\\\\. .x\» xx ... x. m. w w xx .x.\\\\\\\x. .x\xxxxS. 3 R x...“ W“ x. S. x\\.\\\\\\v . n. E x.xx S “W .xx \ \.. xxxxxxxx._. SSS T. xm mm mm W“ gfi Y... .x\\\x\.\\ § \x xx xx“. .\.H fix“ “\ W C. xxx xx\\xx .x\ ...P .3 x § .x S . SS SS .. . . . x . . x . . \ g g xx“ \\\\\\\x. \\\\x xx x\\\\. N x 9 a “w. \SxxxxS SS SS... x \W .. x\\\\\\\\S .x. .. xx \W. x. . . \ \\x xxx «SN». xxx. .xxx, fi S... SS . xx . . .. SW g was» .2. S\\\\\\\\\\\x. .x Mxxx. .. xxxun“ , xxx“ \W , 1x . .\ .xx .. x\\\\. xxx xxx. ..\x. .xxxx SW. , . g a «\x \x x \xxxx. xxxx... .. SS .9, . \W g . \\\\\ xxxxxx .\ \\\\\\\x \\\\x. at \. x . Vx xxxx . x\\\\x. xxx. \W. g , g . xx\ .x. .x.\\\\\\\\xv, xx x .xxx\x. ixx. S «SSS .i. xxx\\\\\\\\ . xxxxxxxx. xxxxx. ,8. . N g g ”Axe. \\x\\\xxx. xxxxx Sxxx. r. x... Wx . S SS ”3 .. . xx; .. .Sxxxx «xxx SS 8 a. “SS. N . . w .\xxxx\x\\\\xx \\\xx\xx .x\ x\\x\\x V\\\x. . , ..xx.x , x “S S SS S. .x\. x. x S. S x... \ an? \\x , .xx\\x .. \xx. .x.x. . N g a xxx. x\\\\\\\x xxx.“ .\ x..\\xx x.\.x\\Sn “x.“ xxfixxu \ . :(x \x \ .xxx\. \\\\x. . .\ xxx .4 \ “g x x x x .c. :\\. \ . . x. \N.\ xx \\\\x V \\\\\\\x k .x xx. x .x “W. g .. \\\.\\\\.x. \xx ..x. xxxxwxxxx. .xxxvvu SW g x8 xxx .xxx .xxxx\ «Sm Wxxx.xx SW xxx\\\\\ .x\xxxx. .xxxxxxx. “xxx“. \W «xxxx \\\\\\x. x\\\\\\\\ x. \\\\x. \W .xx\\\\x VxxxS . . xxxxxxx. Wm \ .\ § x\\\\\\\x x\xx V .3 \. SW xx \\\\\\\x. xx\\\\\\\xxx xxxw.\xx .x“\.. x xxx. mm “\\\\\\\x. xx. . .x ”.xxxx“. xxx. SW Sxxxxxx. SS. A \\\\\\\x “\xR. . , W ..x xxx W .x\ \\ xx & x. xx “m \\x\xWxx\xxx\xx xxx\\\\. «x. xx: xx. xW “SS .... .xx. x. .m . x . x: xx SW x\xxxx\xx xxxxx. W. m. mm m xW \\\\\\\\\\\\xx xxxxxxx ..x .xxw an. m2 SW . .xxxxxxxxxx SS S m. u. \m \\\\\\\\\\xx ..\.x. H W xx .x. xx.“ \. xx x x\\\\x . .x\ xxx “W xxxx\\\\.\\\ x. xxxxxx.. \m § \xxx \x x\\,\\1\. \. xx x x. x\\\\\k \W xxx , x. . x. \W x. \W xW \. \W xW xW . .x. \m “\\\\\x. mm \x. w u \\ w “W \x\“\ xx.xxx \ wax\\\\x. 4U \. . xx. x. \u \\\\\\\x. x. x. xx .x. “W 3. x. . x. , \W ,. . , xW ..x .. W . W x .x SW mu \\ SW SW... S. . SW SW S. \ x x g§§§§§§¥§§§§§\ x§x§x§§N§N§§§ERNNNNNNN§§§ .‘~ {331.- S :“8 5} $35 {em 5‘ E: 33353:? .333 33333355.?) 53* QM a“; ~ ‘33:. t: k finish 33333 5 3‘. 33335235333; 5} (m 325‘ 1g; exe‘zzhiafi 3.3 .53 3335333 3 3 5 35;} a wt... 1-' .3 (3353;323:13 5 ‘M 3 \ n3. .2 m... (on x; m. . 3w» 3% :9“?- \. 5 . f3 :33; 3:: . .3} \.. . I “3533.3 3: in 31% . E 33 {332; ‘ 5: mi»; ’ heat 3 3:33:33 2 ‘ {3:333:53 5 R3333 3:321 fife-3.. 233333.33 333 he gm 3k .- 2 3. .‘ I? 321.3 3533;33- 3... .:‘ fiéfli‘i 5 5? i3! {$3365 8 33.23:} S 3 ‘3 .3 {3S7 333.3333 333.23 3353...";- .<5... \ {183$ {11‘ 5 “3":‘333‘ 33333333! 3‘3 33:22:33 53. m 3R . a.» .3.“ r4. 3%, 3.... \3. \n. .525 553. . K 33.... m. i 3. .55 we. we. .3... .3. .... a \ 5. 3n 3'.‘ ' .3 . 3333's 3‘03 $333 $3.33? i‘ e. 3 33353233 g 3:: {is} \3. in. ( <3 .. {his ‘ it be (3339' '3 péréixshhty. §§ *5? 3M? e‘mhuh‘ 1.. 336: {53.3%} 3 v3 .5 ... .3.» 35.3313537533233 .~' 3% d $3:{§\:'{){1{5§I‘§' .» 533’? ' 295 $33 .. :3 3.33} Si". , {Nth camp 5 * ) we; :hcn‘. 3.355.555.3555555555555...5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.55.5.5.555.5555555555555555.5.5.5....55.5555555555555335555555555355555555555555.555553553553333 55555555555555.5555 "5. 5 .. 3 3V .8 .,.5 v5 . 5.) a5. . .. . .. “m . a... . . .5. . .5: . 5.. .\ .... .55 5. 5.. . R . a.» .. 55.. .55 ..... 5.. .55 K 1.... b... csV. V. A .3 mu m.“ ..,. 55L Hm no +5, .9 5.5.... “m 8 . S 5...... ..V 5“... .5. .5» . 5. 5. .5. 53 .5. R 5b .5 5h 5. .5. .5... nu . 55. ,3 .8. w... 3 .. ....... ”5. .m .n... .. “a, .. 5.5 . x 5.. . . 5.... .5. T .53. .9... fit, 55 2.555.... mu) 55m. .55“. «2 “5V . WW . . .. r». $5.. Mb .5555 .m“ JR“ NW 5, 5.. ,5... .5 .55 .55. . r . . . “ W5”... :5. A.“ Q5 m... (S 555 55M C n5. “.55.. .fi. 3 Cu 3U fl 3 5.. a... .5... .5 an, 3 “.5. ..JV .... a. S v.5 m. (5., Q5. . . .5 a .5. 5 . .5 55. u. .5 5... 5. 5 ,. 0 e . 3 . E 55.. w... .... ......V «55.. 5.. . E +5 .5 «a .. nan . . mm . .3 .. .5. 5 . .55 . .5: a. :5... c... h... .5 .5 ., 55 5.. 55,... <5 Nu 55. in .55 +5.. .. 5. 5.. .5. “m . 5 5... mm: .55, .5..\ 5.. 555. a 5. «H5. is 5,3555 5 ,5.“ or. .\ .55 «5.. 5.. G5. .5“ «5.5 w 5 $3 ..5. ... .55. 55*...“ 4.5% {V55 H“ .5 m... 5....“ .5 ....5. 5. .r... “55. s... 5.. . 95 ..5.. 555 Q 5... .5.» ..5..5.., 5 a. 55.... . 35.. E 5... A.» S, 5.55 5.. .5. 55¢ .t .5. 5. 55 v. “.5 .2 .5... . .5. .5 .5. m 555. .. w... u .5... , w... .35 . ..55. , 955 .555 55.55 \55 . . .55“ .55. .3 3 Mn. «5.5.. g .5555. a w...” .. .... ...... .5. w.“ r. . . .5. F. 3 5.... 5.. .5 .5 . r. a... 55. 3 .5. m... 5...... 55.” E A. $5 3 55. .3 . $5 an. 5L an .55. we... 65.. 55. . 55. A5. .1 :55. .05. . 5 “m .55., 55... .55 . 8. 555. 0 5.. 5... £5 .5... .5 a... :5. 5. mm a,» w. .55 3 S 5.\v .35 5... “.3. .5... 5... .555 .... 5... n5 .. g .f “m .5 h o. 5.. 5.. ..\. .5. 55. 5 Au 3 5.. 5.5. 5.. .5. . . H 5.5 “m n... F. 5h 5.. n... u. .5.» 5w. .r. 5 .5.» ,5... .i a. ....5 _ \... .5 .5 “m 8 5555. \G 5....» x... W... .355. .Vh .95..5 in.» 5k... 0.5. R... wan “59.. .15 5w...“ .5555 ”55. “5... 5n“: m“ 5 ..5. . .55 . 5 . ,. . .V , ., . . . .. ,5. 55. . 5.. .. .. . v55. 5 .5... 5N5... 5 H... 55”... q 55,... h: 5va ..... a.» mu. 5....M. 35..» ”.5.» .5.5. ex 5.... 5w.» m“ .55 . 555 .556 .qu .55.} 35. . an? in 555. pm... 5. mu (5 5555. .9... .50.. NH. *5 “m .5. 3355...”... 5...... 5.55mhn .s.wm§c§5mu.wam 3 . 55.. .55 , i. v.5.» ... .5. 5 . 5.... .55.. . 5. 5 .9 v 5.. . a.” ,5. \., . . .u “x. . m mmm... 5.53 5.....m55... 95.5:nw.am .. . 55. .n... «55. V5. 5.5.“ 5 . z. . .535 . 5.. . . c5. .5 a .55. 5.... 5.... .5. .5 .5. .... 5.\. .553 w. 5... .5... mm .. m a... 5... m... a .. ... h... m m... .55.... ”mm «MW 9 .a .55., 55“.“ fiu .55 55m... an “05“ 5....5. K... «.55. «\w e .r. 5... ...5 8 mm 3 55 5.. a“ 5...“. n5 .3... .5... S S .u. . . ... .. 5.. .9. .5...“ .5... 5m: .55. “\ .». e. f. “.5 . 5.. 5.5. .95. E. h. .5». m...» a. .w. .M. an. 5.. .5 a.» 5m . :5. ._ ..5. . . .51. . 5. 5. .555. 5.. . . 5 , . In... 5 . AV "5.. .qu , M5. .. .55..» 3 Wu 555. ..\“ 5 .Mux. or... 5.1. .55... w”. «U 5.. . “.5: mm 3 S. “.5... ..5.<5 .5... .1... W5. .53 MN .555 ....5.. 5w {5... ....., .55.. .5... .5). “m .5 S .5. Nu. u. . .. u... a... 3.5. .......... .5... mm. m... S 5... mm .54.... “55.5 .55 . .4... 5»: 55 55 H». n c «.5 A: 35. 4.“ K r 5.. .5... w... 8. C - a 5...... a G .55 .. .3. R 5. K an.“ R... 5555 ..... n5... 5?. A. . 355.“ . :. Q5 “55.5w 55.5 52 .5\ w“ 5 .5 5... 5. 8 5.. .5 .5. .9. .h n... 5... 55 km a... .5. .55 3 . L m... 55.. 5.... E .55.. 5... .55 5.. 3 .5 n ..... a, .i. .. a m. 5. 3 5.5., “v. M“ .5 25,. .. 5.. . .5 5.. . ., . 5...... Swim n53 3.5.5.5 “.5“. 553.5 ..5.\. .5“ by . 0 NH». .3. 0 \5.. {V “W 5... ..... fl 55 .5. .8 .5 a H. mm. “5. r.” a... Q Q ,555. 3 Nm 5.. . . S 5. p. 5.5. ML 5.... R . “M .\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\$ An. N... .5. .2 3 S a... 5., a 3.. 5.. . .5. 2.. 555, .5ww a... w», M9 . .55 5 m5\ $5.5M e 5355. .55..” W5. #5. (“V ..o.\. \ m“ ”a 5.. ..... ,..v. : . .5. x... E 5.. 5.. 5n“ 5.5 .m.\ ..5. H55 .8 3.. P“. R. 5.. .\.. is. 5...... t 5... i . .0 5. S5. “5» 9 ...5. «W5 2.....5 55. R E .5. .3 “kn 55. 5... \. .5 1,... .5..\. . 55. um“. . . “5,. Wm .uh «a... . 55. W5... ., . . 55 .. 5.... s Q ma «3 w. v... .55. .... {I +5 .55. N. V... n» «5... r. .55 8. .58.. EA. .5 «u. ... 5.“ 5..” , .. .. .5\.. . ..5 5 m... a .55. 5... u 5.. .5. 3 ,. . . . . .5. .5 .5. 53 5n. .5 «5. C .. .5 f» <5. ..5. .55 . WV . \. .55 .555 fl.» \5. 55. 555. H .5» G 55.. . .5 :5. c5 .5: .55 5A \. . 555w ,. $35 .55 . c“ .5 55. 5 nu: km 3.. n 5. 2.. Mn. «N» 3 55m“ .55. “.3 \. MW :5 .5 ..5 .- .\.. . V555 .5 .m .5 a. 5 5 5 .55. :5 x... 5. 5.. 3.. . . .3 55... a.“ .5. .w .5 .5... 5...... . .. 55 .v . 55. 5., .. . 5 . m... .5 .5... 55 .53 3 fl .3 .5... 0 . H. wt .5 . it t. fin. .. . N“ .V. 555. .35 55 . ,.5. ,1. 55.... .5: . .h... .15 .55. . .2 . . 5..., .m... Mu" m m“... . . .555 5... . W55 V55. «‘55. d5 55> 553 .5 5.2 .5v em. “H... .u... 3.5 3» .u... 5 .3 m. 9, .5. 55 5..” .5. .55 3 a. 5... .55.. 5.... N. 5 K 55. .5... Wu 5. . 50.55.. 3.5, v...» :5“. 5.5» . .55.» . (5.5.. .mu Mm . 5m... \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ww -‘\ \ § .\\\ \ -2\ \ \\\ . \. \ A \x - .x s \ \\ “W X“ _\_\, . . . \- gv§ {‘6‘ § #3 z \ ' \ ‘I§‘ *e3ji\ §§:\ $3; 5 \\-\ . 3 ~3, \ V ‘ ‘;\“<‘3 §\§\%§\° I §§§ /r t// I l/ w i .\ . \ - t I\ /////A I ’III ’I/ ,//7///, r //i is A «Sim-saw g‘s‘iBSSS‘GQ‘EES swam itmeatgtfi <18 years avian} by the {Innmgficui‘ iegifiai‘ure and «‘3: mmvam tcrdage‘. K Swinecfimm sgamm far swam ‘sder‘s £5: piaméjfig 5:39} €¥S§I$33§x£§f§fi§§ mastss’iéfi hfiiaéirk amé gsazia‘ézaiigss's 5&3rviw& 2L i;fii}§‘£i§§¥}iifi§0§3, as'sszé :Exe'aeim‘itém‘: {36? $3.5;- tsgnz warm gagstesm "VS :Sg s: :‘3 R \{'$- -\ \X: _' nu ‘ \ We Rfififigs mm fiswraga $23M in fee ma§ ‘\ \ . . fund ,' ,. ‘ . .' \gsgnaigfietiimx Cmmtfi {35%} mean u fl email mir'gz‘amfimit‘ién in fix? mmning {Rita‘s-iii, Eire s‘ei‘guimii ii: iii“: 3;? £~ Ei§f£§22§§iiai§£$33 fl)? fa‘szém‘a; {xss'iifis'iiqx \. K 1'5“? amms: same sa‘i'mi' its} marmmmm mmmm Mait‘h gfiammgm angr wit? me mm, aw mééa ‘ S‘Efifiim’i‘ amfi eiwsemgz mim‘i’éfisag veguimfi‘ :13; {has Segszarfimam' is? Mamas Ram-3?: am? fisfiéimm‘: Eewéam amt * Tm fififififis resma’sa m mafia twig-32m, mm mm Nady Rim-figs: fiemiem mfis’fimu-i‘xii}; §:?~3;s‘§‘fis{é3‘§§'i§§§ {ms}; mafimgg m. form: ,3“- a: the? mgiami irsfm~ V ii: is} 3.- fu§§ gas-my: m“ ‘. i: ymzs‘sg await Ryeaazfg: Uanmcsmi‘ém, «$231935 am i'searfitih emsiiy. «$23 émfiemfimfient am: £9;<§:é:‘a“§33§§ megbf :‘agzmasmzing 3§§ mmmmmt gmims.. =9 ‘fim amms isfimm 3mm? imfiumm- isms: wacfim‘ mfim 23M mafia: is} fiamémm {Eur WW‘SZ 5‘ éwmm in ‘i‘hfifii csmsrsxmmx s3? ragiétfiy chasngmg mmfiem {33‘ mm é‘xssfidh‘zsgg kayaks am wwgs: mmésk Z gm 2 , I / , 1- ‘ I, 5’: w, 5, 7 s :suéfimaars, am gss‘misimfi m wmk Mgafhw i“- S-ugmm't m‘ that can-Lamsg'sifies, Wigwam and .sszsmes‘sssm miidififig aim-am ' gamma as“ w gmgmmfiem we cms‘z‘mata mass-S:- was m. was, pmvrw <3;};3s:ss‘tuaé§fieg, anti “metiagsa «Each year i‘m‘au: {:mmmmita' mamharsz‘ ;' . 3 flag R§§x§§v§§§ emgmwsss‘ wmgéa anti famfiias » ifmm ta} Simsatsatate effecfiss kn {imm- : =_. $13? (imam; and fig: imprmed mwima few 33. e a mmam 9‘s: “5%? ,ags’azfimaw a233g3gfi-mrem‘ {Bur {“atfi'mmsmir Mei} {msmtéég {Chis-:1- afi‘eér {TQQ‘Em’Efi gmumfi i“ 2:)“: ,, ‘52. W 52 :4? 33" 2 ft) 33 m a“ {a m 3/; (I; :33 (m flags Rfifififis pmvwe aim: aws‘gfimm 38am} Rasfih first 35$; {raining flammmiw {fiewersmmx 5m whim? §¥£s$£$§§23-‘ ”gimme t: {aim “x38“i’3‘3‘: awammfig. Was high-iégN emexgéng mm .5385: g§§s§€€§§§€$, 53% «mm a? {Team ‘ i* We Rwfifiss mmfifia mmrmafism, masmam, amfi §in§§a§as m mmm u51;§tgs.‘s:xz§s:*sizka gmwste $325932} mwsfim am am "i‘nrrfingFoénfii‘i‘.mg wehséte $0! yam-kg ms) 3% firms $935832; mmnmtt {mama‘s ta mwiéwsew W ms: We: Em < Wm as‘a Sm: in me: mmsm WE may-Mg mama-3 Ma: ' y Seisght 3‘0: 2%: sea \z‘g; {3: mamm- m 818% r 39.?» n mam gsmxéum mmfits mm mach thmwan‘ds s3? mm an a kw: fimgmv Wiizémgfzgva.raga £35 3 staff: saga-Ema: mm, 3m? “3&0 M4383 miss-mam snow the mm}: was make as <§§§§emm2£s far =§~rs§§vi§~zszaig f‘ *" 23mm . * ‘mfis fiMHfigir misf'éismfi 3m Mmemfiéw imam an ifiwsimant 33% 333133, A to ‘i‘hss: Ri‘éfiéfis hfifif 5. Eng, 3:: § 323 mfis‘m‘: an é‘efifirsfi 1:36;?ng 1f} 3‘: attafie {Liming Iiiiiil'l'iiiiii/7/iiii1/11//////////////////////1/1//x//////////II11/1/1///I/x/I/x/x/IIx/////////II//////////////////////////////////l/1////////xxx/1////////////////////////////// ll‘ r WIIIII/w1/I/I/I/IIIIII/I/I/I/IM/I/l/W/I/wwwwxw/IWWW/MW/z/WWWW/”WWW WWWWRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR‘x‘x‘x‘xk‘x‘x‘x‘x‘x‘xxxxxxx / m... ”.33 m ......3 w... n3 a... .1 m, m3 3 w... n... ... m. . n 3 3 3 .3 .53 3 A... . a. . . . a 3 3 ..... a m m3 . m U m m 33 .i n... 3 ...3 3 3 .3. 33 3 .m .: W 3 a. 93 3 m. mm 8 3 3 w... .m3 Na a... D... “a... V3 3 n n . 3 3 3 m U3 3 f. 3 3 3 . 3 3 . m e m 3 3 3 d m. «.m if.» .3 3 3 3 .u. Ki3 3 i .33.... 3 3 3 .53 3 m... M... E 3 3 3 W m3 w 3 S .m a. .3 3 3 . U. .3. ... m n m3 m fi .m 3...” a. m m3 6. Q U. U m M N3 n... mg m a... E. 3 3 3 i3 3 6 .3... a... 3 3 3 n $3 3 Ga g Y... . . . a ‘3.” 3 3 S n a. 3 3 3 .fi U3 3 :. mfi E a, 3 3 ...._ $3 3 C . .35 t Pl 3 3 3 3 3 8 g a... U. 3 3 3 .3. B. 3 a. fi .3. his. 3 3 3 a a... 3 is 9...... 3 3 3 lam x33 3 a. fi i is a 3 3 3 .7... a3 3 n g S n” 3 3 3 a “:33 3 C , as: r... .1... 3 3 3 we. $3 w a a. m g . 3 8 .E h... .4. 3 3 3 U. 3 .... 3 flu A as“. new 3 3 3 .m W3 m... 7.. a 5 3 3 3 .n U3 .H.... 3 C «a 9..., w 3 3 .H «.03 a...“ 3 s . h 3 3 3 . r3 w... 3 m Q d 3 3 3 m 63 ... 3 .H a Mm n 3 3 3 i3 ...... 3 fl ._ .3. a 3 3 3 fl AWm? x.“ 3 G 8. 3 3 3 . 3 3 N h .I. g 3 3 3 % m3 3 fl ”.3. n 3 3 3 .U. 9. nit- 3 3 3 .. 3 .i m h A... 3 3 3 m m3 3 .. . a. n -3 3 m R h a 3“ Q3 8mm .3 6......“ 3 3 3 ,4. Pa 88. vi. 3 3 3 2.... ”m3 3 . e a m a. N W 3 fi psi. 3 3 3 . 3 3 m m .m n... m m. 93 3 h a... U 3 3 3 m H... 3 aw. T a. he .3 3 3 3 . U. 3 mg 1 .fik a. 1.. 3 .u S p. 3 3 3 i 8. 3 d. .2 My... 3 3 3 3 % m3 3 .fi U“ a a. fid3 3 g .3. . 3 3 3 .. H3 3 go... a «u. g 3 3 3 ”“3 3 ..... h n .3 3 3 mm .3 a... w .U 83 an E3 m U m M3 U n... w. a Fh3 a. U3 s... “a U. v.3 a. n3 3 n 3 m3 3 3 U ...3 U .w h a3 S U3 3 m... .m. .w a. U m . .m .1. U3 a. U ........3 a ._ a {3 3 3 % no”: ... 3 vuh § Umfi 3 3 w®m3 E 9.. M3 u... ....... N E «.3 3 3 S. 3 . E... m3. 3 An 3 .93 . H,..... % n33 . m r .3 abie, u. n‘ .»~ \~ “ v k. v . V a. .\ afierfi grad saggm‘tg. iis famiamentai is hmmifig 1? g targ; gas a) fin 9tu Wifig flfl‘k‘ifi'finifififi g& a»? afifi {3: Eve} giwrta fig: iieéaig r $33 spec: Hie r Emhavieerafi Mam: cam, amasg shmfifi he ami gamma m . a $ $ PM a n. .5 v m ,3 is we» .‘\ .a “3 “u i m .~ $235 ma magi fa gmiat ii 35 m in gm £3; $333359, gafe. '5 mm afiesfive. mere timaii ism gnierm msifleniiai. Germ m: {£83295}??? :- aime 3 gmrs . 3ft :3 as a 3 AT fiii LEEt'ELg 3F {‘fkRE “fa-'3 QQRE am“ ar- .- t5“ fecwery—mifi i timeiy straighfiamam, and. gimme; HNBERSEREEEEE FfigfiifiHGNS ASSESS HfiijfiiNG ciian Swami: %\\\\\ W:1x:22:::\.11\.111111\.\.111111111::1\.\>.\>\.\>>>>.\.1\>>>.\>.1:2:» \\>\\“\% x:: . . “5% % 3% %-t 3% $3 3: %*’ 3% %3 x A“ 3% x3 x.: 5: 3\ %. . 3\ %3 .3‘-\xxx 3% %3 «xxx: 3% %3 , \\x~ $< 3% %3 M )\\\\\$ 3% :3 _x\\\\\\< 3% %3 xx\\\\\; 3% %3 \\\\“3 3% %. :1 .xxxxxx: 3% . . $3 :\\\\\\\\% 3% $3 :.\\.\\.\‘ 3% :3 w \‘ '\“ :3 %3 w 5. m 3% %3 m»? :3: $9. §\\\\; 3% %3 m m as; .xxxxxxxxxxx 3% \3 w. :1 xx: ‘\ ~ \\ .: %3 » 9. ‘ ‘\\\\\\\‘ $9“: 3% %3 m W 3: .xxxxxx\\\\\\‘ AM“: 3% x3 .. .v. , . ,. \ . 3\ x: w «3 .Q N xxxxx .\ \\ in; \ :xxxV 3\ x. w 1:, \\\\ . . \ V m w 3.3- \\\ »\ .x\\~. .: v\ 3\ :3 ~ :. :“ \ N ~‘ §%\\\“ 3% §§ w M w ..5 \\\\\\\\\\\\ %\x\\x\\‘: ::\\\\\\ 3% %3 W w w 3: 3 .¢.\\\x\ :“ v “I 3% :3 W -- k: .x\ $11: \\\\\\" \\xxxxxxx‘ 3% %3 m w w 583' .\x\\\\\% :x: 3:. :1 ‘5. 3% \ . . . ‘ ‘ w \\: ' mow #5: w. . a» 3x:- ‘:: %3 ‘ 3: .‘xxx\*‘ :‘x: «xxx? ‘xxxxx 3% $3 $3 W N § “\ 3““) \“ xxxx: 3% .... . 3 ._ » 5. . ‘ $3 m ‘95: $1 3:: :: ::\x: :x.\.: 33 : :m m :a: Q 1 ' , w: 3: :3 ? . . 1.. :\\\ 11:1; :13 35:: 3: %3 \ 1‘: \N V *xxv xxxx: ‘- \‘ 3% %3 :1. N sx“; %\,\\: .x\\\\\‘ 3% $3 w ‘\‘\\\x ‘ '\\‘x‘$ %‘\\“‘\' 3: §3 3.7. $\\\\ \xxx; ~ \\x\,§.g.\ 3\ \ ‘9‘: _ . x\\ .xxxxxxxx \\ ‘% \3 a Q \\\\\\\\. ¢ .\\\\‘ s‘ o \\ 3\ %3 ‘ 3 \xxv‘ 3% x3 \\\\\\.\\ x 3x :3 . xx- M 3% \\ - ‘ \n \\ %3 5:3: . ¢\\\ 3% %3 . : %\xxx\xx\\‘ 3% x3 ' ‘ '3 3\ \\ . \ \\ \3 . \\\\\\ \\ $3 :x\ “$5: 3: $3 \‘ 3: x3 , 3x %3 \xxxxxxV 3% \\ . \\ $3 mm: 3: ‘ \ %3 :\x\x\xxx$ 3% %3 ..\x\\\'\'\\\\\ 3% %3 \xxxxxx\:‘ 3% %3 x\\x\\\\\\.\‘ \\ 3% %3 “3 +N\ 3% $3 :11: 3: \\ 'C \ 33 .:\%\>\ 3% %3 {g 3 3% \ . %3 ‘ \\‘ :% $3 \ :% $3 $ 3: // \\ ::\.\.\.\.\.\.:\.\.\.:\.\.::\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.11\.:\.111\.\.\.1\.\.11\.\.\.11:1\.$5.11:::\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.:\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.:\.\.\.\.\.\.\.:::\.:\.:1:\.\.\.\.:1:\>>>.\.\.:\.\.\.\.11\.1:1:1::::111:11111:1:11\.1:11:11::\.:1:1\.1:1:\\"\\“W“WW‘WWWWWWW ‘ \3 \\ \\ . ‘: “~ ‘\ \3 x . \ “ ‘\ x3 «A .... .3; , _ vs ‘08 , -“. :\ %3‘ 3‘s x s“: 1' .3; w «v: 53> ‘3 £3 (3: ’1‘ :9 w. 3% $3 w m: ..- m ,2: 5;: m :7: 3: 3.- m 3% $1 4: 1: *° W “:5 w 9.. “a .2: :1: <~ :- M :3 \ . 5w \_ . . . h- 5\ x: x8 ~ ,.. 217$ - 6” x~ ~.. -; . Q»! .\ . » . x. M: ... . Mu. .- . Q. . xv »\ \ {3.) x . «- . \a . ~ _ »\ :5 311 :13 ,1: . 3 n. a: :1“ a 1-5 cr- 5. 4 '2: 5G 1:: V :: %§ :3) 3... ' .5; 5,3,“, ii... if: S: Av «,5 ‘33 {33 L. w- Q.- k 3 V: 5.“. (3‘: - n T :% %§ M m ‘3‘} M... : Q; 5w .3 {1* x{,, ~\ .\ S \,, w». Q3 «3 ; .33 $33 3‘ := 2:: :1.- :ii m I» 2‘: :33 at :2. ~ 1 x‘ 1: £6 5:: a}: ‘3 N C‘T‘ :2:- :1 3% » .5 f - .. x - ‘ . .' U : .‘- ‘ - »' ‘ , v- . $s :3 as :5 :5 ‘1: 5: :2: ,... 9 .1: :- ‘1; :3 3 .5: .5. 1“ m a: m k" 5: %: <3 :3 .w *2 :4 w A {1‘ E g,“ '4...“ “cs ‘6 m :1. 91 >53 3‘" {I‘- 3:221 N ‘3“ 3% . . s... »\ . , . . - 3 » ~ : “3:“ é*"§~‘:$- :s a: 2 a “s 33 m: fi“?:~ri3‘:3‘i‘3““az:: 5: 3: z: ,3; ‘~» ‘31: .5 «5 : W C.» .91 2% ‘- :55 523 .1»- ~<33 3:3 (we .. 5:5 “'3 W. .' S: $3 “”5 5:»: ‘1.“ “a “‘ 33:: “w 1- x: 1:13 2': $ :2: «c: N 5% 5" “ ~l 1: “:3 i~1~§s f9 ‘% \5 :. _ 9 5“ .«3 m, «w 333 w t . ~+.,- 3- x... .3: 4.3. .5 ‘M * ‘ s... v“ '\ «A. >1 :\ x . u... 3 m “ .q Mr. .- . \ . i 3.. 1 . 3.. .. .3 “1} :x %3 v? ‘ '5’ C‘ _‘"" :93 3,3, am $33 :3.) E 3‘3 a; E: t: t. .. 3; 5;: .. ‘ .1 (3“- . ..., ii 3“ 2?: Q; 3% 5: 5:)“ t .1 3% . . . . .w m. . . .. - . ‘ ' ' - ~ . "5““ . -. N t %: a . an T»: - 3;. :5; .2. .3: "- 13:; 3: .2; *~* .V: n “‘1' 1.. :3) 111%: 1;: E: 5: :2 :1»- .g. a.- r: a 3: a 5:; “:3 :12 $ w it; .-.~.; 1, :3? g. 3.: $3 '3 t: 5... ‘~" L“: =% \5 _ x 5... s... a . ,... . . w .. w '1‘ n '> “t ‘ <3; » ‘\ \» 3‘) .9“ “h v“ M A; V 32} My .. . <1} -. v“. aw. 5\ M ,x: 3w. v m. m x. 3... . m 7 x. a... s... m {3; ~x x» ‘ u. w. m m. m 3 Qv , ,.\. v“. '0'“ WV‘ Q .\ \5 M x m a. . \ 5 «g :15 ,. Q 3». 2k V \v M. . >w ~\ ‘3 v .. ..._- . . 3 . 3» ¢ ”K‘s v. rx »: N. w i: u . .\ x» M. 3* v: m: M M :4... a.“ Q. n .. N , 3 . . , {w m "G _\ x: ‘3 x.. a: a x... ‘w- w :3. .2: ~\ 3‘25 Q- .~\ M :43 3 ‘ . 5x \» x. 3 ‘ w , . _ , ., m , m .. .5 . \ \ x m VM 5. - £3 .m.“ V‘- . . C» . . 3 . . . ix} . %3 A» 53.. g? «a .s: 3’“ E“ <3; 33:" 13‘ 1C: 137» 333 3A 1.3 C: :13 ‘1, 7" ‘4" :91 9-1 5:: 1C3 3% %: xW' . \ ‘ w M.» Q: .35. ... x» - {fi 3:. x.“ .M ,3 '-- .W ix 33 K“ :3 z“ x3 {(2 ‘% $= «m 1‘ “2‘: w w. .. 5: :2 :5, :«3 - - w 3.: .. «1: .z m a .m s: x: M» A “-, ‘ 3 . w. ”3 f» \w‘ (\5 5». E 9A {:3 ‘3‘ Qt .g} .2“: k“ 5‘” ’93 5% %: n: _ *9 :- a. 3: Y‘ K 1.. 5.1 5:: .“ (‘5 ,1: ’ 3:: .M «3 .. "1‘: “‘0 5% $3 0 5 .T’Ei’. 3‘”. ‘5.) w {43 3: 15: x :5" n”: I): K: 9's; {‘3 “5 1 :53 a:- m: 5% $2 5* “5.. W-:—-&§ 39:; :2 .t 3/3 - ~. ‘1‘ ‘% °sz ~: 5 A‘ . -“ ’ . ‘ \\ .“_ N . -- ! $3 1&3 1 : . , g}; ‘1‘" .::‘. § {‘3 «a, .213 f“ ¢~< 35 'u“: 33'; F“ k: 53$ 33:15 ‘w‘ 3.? “ :% 5: m a .. c" m m 3.. m {.13 1 >2: X, ~w- w '9 M— 11: «3 x. «‘11 W \t .W- {‘53 ‘5" “" W 51‘- “."‘ 5 1. ‘w , ‘1 f»: “R {I} , ~. :5» :\ \5 5 M- M ”:- 4; x ‘3. . v.3 . \~ E ‘5 ({‘5 w -\ x . A W“ . m ' ‘ W .. 1‘ £3 M. “*1 ”M .~.. It. \ “s - n . ‘% \5 5..» m A d“ \. m M g. u) . . . 3.. x -\ x. 4...: w - 5 .5 . M :5 ¢ “M \~ ‘\ A. «9. 0..) \ 5v “‘1 ‘x :: vrz»mz~w.»wm~rs:.§: :3 MN». m: 3: %‘5 +-\ 3: . :5 :9 “’3 :3 _-‘«‘ m ‘31 «<3 2r :6: 5:: V ”‘1 3': €33? 7% 3% :5 V. w 5“. :. w W: x» .33 x a; . .3. m x. c; k a). r: L: s: 'w) 3: %3 ,. 3 a; w a: 5’“ .5“. ’-’ v 3‘ : \ 3V: ‘ «‘3 {u v)“- w _\.\ I} _ 3% %= «m , t... m .w 5;- u: T5 '11: a: “a :21 V. t) :3;- s: .. “Q i: M: t: 3: : :“awmwmgamwxsc :5»: -::3 :4. :51“ wk: : 3: ‘1 ... 13‘" .3: C «r- .3 ."\ «a: W me ‘~ “A. "‘ ~°\ m *‘t 3:; .4: ‘f’ :5,» 3: 3 m x. N w, «a. x.» w \A (33 )3 13 V 3.. ‘-- 1‘9: Q m :- 5 (\ . 3% Q: {E 3‘ '3“: 2.». Q 3" "w: “SEC 2% “a: ‘5: 23.3 15:: -~ 5: $15 w IL E “cs 3 ’5’" .\ ~53.“ m 13‘ 33 3% 3 ‘ ‘ 3 . 1w .‘ .. . \. . . ‘ w “5 g 53.“ x \ «Q ‘ .‘ . ' . 3 %"§:~’f~“i’:-"‘ 3.3.133? 3353mmm95> 3:3“: a;:;:.<§:«‘:3 1:: at“? g“ 3% . - .. . ._... _ .m 3 m. ,. . . . %3C3-'N£?“‘£:Nw:::s;‘r‘§‘m“iuxz :13: ~§.’~:1S;f:5 :: :13 35:6:“ 71‘: 33:31:23: N‘?V1N.Q§3Eficmh:g .mggmmggfi\§: Km? 5.; 3% \ ,3 w. ~. .—~ ... ._ ;.. x .- ‘ W; m 3.. ~ ($1 .. _ 3.\ . .9. _\ m i; - \M 3 $3 .3..- m - w -- ‘3': \me .‘o‘Q J2 in v3; “W m {w 433. \ 3A,. E; w Q. w x. t. T‘ .- . . 3...? 3% :3 m ”: “r x... ‘ v .9? "a“ ' *5: 5.. Tu ‘ ‘s. i» W $4 >11 :1: . t” 1““ m :7 3$ ::~. :2: :mt::: 9:: 2:... ixw: ~33 \: 5.5 ‘ 5. r1 - ..._ .5 3. 1.. w.- na 3.. :1 .a: 1‘ , - *2 -3 .. 3: :3msr. mmanwwmmm: ”3: .1339... :~x:w““° 4:5: fl 3: :3 :1; r: «a -: ...- 1:: ”1 c.» w ‘“ 55’ “v‘ :2: :3 :5“. ’33 E s :35 “2:: I: 2‘39 3% ~ .“‘< . - n 5 N, . \ , x , ' . - ’ . ‘ . %3 n .~ :3: 3313 Q ~33 .. w 53 £3 :3; a: 5;: «*5, (h m '3}? a: 52.. \.I 3:: 3% %3 .2"; 3’; “<23 .52: 3 5.3.: :‘0 m 5 33‘ 'w x. 21.: g 32"; 5... a): 9.: "K: N 3% \3 .Qw‘ 3:3 {1‘ Qd . ,x.) {"3 S: “V W “" I? {3' (3-: N M {D 5“ ‘3‘ 3% 33:: ww: “3.? $3.: ’1‘ 3?; 1:5 3"“ -’“~ ““1”“ a}: 3% :MH: :3. Mr: : : - 5:: :Mm": .. : $3 «CT-*1“: x9 §:“‘ .12 s 3% \3 3 3 23'- .M- M m\ .. a‘ > .. V». . . , Vx \\ $3 a: m. £3: .2. r: 33 ‘55: 5... :. 3:: g x- :3, 3 {3 .1- 3.. if: N 1) ~ g s .w. 5 . §3 . 54$ ~24: M t..- " R3 :mfi y. \% %3 >33 $3 $3 3 3 1‘3; 11;; '33,; b». k. 3 {‘Q‘. :3» 3% %3 Q: ‘ a. ‘x... ‘1‘; .. V S31 3.: 3% \3 i: " 5‘ flv (~\ 3% :3 .- w 3: ~\\.\ 3% xxxxx‘xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx WWWMWWwaxxx\x\xxxxxxxxx\\\\\xx\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\%\\\‘\\\\\‘\‘\‘\\\\\x\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\% AAAE mA 3AA... . ...-{yAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAA AAA: .....AA AWE AAAA AEE EMA AAAAA. AAAAE .AAE AAA... AAA. AAAAAEA. AAAAAA. AAA». ..mA... .22... .HWEAEAAAEAAAAEA E3523 .3 .mAAAEw EM.“ AAAAAA BAA-AAA. ., .....mm AAAA ESE AE .AAAAE AAAm... ...AAAAAEE E .....AAAAAAAAE. AIA-AAAA Am. WEE mmAAAMAA AAA-.2... AZ... -...AA... AAA: EA. AAAAAA ...AwAAAAAA 3...:AEA A323. . 3.3m. ENE AAAAAEAAAAAAAA... Enema AAA-AAAAAAAAAA A... .AAA. A2AA AAAEAEAE AAAAAAAAAA A... AAA. .2... AAEAA... 2..-AA .33. mg. AAAAAAAAA 33.. 2.23.3 AAAAAA.» ..EAAAAAAAE $323.; AAAA .EAA 22.33... .2 mm Emma. AA: AAA 3.. new». ....AA 2.... As... AAA-AAA: AAAAAA AAAAAAA ..AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA2A ...A ....AAAAA AAAAAAA. ......mA .3 . ......AAAAAAAAAAAAAE: AA... 2A.A,A,AA-AA.A .. EA. AAAAE 23. AA AAA mAAA $va ‘3». AA AAAAA A.A..A.A.AAEAAAAA.2A AAA: mm ..A. AMA-Ammw Emma. .AAMAEAAA AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAA. .....AA AAAAAA mam-AAAAAAAAEAAAA. AAAAA ..AEAA :AAA . AAA-AHA: AAAAAAAAAAA .mnE ...AAAAAAA 93.23... AAEAAAAA... . AAA-... AAA AAA-23mm... AAEAAEA mm: «.3... AAA .W.A._A.AAA ...-E AAA. ...AAA A...2.,A AAA-.... EAAAAAAAAA. AAAA A 233-: :3. mAA A. AAA-AAA: A. AAAAAAAAAAAAA. AAA ..EEAAAAAAAAAAAE .2: AAAAAAAAAAAB AAAAA AmmAAAAEMA :AAW AAE EAAECAAAEE ....2 :AmAAAAAAAAA AAA-AAA. AA... ...AAA AEEE .23 .....AA AAA... AA: ......AA. AA A333 AAAAAAAA ...AAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAA ”Er-AAA AAEAAAEAA AAAAA .....AAAE AA.....A.,..AA~ , AAEEQEEAAEAA PAAAA .AA .AAAAAAEEAAAAAAAAAAASA £33 A :AAEAAAE mmmfim. «3AA... AAAAAAAAA . . . (2222 . «3.23% EAmA-AAAAAAA AAAAAA AAAA. 333m ..A AAAEAAA .mwrxwuymw .fimimw {.m. A , ..A. .3 AAAAAAAmmAAAAAm. ,AAAAAAAAA ...AEA AAAAAAAAA. AAA-AAAAAAAE . AAAAA .AAEAAAEA: ...AAAA ”AAAAAAE: .22.: AAAAAA AAAAAE $3.38 AAAAAA 3E. A... AAAAAAAAAAAAA Err-w :33 Em... A.“ MAN. AAAA. AAAA Ami-Em, .AAAAQAAAA AAA; ASE AAAAAA ma AREA-AA , .23 ma 3% AAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAEEAAEA. . JAE AA: . , AEA. AAAAAAEE EAAAAAAAAL AAAA AGAAAEEEA AAAAAAAAEEAmAAA ..AAAAA AAA AAAAAAMAAwHA ..Ammm,.2AA.A.m AAA... 33 ENE AAAA2 . Am. 3.3.x...» mam AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. AAA 3.33. Em. AAAAAAA ....AA AAmAAAAAAA..AAAAAAA AAA Em AAA. mAAAAAmAA Ex». «AAA-AN Ema...» AWE Ema. AAA... AAA-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ...-AAA... A... AAAAA. AGE .AAAA_ EAAAAAAQAAAAA. . A... 22.233 AAA Em EEAAA 333% EA EEE EAEAEEEEA AAAAAAAASAAA AAA AAA-A..A..A..A.§.A.2 AAAAA ...: mats... in AAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAA AAAA...AAAAAA AAAAAAAAAA... EASE. 0253A...» Emu-A .AAEAAAA .AAAAA AAAAEE... ..A AAAA .....A ...AAA. E AAA-......AAAAAAAAAAAAAA 3% E3. AAAEAA. AAAA..A.AA.AAAAAA.A .AAAAAAAA «AAA AAA AAA. ..AAAAAAAAA 3AA AA. AAEAAA AAAAA AAAAAAAA Em... ....A-AAAAAE EE 3..» 3.3 ..EAAAE AAEAA. mm... .....AAA 33% AAAAAAE...A..AA.A.AAAAAAAAAAA A13 ......AAAA ......EAA 3 EA. .. AAA. .mA-AA AAAAAAAAA... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAa: .3... E... Axum. .....A ......AAAAAA ..A 8 AAA-.3 AAAAAAAA 33 EA... .. “NEE ..A...-..A... Emma. AAAA :3 Wm. ..,-AAA AAAAA AA AmAAA AAAA Em AAAAEA .AAAE... AAEAAAE m «EA-mam E3:- ..‘Ei‘: \- E: 3 $2 V“ 23:: *g' m 2% .AAAAEAA. AAAAEEA AAA ... AU. 3AA... AAA-333.233. AAAAAAAAEAAAAAAEAAAA 2.... ....AAAAAAEAAQE AAA AAAm ...AAMA. AAAA AEAAAAAA .E ASA... ARENA... AAAAAE NAAAA Arman... AAA-AA AA 3% EA umEom AME-A 3.“: AAEAEA AAEAAEAAE ..AA AAA AAA... . Em AA. .33 A39 AAAEEAAA2:AAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAA... ENE... EA AAA. AAA-AA AAA AAA-Ema A2... . 33E? AAAAAAAAAA 333 Am EAAAAAEm AAAEEAAA. AAAAAAAEE AmmAAAAAAAAAA ..AAAAEA ENE... v: 1:: 3}! 3.: :‘z :1: “:3 3.2....» ...-.... 3.33.2.3 AEAAA 2...“. .AA EAAAAAAAAA. 3AA. .»AA.2A2AA.....AA MAE. A...» ..EAEEAE AAEAAAAAAA gamma 3:33.... EAAEAEQ .33.. 383A 33.23 EAAAEA AAEEAEAEAA SEW... .AAAA.A,.A. .2. A E AAAAAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAA AAAAA ..,AAAAm AAEA . AAA AAAAAA. E AAAEEA EAAAA 3 mmmmm-AAAA. EA. ...-ch AEAAAmA-AA AAA-Aw EA AAmAEA-A AAEAAA mAAAEAAAA A... A2... AWE... AAA-EA A... E .2 332.. AAAAA. AKA AAA-A.» ..A mam MAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAA AAAAAA SEE A AAA... Emu: A. AEAAAAEAAAE A. AEEAAA 3.2.3 AAAAA AAAAA. AAAAAAmEAA 3.3 3.2. E E3 AAA-...... AEmAAAA. .AAAAAAAA AAA .2. 33m. .AAAEMAA... .EAAAA A. AAAAAAA AAAAAAAA. Am EmAmA-AAE 3333333 “.3 AAAAAEEA Ewm AAAAAAEAAE AAAAA .22 ......A 2.2 EEEAAA 33. E333 AAAAA. ...-.... ..,,\....-....2....., ...A.\. ...\ .\\,. \....\\..A\\.2A 2.x.\A.\.,A,...2E «an AQAEAAAAAEE .... ..., .. AE ......AAAAA .AAAAAA. AAAAAA m AAEAASAA 33333 mEEEAAAA 3 AAA AAAAAEEAAAAA mm; «3.33%.. .AAAAAA. Am. 3:3»: AAAAAAAAAEAA SEA-3E. Am... 32...... AKA-Em. mA-AAm .AAAAAAAEAAAAAAAAsaAAAA. A...AA2. .. AAA... ......Q ..AAA....A2AA....M.. EA. Ammm AAAEEAAAA... AAAAAAE. ESE ..A A33 A..AAAAA.AA-AA\ . AAAAAEAAAAEE ...AAAA.AA..AA..A.A ....A2A...AAA...2A.A A 33.3.2.me AEAE ..AAAAAAAAAAAAA. \ gm: §§§§§ ‘ 73‘ “fi‘ is,“ ...m.w.;.......m“)..«..m.m..“mm.....“5..“‘H.....‘u..u,\uw‘w‘ fif‘i E Mm? $3 'yaam, fimmm Raging“; mmm 835mm Emmi mm 533%? mafimga “iii: 0 :' sszi h‘ {if ‘x 3&2" ‘1 \ L. x196; ~. q {I y . v » , ‘ 3R Kym: x 96333!“ ~ \\ ..\.,.....\-.-.“ “w... Testimony of Kati Mapa, MSW Intern Eastern Regional Mental Health Board, lnc. Before the Appropriations Committee ofthe Connecticut General Assembly February 18, 2016 Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and members of the committee. My name is Kati Mapa. I am a registered voter in the city of Norwich, and a student at the University of Connecticut School of Social Work. I am addressing you today on behalf of the Eastern Regional Mental Health Board, where l have served as an intern for the past 5 months. I have learned many lessons in my social work classes, as one would hope when paying for a Master’s degree. I have been taught strategies to engage clients and communities, tips to analyze data and people, and tactics to run meetings and organize for change. I have been taught theories and interventions and best practices on a wide variety of topics. But the most valuable lesson I have learned is “to respect the inherent dignity and worth of the person," (NASW Code of Ethics). As with many ofthe best lessons in life, this truth has been cemented through experience. In my short time at the Eastern Regional Mental Health Board, I have seen firsthand how the work ofthe Boards affirms the dignity and worth of the people they serve, and just how valuable this work is to the community. The Regional Boards engage and represent the community’s voice in the oversight, coordination, and evaluation of the behavioral health system. They involve all stakeholders in their process: people with mental health issues, their family members, concerned citizens, providers, and town leaders. Community members are empowered to advocate for their needs through the Catchment Area Councils, site visits, and other community engagement projects. It’s been said that having a role in shaping the system is at least as important to recovery as the services themselves, and the Regional Boards provide an effective way for constituents to voice their concerns and ideas, thus promoting the recovery and the dignity of their members. There is no other structure that so fully empowers the community to participate in the planning and monitoring of mental health services. The Regional Boards do a lot for the state. On a tiny budget, they provide independent oversight of local mental health services, and in partnership with the Regional Action Councils, help to leverage $23 million in Federal funding. The Boards also provide education, facilitate dialogues, coordinate Mental Health First Aid training, and disperse information and resources to community members, providers, and town leaders, all with an average ofjust 2 staff members each. The Regional Boards are respected by their Testimony ofKati Mapa, Eastern Regional Mental Health Board February 18, 201 6 communities and local service providers, and listened to by town leaders, department officials, and state legislators. In a time ofbudget deficits and cuts, mental health service providers are being asked to accomplish more with less. More work with less staff. Better outcomes with less funding. More results with less support. In times like this, it’s all the more important that the consumers’ voices be heard and included in the decision-making process. But under the proposed plan, the drastic reduction of funding and the consolidation of the Regional Boards and Regional Action Councils would essentially eliminate the Regional Mental Health Boards. lnstead ofprotecting the voice ofthe client, the best mechanism for empowering members will be lost. Please restore the Regional Mental Health Boards to their fully funded levels, and help ensure that the community’s voice will continue to be heard. Thank you. Testimony ofKati Mapa, Eastern Regional Mental Health Board February 18, 201 6 The Legislature created the Regional Mental Health Boards so that the citizens could help guide the Department of Mental as it served a vulnerable population There were over 3,000 Connecticut residents living in three large State institutions. Now over 30,000 Connecticut residents are served by programs closer to home. The Regional Mental Health Boards are partners with DMHAS in providing evidence based services to Connecticut residents. Funding for the Regional Mental Health Boards ensures the continued success and viability of State servnces. Please do not reduce the funding for the Regional Mental Health Boards. Lawrence l. Pittinger, Recovery Resources Manager Testimony before the Appropriations Committee on the Governor’s Budget Public Hearing Date: February 18, 2016 Linda Pikul, R.N., MSN, BC Norwalk, CT Re: Proposed cuts to Regional Mental Health Boards Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee: My name is Linda Pikul and I am writing to testify on the budget. I strongly oppose the proposed cuts to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, in particular the drastic cut in funding for the Regional Mental Health Boards and the Regional Action Councils. I am writing to you not only as a Psychiatric Nurse for over 30 years but also as a member of the Board of Directors of the Southwest Regional Mental Health Board. I can attest first-hand to the importance of the work of the Regional Mental Health Boards in our communities for some of Connecticut’s most vulnerable citizens, those with serious mental illnesses. Our work is focused an advocacy, reducing stigma, and most importantly ensuring that all services are readily available and accessible to members of our community and are of the highest quality. Unfortunately, there is not a day that goes by that we don’t read in our newspapers or on social media or hear on the news reports of a tragedy as a result of mental health issues. It is not long ago that our State was devastated by the tragedy of Sandy Hook. That event should continue to serve as a wakeup call to every citizen of Connecticut about the need of accessible mental health services The mission of the regional mental health boards and regional action councils are to ensure services that are of the highest quality by on-going review and monitoring; that they are available to all persons who need them; advocating on behalf of those impacted by mental illness so that they may have a voice in the development and provision of the services they need, and lastly but no less important, working towards reducing stigma, so that no individual or family is ashamed to get the mental health services they need. The proposed cuts by the Governor would totally eliminate this vital advocacy and monitoring arm of our mental health system. I urge you to restore these harmful cuts to ensure crucial services are available to the residents of Connecticut. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports. Linda Pikul R.N., MSN, BC 1225 Foxboro Road Norwalk, CT 06851 — NORTHWEST REGIONAL MENTAL HEALTH BOARD, INC. 969 WEST MAIN ST., Suite 1B Central Naugatuck Valley Catchment Area Council #20 WATERBURY,CONNECT|CUT 06708 Housatonic Mental Health Catchment Area Council #21 TEL/FAX (203) 757-9603 Northwest Mental Health Catchment Area Council #22 3; website: \mrrw.rwvrrnhb.org Testimony for the Appropriations Committee On the Governor’s proposed budget DMHAS expenditures and recommendations February 18, 2016 Good evening Senator Beth Bye, and Representative Toni Walker, Co-Chairs; and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Janine Sullivan-Wiley and lam the Executive Director of the Northwest Regional Mental Health Board, Inc. As background, the Regional Boards were established by state statute 40 years ago to provide a community-based assessment, planning and oversight entity for mental health services. I stand before you, yet again, to speak of the value of the Regional Boards, as we are faced with a reduction of virtually ALL of our funding ($585,000) as proposed by the Governor with a proposed ”consolidation.” That reduction represents virtually ALL the funding the Boards receive from the state. That is not "consolidation,” that is extinction for the boards. It also does not allow for any process. There are 5 Regional Boards, and 13 Regional Action Councils. Each is a separate, PNP entity. With the kind of gutting of the funding, (virtually all of the Boards’ money and roughly half of the RAC funding), and only about four months left in the fiscal year, it is quite impossible for those 18 separate entities to achieve ”consolidation.” Any of you who have ever run a business will understand the logistical and strategic planning that would be needed to achieve this. Four months and such a monetary reduction will NOT accomplish that stated goal. Which then prompts the question of what then is the value of the Regional Boards? The Boards provide the state with a complex web of grassroots community connections, built over 40 years, including minimal staffing and hard working volunteers, which then provides community education to Connecticut’s residents, comprehensive evaluations, effective needs assessment and all- stakeholder participation. - The Boards’ process — with the RACs — enables the state to get $23 million in Federal funding. - Community connections: with our all-stakeholder membership and extensive relationships within our communities, we can identify what is ”out there” and what is needed. We then bring those community issues, and the voice of consumers, families, and providers to the state’s needs assessment process, multiple state agencies and with essentially ALL of the structures within the state. When outside entities need to do research or get information from the community, they turn to the boards for help in reaching the right people. We evaluate services — including state-operated services — with an independent process that answers to the community. I have been asked how our evaluation and planning process brings about needed change. We are like braces that orthodontists use. With consistent pressure, and a vision of what should be and what is needed, we help agencies and programs make the changes that are needed, much the way those thin wires move teeth in jaw bone. And by the way, there are many community needs that the currently proposed budget will jeapordize. We see that, and hope you do, too. The people of Connecticut do not want the safety net of behavioral health services gutted. It grieves me to have to speak to our own funding when I would much rather spend my time talking about the needs which we see so clearly in our — and your — communities. We provide information and training in the community. We provide Mental Health First Aid training. Last year, our one board alone got over 9000 educational pamphlets and resource sheets into 42 towns in the northwest region of the state. Developing solutions: Did you know that the need for specialized Young Adult Services was first raised by a Regional Board? They brought in federal funds and early expertise. Now these services are helping young adults throughout the state to get what they need to recover, often no longer needing the adult system. As the healthcare system evolves, we have the right structure to develop new solutions to new challenges. It can be hard for consumers, family members, providers and the community to understand their sometimes divergent viewpoints. We bring all stakeholders to the same table. We make sure all voices are heard. We then take what we learn to the state level and the various groups that need to hear about those experiences and needs. We are cost-effective: For every staff person we employ, there are 50 volunteers, greatly expanding our impact for very little money. We are already regionalized. There are five boards that cover the five regions in the state. An employee of DMHAS described us as ”the glue that holds the system together." An employee of another state agency noted that if you want it done well, and in the most cost-effective way, ask the Regional Boards. All of that stands to be lost if the Governor’s budget recommendation for the Boards’ funding is not changed. Cutting the $585,000 in funding to the five boards would result in great monetary and service loss to the state. There is no way to replace what we do for anywhere near the cost of what we do this work for. If a truly effective consolidation is the goal, this is not the way to do it. Thank you for your consideration. .‘hank on’ Baubmeai fiegmmi Naomi éixi‘esefih Beam Testimony before the Abprobriations Committee on the Governor’s browsed budget DMHAS expenditures and recommendations February 18, 2016 Good evening, Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and members of the Appropriations Committee, My name is Margaret Watt, resident of Norwalk and Executive Director of the Southwest Regional Mental Health Board. I want to start by thanking you for your hard work last year to restore funding for essential human services, and to acknowledge that the task you face of trying to meet our state’s needs without enough money to go around is daunting. In the short (and medium) term, the state needs to save money to address a terrible deficit. But in the long term, we will lose more than we gain if we do so not only by reducing funds system-wide, but also by dismantling entire structures that have been put in place to protect the community and provide oversight. CT’s mental health system has been a pioneer in adopting the Recovery Orientation, in providing pathways for people in recovery to work within the system to help their peers, and in thinking outside the clinical box to bring effective, low-cost peer programs such as the Hearing Voices Network to our state. However, the morefunding is cut, the greater the risk that we lose supportive services that are non-clinical. Treatment services will still have to happen, so we will have to chip away at—or even undo—the evaluation, coordination, and prevention services that are critical to ensure a high-quality system. We will beforced to retreat back to a more traditional model—which isn’t necessarily as effective or cost-effective. CT will go from being a model of forward thinking to being the state where even a tragedy like Sandy Hook couldn’t move the needle. One reason CT’s mental health system is strong compared with other states—and even that DM HAS is strong compared with some other state agencies—is that 40 years ago, the legislature established the Regional Mental Health Boards. The Regional Boards are a formal mechanism for providing communities with a way to oversee programs and advocate for their region’s mental health needs. The Regional MH Boards are unique in serving as a hub for connecting all stakeholders in the mental health community and empowering them to share issues and ideas, assess needs, develop initiatives, and evaluate what’s working and what’s needed. No one else brings together consumers, providers, and appointed town representatives from across the region around the topic of mental health. We get calls from families, program directors, social workers, and town human services departments because we are recognized as such a resource. We truly are ”the community’s voice in mental health.” I’d like to give an example of how the overall service system, including the regional boards, plays a role in people’s lives. There’s a young woman I know whose earliest symptoms of mental illness started around age 10. She went to a very competitive college, but had to leave due to her mental health problems and thoughts of suicide. It was almost a decade-long, painstaking road to recovery, but today she is one of the key founding voices in TurningPointCT.org, the website by and for young people in CT, and she is starting her own nonprofit advocacy organization. . V...“';_-_-_V\_~.\\““\““\w_;: m Baufimeai Riggigmai Mmmi i2x§§s2%§§§% 32mm I'IIIIIIIJ.’ Along the way, she received services from hospitals, nonprofit provider agencies, and clubhouses. She used DMHAS’s Young Adult Services, she received Supported Education services while attending community college, and she received disability benefits. All of these are areas where funding is needed and cuts have already been felt. This young woman also became an advocate. She received training to become a Recovery Support Specialist and a QPR suicide prevention trainer. And she joined the Southwest Regiona Mental Health Board as part of our Catchment Area Councils. On the CAC she has been able to work on community education initiatives, mental health screenings, and focus groups, and she was so valued that she was elected to our Board of Directors, where her perspective is informed by her many experiences using all these areas of the service system. I know that, for her, a huge part of her recovery was about being a part of the Regional Mental Health Board. In a recent survey, she wrote that SWRMHB is: ”A place for all of us to come together: people receiving mental health & addiction services, our providers, our family members, and interested lay-people who are committed to improving visibility, access issues, and quality of services. Everyone is an equal — psychiatrists, program managers, people in recovery — our voices are all treated as equally informative to our collective goals.” The Regional Mental Health Boards’ work assessing the region’s needs helps bring in $23 Million in federal funding to the state—at a total cost of $584,000 for all 5 Boards. The Governor’s proposal would cut our funding to less than $10,000 per Board as part of a ”consolidation” cut. That level of cut does not allow us to consolidate; it puts us out of business. When that happens, who will be there to impartially represent the needs of the different stakeholders? Please ensure that this visionary grassroots structure is not dismantled permanently. Thank you. The Regional Mental Health Boards are truly "the community’s voice in mental health." (Caption: Images proposed by Regional MH Board members to capture the role we play: the sun radiating energy; the hub of a wheel; a megaphone for the community; the latticework that allows the garden to thrive) TESTIMONY BEFORE THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Britney Bidmead, Ellington, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. I sit before you this evening, with a plea to consider creativity as you move forward in the committee’s allocation discussions. | work closely with Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services to improve the programming provided to the young adults throughout the state of Connecticut. It is through entrepreneurship ventures and our adaptive work and learn model that we have succeeded in improving not only the amount of young adults employed, but also the quality of employment positions that they are filling. | see what creative funding can do to positively impact people every single day. This programming bridges the gaps created by an educational void, eliminates barriers created by stigma, and lessens the impact of transitional trauma. The thought of budget cuts to quality health services, like those that I and DM HAS provide, disappoint me because of the detriment we are passing onto our most challenged, and downtrodden citizens. The people who are helped by our programming services are Connecticut’s most socioeconomically challenged. Our most disadvantaged. Cuts to these services do not just tug at my heart strings. They create even larger state challenges that will impact Connecticut in our lifetime. By cutting funding to mental health services, a large segment of our population would be forced to seek alternative resources in other overburdened areas. Consider the costs of increased hospitalization, and taxation on medical employee resources. Prisons could become our new supervised housing and law enforcement professionals will be our community outreach therapists. Most importantly, you are pushing the mental health care of our youth onto their educational system. These proposed budget cuts affect more than just our financial wellbeing as a state. Connecticut could be creating a less productive lifestyle and rippling effect for a lifetime of need and dependency. By denying proper funding for innovative programming, you are eliminating resources needed to continue supporting those on the path to independence, satisfaction and self-actualization. Let us continue to invest our money human growth and potential. The dividends will be exponential. Thank you, Britney Bidmead Testimony of James Fazio Before the Appropriations Committee IN OPPOSITION TO: HB 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 James Fazio, Windsor, Connecticut Good evening Senator Bye and Representative Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is James Fazio and I am a registered voter in the town of Windsor, Connecticut. I am here to testify on HB 5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to the cuts to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services and any mental health services and supports. By creating a $ 1.2 million reduction and consolidation of the Regional Mental Health Boards and Regional Action Councils, this would essentially eliminate the Regional Mental Health Boards. The system evaluation and community involvement in mental health by the Regional Mental Health Boards and the prevention and training efforts of the Regional Action Councils are separate missions and impact a diverse cross section of Connecticut. Together they bring in $ 23 million dollars in federal funds to the State. For 41 years these unique agencies have been a vital liaison between the state, local communities and providers on diverse mental health initiatives, concerns and opportunities. The Regional Mental Health Boards were created 40 years ago by the Connecticut Legislature and are still, now more than ever, relevant today. The Boards conduct needs assessments, evaluate the behavioral health service system (which is mandated by State Statute l7a—483—4), provide equal representation of stakeholders, and engage and educate the community about mental health. They allow persons in recovery, family members, mental health providers, concerned citizens, town officials and social workers to meet and discuss what improvements should be made to mental health services in Connecticut. The Regional Mental Health Boards operate on a low budget, with an average of 2 staff members and 500 volunteers state wide. The Regional Mental Health Boards are the community's voice and provide independent oversight of mental health services delivery. I personally volunteer as secretary on one of the Regional Boards Catchment Area Councils, or CAC's. Ihave witnessed improvements in mental health service delivery in the Local Mental Health Authorities. First, there was integration of services and easier access. Now, a holistic approach to mental health is being adopted. Persons with mental health issues often have physical illnesses and issues as well. It is now easier for consumers of mental health services to access a dentist or medical doctor, which often requires finding one who accepts state medical insurance, since many consumers' incomes are near the poverty level. One fellow CAC member was able to help start a new bus line in her town, which allows many persons without personal transportation to get around town, buy food, or access medical services, etc. These are some examples of how the Regional Mental Health Boards directly improved the quality of life for mental health consumers as well as other town residents. The North Central Regional Mental Health Board also provided financial support and oversight for the Day in the Life Project, a ground breaking approach to telling the stories of 80 Connecticut consumers of mental health services. We worked with a Yale professor, collected and analyzed their stories and created a presentation that was heard at CVH State Hospital and all over Connecticut. A professional DVD of the presentation was also produced by a film company. Many of the persons we interviewed were grateful for our interest in their day to day struggles with mental illness and their experiences with mental health treatment providers in Connecticut. We need the Regional Mental Health Boards. I am also concerned about consolidating agency operating funds into one line item. Consumers of mental health services would lose accountability of how their taxpayer dollars will be spent. This could directly and adversely affect their mental health services. The “new way of budgeting” no longer allocates funding by individual line item but instead proposes combining the funds for many different programs into one large pot of money to be divided by the agency. This is problematic because no details are being provided about how DMHAS would make funding decisions. Programs whose funding would be combined into one big pot of money subject to the proposed $34 million cut are: Housing Supports and Services, Legal Services (CLRP), Jail Diversion, Young Adult Services, Grants for Mental Health Services and Employment Opportunities, Discharge and Diversion Services, Home and Community Based Services and Grants for Substance Abuse Services. Let our State continue to be a leader in state of the art mental health treatment. I urge the Appropriations Committee to please oppose HB 5044 and not allow it to be passed into law. I would like to thank the entire Appropriations Committee for hearing my testimony. Testimony Before the Appropriations Committee In Opposition to Governor Malloy’s Budget Cuts to DMHAS Thursday, February 18, 2016 Catherine F. Kriss, Enfield, CT Good afternoon, distinguished members of the Connecticut Legislature and colleagues from the Connecticut mental health system. My name is Catherine Kriss and I am currently 51 years old, diagnosed with a mental disability since 2005. This testimony is specifically in deep opposition to the proposed budget cuts to the DMHAS budget, especially the cuts to the Regional Mental Health Boards. As I understand it, any cut to the North Central Regional Mental Health Board would be insidious to its successful operation for people in recovery like myself. We have a right to the quality of life like the average American citizen, but if we are constantly appearing before you, we can’t get anything done to benefit society. We struggle for leadership and a community voice which is amplified by the Board, especially the Catchment Area Councils managed by the Board. In serving in office of the CACs, we can use our leadership and organizational, interpersonal and confidence skills acquired to seek gainful employment either inside or outside the organizations we currently volunteer for, depending upon our anxiety level. Programs like the Magic Carpet bus in Enfield are vital to our community to provide access to employment, education at Asnuntuck College, Pearl St. and Main Libraries in Enfield, grocery stores, laundry facilities, medical appointments, etc. In fact, we celebrated three years of bus operation just recently. The Board was instrumental in getting this bus on the road. Another struggle the Board helped people in recovery with is the Day in the Life Project which captured and preserved the voices of 80 Connecticut people in recovery in telling their recovery stories. Dedicated people in recovery volunteered for the training to become interviewers and conduct interviews, under the successful leadership of Larry Davidson, a Yale professor. A presentation was born and benefited locations such as CVH and several colleges. We learned that together we can change the face of the mental health system. Please let’s find a way to ensure that the North Central Regional Mental Health Board continues to provide much needed ballast and support to many people like me in recovery. Thank you. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30,2017 February 18, 2016 Angelina Norris, Windsor CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and the members of the Appropriations Committee: My name is Angelina Norris and I am a registered voter in the town of Windsor, CT. I am here to testify on H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. I do not want to see the regional mental health boards essentially cut because the regional mental health boards collectively help bring in 23 million dollars in federal funds to Connecticut. While the regional mental health boards are bringing in federal funds the community care teams that we have in Connecticut are saving the state money by collaborating between hospitals and community providers. Would you want the State of Connecticut to cut the regional mental health boards that are bringing in state funds and reduce the community care teams by 3 million when they are saving the state money? I urge you to keep crucial services available to the residents of Connecticut. I have been with DMHAS since Ihave turned 21 years old and I have been a part of many of these services that might get cut. I will tell you one thing it was a struggle at first getting to know the DHMAS system and with thanks to the help of the regional mental health board who helped me to find what services are out there and which was that were going to help me was a big help. When I stepped in the door of DHMAS there was no one there to tell me “Oh if you need help with housing these is the service you need!” If it was not for the regional mental health board at that I would not have known what to do. Not does the regional mental health board help people find the resources out there we are a voice, we are there speaking on behalf of others who need help and need the support that we once needed. Along with the help from the regional mental health board about services I have gotten help from the Community support teams from time to time. Like Ihave stated earlier walking through the doors of DHMAS was not easy and not only did the regional mental health boards help me but also did the community support teams. The community support team was there to communicate between the hospitals and the care providers. Anytime that I ended up being placed in the hospital there was a community support team there to know what my discharge plans were and how to relay that back to the care providers and along with that a plan of action when this sort of thing happened again. Not long ago I was in the Young Adult Program and it helped me out tremendously. The young adult program was a stepping stone for me from a group home into my own apartment with no staff watching me 24/7. Without the young adult services helping me I would not have gotten where I am today. In the young adult program I have learned coping skills to help me with everyday life, I learned how to take care of my own money, how to register for school and access the things that I need in school to succeed. Without any of these things in place or without the money they have know I probably would not have made it this far in life. So please I urge you when this bill passes by on the senate floor or on the representatives floor think about how it might affect others in our community and how it might affect the community as a Whole when these services are no longer to help the people because they do not have the money or the funds to do so. Thank you for your time Senator Bye, Representative Walker, and the appropriations committee. My name is Danielle Herbert. I am testifying on H.B. 5044. I am a registered voter from West Hartford, a sixteen-year employee of the North Central Regional Mental Health Board, a family member of someone who lived his adult life with a severe mental health disability and I am opposed to the proposed elimination to the RMHBs. RMHBs were created by state statute (Sec. l7a-484) over 41 year ago to advise DMHAS by evaluating state funded mental health services and programs. Our 500 volunteer members are composed of providers of mental health & addiction svcs, clergy, police, social workers, family members, concerned citizens and people in recovery. This diverse group of dedicated grass-root level volunteers ensure that a broad wealth of knowledge and experience are utilized in advising DMHAS and empowers people and families living with mental illness to advocate for themselves and others, and for improvement and efficiency in services. The Regional Boards are essential in safeguarding that services are delivered effectively and efficiently. As I said, I have worked for the RMHBs for many years and as many people in this room know that when working in the non-profit sector that the work is not done for the high salaries but for the heartfelt commitment to the cause that is dear to us. My brother was a person who lived with a severe mental health disability and unfortunately past away last year. I was his trustee, his caretaker and I loved him. I know from experience how the mental health system works and know that without the work of the RMHBs that people like my brother’s voice might not be heard. He gave other members a perspective on housing issues that they may have never known. So what will the state loose? Information collection and priorities development by a large diverse group of volunteer citizens. Development of community partnerships for solutions on young adult needs, transportation, wellness, and health equity. Evaluation and guidance on best practices, consensus building, and coordination of numerous projects. A self-advocating platform. The RMHBs help leverage $23M in federal funding. During periods of short funds when services are being reduced, oversight is more important to ensure that services be effectively and efficiently provided. Please do not end the hard work of these small RMHB staffs and the many volunteers who have made the system more efficient and effective. I know you are making difficult choices but we get feedback on a grassroots level with a 2% paid workforce (10 staff and 500 volunteers), and we help bring in 23 million dollars to the state so why would you consider eliminating a program that helps the people it serves so much and helps bring in millions of dollars to the state. Please preserve the Regional Mental Health Boards. Testimony Submitted to the Appropriations Committee: H.B. No. 5044: An Act Making Adjustments To State Expenditures For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. Public Hearing Date: February 18, 2016 Submitted By: Genevieve Porter Eason, Wilton, CT Re: Proposed cuts to Regional Mental Health Boards Senator Bye, Representative Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee: My name is Genevieve Porter Eason. I serve the Southwest Regional Mental Health Board as a member of both the Board of Directors and one of the Catchment Area Councils. | write to you today to testify on the budget. I am opposed to the proposed cuts to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, in particular the Regional Mental Health Boards. The Regional Mental Health Boards are uniquely positioned to provide valuable services to our community. Southwest Regional Mental Health Board (SWRMHB) serves as an important hub for disseminating information within the mental health community in Fairfield County. Though the Catchment Area Councils, as well as other committees and coalitions, we have built a network of consumers and providers who share insight and expertise and are able to mobilize on major initiatives. Providers have the opportunity to network, and consumers can access a wide array of resources. Information on programs, services and events are shared countywide. This access to information and collaboration is invaluable as providers attempt to care for the mentally ill and their families with increasingly limited resources. Additionally, SWRMHB has a robust education and awareness program. Each fall we conduct mental health screenings across the county. In 2015 we screened over 1,000 individuals in 14 towns. Of the people screened, 24% scored at risk and were referred to treatment. Had we not made screening accessible to them, those 244 people might not have sought treatment. We also make resources, presentations, and training such as Mental Health First Aid and QPR Suicide Prevention available to local organizations and the public. These are just two examples of SWRMHB’s impact. There are many more. No other organization has the capacity to connect so many agencies, providers, consumers and volunteers within our region. Regional Mental Health Boards in other parts of the state are engaged in the same type of important work. I urge you to ensure that these crucial services continue to be available to the residents of Connecticut. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Genevieve Porter Eason 37 Dudley Road Wilton, Connecticut 06897 Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. February 18, 2016 Quyen Truong, West Hartford CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Quyen Truong and I am a registered voter in the town of West Hartford. I am here to testify on H.B. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports, and I am especially opposed to the proposed cut to the Regional Mental Health Boards, which would effectively eliminate this core service. The Regional Mental Health Boards were created by concerned community members and forward thinking legislators in the 19705, when most of the state mental hospitals shut down. The Regional Boards were created to hold state-funded mental health programs accountable to the people they serve. Regional Boards are the only organizations focused on representing people in recovery and their families. Regional Boards have been the voice for this marginalized community for over 40 years. The Regional Boards’ main function is to review and evaluate state funded mental health services, with involvement from people using those services. They help create accountability. They reassure that the $700 million CT spends on Behavioral Health is money well spent. Regional Boards identify needs and service gaps. They were the first to identify the need for Young Adult Services in the 19905, and they helped bring attention to critical mental health concerns after Sandy Hook by organizing dozens of Community Conversations about Mental Health. Regional Mental Health Boards also cultivate partnerships among local mental health agencies to deliver more effective, efficient care. During this tumultuous time, we need coordination among limited resources and accountability more than ever in our mental health and addiction services. We need to preserve the Regional Boards. The Regional Boards are only 0.08% of the DMHAS budget. They leverage $23 million in federal funding. They are the best return on investment from an economic and social standpoint. If we lose the Regional Mental Health Boards, people with mental health concerns and families grappling with addiction issues will no longer have a voice. Our communities will lose access to core programs like Mental Health First Aid. Our local mental health agencies will lose the key coordination efforts to align their services with other programs. Our police will lose access to Crisis Intervention Training. Your constituents will not have a place to turn to for grievances, nor be able to offer critical feedback to mental health and addiction programs. And you will lose access to and connection with your most vulnerable constituents, many of whom would not have a voice without the advocacy and coordination by the Regional Boards. Of all the cuts to mental health and addiction services, the one to eliminate Regional Boards is the worst. Please fund the Regional Mental Health Boards - the only mechanism for accountability of state- funded programs and the voice for people in recovery. Testimony of Corina E. O’Dea, RDH Vice Chairman of S.M.A.R.T., Inc. (Southbury & Middlebury Acting Responsibly Together) and of the Local Prevention Council of Southbury and Middlebury, Connecticut H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. Department of Mental Health & Addiction Services- Regional Action Council Funding February 18, 2016 Appropriations Subcommittee on Health Public Hearing Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Gerratana, Representative Dillon and members of the Appropriations Subcommittee: My name is Corina O’Dea and I am the Vice chairperson for a non—profit agency that has the responsibility of being our local prevention council for Region 15, Southbury and Middlebury. I strongly oppose the grave cuts to regional action councils that will decimate the current prevention network structure. The current proposed budget would equate to an almost 80% funding cut which means that CNVRAC and many of the other Regional Action Councils would cease to exist. These cuts would be devastating to the invaluable work that the Regional Action Councils and Local Prevention Councils do across our state and a terrible disservice to the citizens of the state of Connecticut. Connecticut state news headlines constantly warn of the increased abuse of opioids and statics in our state show a marked increase in heroin overdose with hundreds of deaths in 2014, S.M.A.R.T., Inc. (Southbury & Middlebury Acting Responsibly Together) as well as the many other councils working under the guidance of their Regional Action Councils, work painstakingly in their communities to squeeze the most out of every grant dollar to provide every community in the state with education, training, and advocacy for substance abuse prevention and related community concerns such as behavioral health, violence, gambling, drunk driving, prescription drugs, opioids and suicide! In Southbury/Middlebury alone, our regional action council, the CNVRAC has been an integral force in the development of the following initiatives: 0 Parent University Series, Free Informative workshops for parents of children K—College on prevention, awareness, intervention and treatment. Topics include: Chris Herren Speaking Engagement. Self—Destructive Behaviors Teenagers Engage In: What to look for and how to help your teen. Adolescent Substance Use, Abuse and Addiction. Challenge 28—drug/alcohol free contract for our high school students. Community Conversation — Wanting the Best for Our Youth. Masked vs. Unmasked, Helping Your Children Empower themselves to have Healthy Relationships. Parenting for Your Child’s Success. Uncovering Your Child’s Natural Gifts: A Strengths—Based Approach to ADHD. Self—Destructive Behaviors Teenagers Engage In: What to look for and how to help your teen. Why Do My Child & I Battle Over Homework (And who will win the war?). Happy Parents = Happy Children. Grandparents Raising Grandchildren. Parents: You Matter. Drugs/Alcohol, Your Teen and You. Adolescent Substance Use, Abuse and Addiction. Community Conversation — Wanting the Best for Our Youth. Race to Nowhere: A Documentary Film on our current Educational System. “Girls Night Out”: A film and discussion on how to Raise Confident and Successful Women. Challenge 25% drug/'aicohoi-frcc contract for our high school students. VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV 0 Community of Concern books — A Guide to the Prevention of Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drugs distributed to all families of middle and high school students in Region 15. 0 BE SMART, DON'T START campaign to engage students in making healthy choices. o Funded local pharmacy the $50 to carry Narcan. o TIPS (Training for Intervention Procedures) follow—up to Alcohol Compliance Checks. 0 Medication Management — What Everyone Should Know (provided in recent years at our local senior center). 0 Narcan video discussions and education. 0 Promotion & coordination of a comprehensive youth risk behavior and resiliency survey conducted with all students in grades 7—12 throughout Regional School District No. 15. 0 Promotion & coordination of a district—wide youth—led analysis of local—level risk and protective factors affecting adolescent substance use, education, risk of suicide, bullying, safety, and other areas affecting health and wellness among young people. 0 Sub—regional and local training delivery: 40 Developmental Assets for Youth; Opioid Abuse Prevention Forum; Financial Wellness for Seniors and Problem Gambling Prevention Across the Lifespan; Local Prevention Council “101”; Local Prevention Council Capacity Building; Local Prevention Council TA: Prevention Strategies & Effective Service Delivery. 0 Development and dissemination of Opioid Overdose Wallet Card to prevent opioid overdose and deaths 0 Mental Health First Aid course for community members to be knowledgeable on signs and symptoms of mental health and addiction disorders. 0 A resource support for our school systems, town offices, parents and community members at large. 0 Website and social media as education tool 0 Public awareness program educating communities and parents about the health and safety risks of serving alcohol at teen parties. 0 Anti—smoking campaign across the age spectrum. In closing, I urge you to OPPOSE the severe budget cuts that threaten the survival of Connecticut’s regional action councils and countless other important prevention services and local—level supports that will be lost. It is my hope that I have impressed upon you the gravity of this potential budget cut, so that we may preserve our prevention infrastructure, saving long—term costs and at the end of the day, saving lives. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Corina O’Dea, S.M.A.R.T., Inc. Vice Chairperson Southbury/Middlebury WM (/11: w, ”4 / /// , a , / ,9 ' ,5 7/41 W, m, ”/1 ' ' Aye a, , (11/ «7; //"1 , $sz , (/ 44 7” ' w’ (xxx, 11/ ’f/ ”4 ”A [/4 I/ ’1 / I ’/ f/ r ’0 «(/4 fl'. , a.” ’ 7/2 ”ff/ ’ ”/44 / /// ////////1 ///// M/ M //// /// r/ 5/” 5/ , a / 6/ February l7, 2016 Senator Bye. Representative Walker, and honorable members of the Appropriations Committee, my name is Caitlin Sorge, and l am the Director of the Sexual Assault Cr" Servi “.e (SAC-El) at the YWCA New Britain. Our program offers assistance to sexual assault survivors and their loved ones. Our services include a 24-- hour English and Spanish confidential hotline with immediate access to trained and certified counselors. We also provide individual crisis counseling, support: groups, accompaniment through medical. polic ,, and court procedures, campus advocacy, and prevention education. YWCA New Britain SACS covers a Aid-town region including all of Hartford county, part of 'l‘olland county, and the town of Plymouth. Our program covers one of the largest territories in Connecticut. in fiscal year 2Cl.l4-—20l5, we provided services to 73?. sexual a " ult survivors. Due to budget cuts and lack of funding over the years, YWCA New Britain ‘ SACS has reduced our program staffing hours, which has created unique challenges for our program to meet the ever—growing needs of our community. Each full-time Advocate position has been reduced to 30 hours/part~time statuses. Our Community Educator position has been reduced to El) hours weekly but is required to meet the prevention education needs of 46 towns. 0 ur Campus Advocate has been reduced to St) hours but is required to meet the campus outreach needs of 14 college campuses. Our Child and Adult Advocates have been reduced to 30 hours weeldy but are meeting the recovery needs of survivors and their families. Our Advocates respond to the needs of those in the aftermath of trauma around the cloclt. To say that our worl»: is emotionally and physically taxing is an understatement. Advocates deserve a livable wage and sufficient paid work hours. crisis line item fully funded. Our program is rising to the challenge of supporting survivors and providing effective prevention programming to help end the prevalence of sexual assault in Connecticut. We know our worlt positively impacts and shapes the lives of survivors. YWCA New Britain — SACS evaluates our program though client questionnaires. We are proud to share the following outcomes: at l 013% of clients felt their Advocate was sympathetic: and helped them understand the effects of trauma . a ll) % of clients “v 'ere provided resources and safety planning, ‘x c 100% of clients were assisted with access to appropriate medical care and felt they understood the is“: criminal justice process with help from an Advocate. CC a 98% of clients felt their Advocate helped them understand and/or manage their feelings. \ s it) % of clients felt they )enefited from receiving SACS services and would recommend the l agency to someone in need of services. Sexual assault :an harm survivors emotionally, psychologically, and physically. Common effects from sexual assault include Post~Traumatic Stress Disorder, depression, flashbacks, substance abuse, suicide, self— harm, and sexually transmitted infections. W e know that when survivors are given support and advocacy in their recovery process, they are in a better position to be able to manage these effects. YWCA New Britain — SACS remains committed in our mission to support survivors in our community. We look forward to continuing to meet the needs of Connecticut residents affected by sexual assault with your support and partnership. Sincerely , Caitlin Sorge, LMSW YWCA New Britain Sexual Assault Crisis Service www.ywcanewbritain.org 19 Franklin Square Satellite Office New Britain, CT 06051 175 Main Street A United Way Agency T: 860-225-4681 Hartford, CT 06106 F: 860-826-7026 T: 860-241-9217 ,.~.~.~.~.~.~. \ § “5.. www.ywcanewbritain.org Sexual Assault Crisis Service Satellite Office YWCA New Britain 19 Franklin Square A United Way Agency 175 Main Street New Britain, CT 06051 Hartford, CT 06106 T: 860-241-9217 T 860-225-4681 F: 860-826-7026 I am writing to you to express my concern about the budget cuts planned for School Based Health Centers around the State of CT. I began working at the Rogers Park Middle School, School Based Health Center in Danbury last year, and before that time, knew very little about their purpose or capabilities. I am wondering if you know anything about the School Based Health Centers and what they do on a daily basis! I would like to give you some insight into what the School Based Health Center is comprised of. The School Based Health Center (SBHC) includes medical services provided by a Pediatric Nurse Practitioner, Mental Health services provided by a licensed Psychotherapist and dental services provided by a Pediatric Dentist and hygienist. Each and every day, children come to the SBHC with medical or mental health needs that would otherwise have resulted in the child having to leave school to receive treatment. At the SBHC, they receive the care they need while staying in school and resulting in only a fraction of time being missed from their school day therefore not interrupting their learning. Parents are able to remain at work and not riskjeopardizing theirjobs by having to leave on numerous occasions to transport their children to doctor, counselor or dental appointments. Many of these children would not receive the care they need because their parent/guardian would have to choose between working or bringing them to appointments, and in many cases, do not have the access to transportation to get their children to appointments. The SBHC is the first step for children to advocate for the care they need to become healthy, successful learners. On any given day, the Nurse Practitioner will see children with viral symptoms, gastrointestinal issues, ear pain, sleep problems, children in crisis due to asthma symptoms, or injury, just to name a few! Many times these children will present with physical symptoms and once the child is evaluated by the Nurse Practitioner, it is discovered the child has home and/or school stressors that need to be addressed by a Mental Health Professional. If these children were not seen during this vulnerable time, due to the window of opportunity given to them by the SBHC being within their school, their symptoms could easily manifest themselves into something more serious. The Mental Health counselor sees between 7-9 children a day, with children on a waitlist. Their need for behavioral health care is brought to the counselor's attention either by faculty, guidance counselors, school nurses, or the SBHC Nurse Practitioner, again due to the accessibility to care within the school. Good mental health proves to be the catalyst for good physical health, eager and enthusiastic learners, and successful members of the community. This city has a large immigrant population and these children need access to care on their own. They need to advocate for themselves in many cases. The SBHC is where they go. They know by coming to the SBHC, they will be given the care, assistance or direction they need. The School Based Health Centers work on a bare bones budget and cannot afford any further cuts in this budget as it would result in reduced staff and available care hours in the school. These children need our help and they are not in the position to reach the legislators to let them know this on their own. Please reconsider the cuts you have made in the School Based Health Center budget for the sake of the children who can't speak to you themselves but need someone to hear them! I thank you for your time and hope that this helps you to see the essential role the School Based Health Centers play in the schools for the children of the State of Connecticut and making any further cuts in this budget jeopardizes the wellbeing of the youth population of our State! Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STA TE EXPENDITURES FOF? THE FISCAL YEAF? ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. February 18, 2016 John Lewis, Ansonia, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is John Lewis and I am a registered voter in the town of Ansonia, CT. I am here to testify on HB. No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I strongly oppose proposed cuts to the DMHAS budget and any mental health services and supports. I am currently paying too many co-pays and premiums on medical and medications that leave me very little money for the rest of the month. That kind of expense keeps me from going on activities with my social club which is an important part of my treatment to keep me well. Thank you for hearing my testimony. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee on Governor’s proposed Midterm Budget adjustments FY 2017 H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Re: Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) budget February 18, 2016 Emily La Croix, Granby Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Emily La Croix and I am a registered voter in Granby. I am writing to you today to share with you the benefits and importance of supportive housing for individuals with high—need mental health conditions and other health concerns. I understand that you will need to make difficult choices due to our difficult state budget situation. However, I would like to highlight the proven and cost effective solution of Supportive Housing, which combines safe, decent housing with rental assistance and supportive services chosen by the individual. This support of individuals with serious mental illness reduces hospitalizations, court involvement and promotes independence and hopefully a return to work. Unfortunately, we aging parents worry about our loved one’s futures. One of my good friends, now deceased, spoke honestly about her fear for her daughter. What would happen should she no longer be able to support and watch over her middle—aged daughter? At that time, her daughter had experienced multiple hospitalizations, a car accident, and a divorce. Now, her daughter lives in supportive housing close enough to services that she can walk or pedal her 3—wheeled bike to go to the library, shop, or get her medications. I am certain the state is saving money, in the short and long run, by providing housing in a subsidized mixed housing, rather than her court appearances for driving violations and, hopefully, avoiding inpatient hospitalizations at the Institute of Living. When my daughter, a college graduate, developed serious mental illness she made many efforts to achieve independence. She had both social problems and work—related problems. She acquired Social Sercurity disability and Medicare coverage. Suitable housing did not relieve her disorganized habits and resulted in more than 3 inpatient hospitalizations in CT. Her inability to maintain a healthy lifestyle and inability to live within a budget continued to be a problem. Because we are also retired seniors, we have the same long—term concerns for our loved one. A trustee provided by a bank and a small trust fund will not alone, ensure a good future without us. However, supportive housing would be a long—term solution. Another friend’s son, a graduate of an Ivy League college, is also having similar problems. He has had jail diversion and a few hospitalizations for acute alcoholism plus underlying bipolar illness. He is currently in a temporary housing facility, having had to leave his apartment due to long—term problems living alone. These responsible parents have the same concerns as our family. In their case, they have a trust fund and a relative willing to be a trustee. However, a long —distance relationship with the trustee is not a good solution. In closing, we think supportive housing will be the best short and long—term solution for individuals and their families and be a prudent solution for the state and taxpayers as well. Most families our age (70+) have children who still desire independent living. Continuing care retirement communities are reluctant to admit middle—aged people, nor is that a good solution for those of us who hope for recovery and an independence lifestyle for our loved ones. We strongly recommend expanded permanent supportive housing for high need populations. Respectfully submitted, Emily La Croix Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services Budget Testimony February 18, 2016 Thank you committee chairs. My name is Evangeline Sargent and I am from Norwich, CT. I am testifying in regards to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) budget. The Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services needs every penny you can give it. The recommended adjustments is taking too much away from the system. Consolidating the Regional Mental Health boards and Councils will make is so that they cannot fulfill their mission. They provide an invaluable service to their communities. Without them we would be lost. We also need to Expand Supportive Housing for Families, Children & Adults. Supportive housing has been shown to reduce hospital costs, as well as improve self—sufficiency. Besides units we need adequate rental subsidies. I may not live in supportive housing, or have rental subsidy. Last year when my roommate passed and I was in search of a place to live if it were not for my family and friends I would have needed a rental subsidy. The sad thing is I knew that I would have been out of luck in that department. We need to promote wellness, self—determination, and self—sufficiency. Individuals need to be offered services and programs such as Supported Employment, Supported Education, Advance Directives, Wellness Recovery Action Planning, as well as other programs and services that are cost effective proven. Do you know how hard it is to get a job in today's market when you have not worked in a number of years? Not to mention how frightening it can be. Also, when dealing with mental health issues, how it can be to go back to or continue with schooling. Not everyone knows about or can fill out an advance directive form alone. Age appropriate services for young adults needs to be provided. The Department of Children and Families (DCF) and DMHAS need to be held accountable for providing timely services and supports for young adults with mental health needs.. This includes those having their first mental health episode. One idea for services and supports could be peer mentors. Please remember that when you cut money from the DMHAS budget you are impacting people what need these services. Thank you for your time. Evangeline Sargent Testimony before the Appropriations Committee H.B. No. 5044 - An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the FY 17 February 18‘“, 2016 Sherice Byrd, New Haven, CT Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Sherice Byrd and I am a registered voter in New Haven CT. I am here to testify on HB No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. l have received services from grants for substance abuse services and as a result I have been drug free for 5 years. l have also received services from Home and Community Based Services and as a result my family is intact. l have received services from Housing Support Services and am in a two bedroom apartment with my children. These services have allowed me to become a productive member of society. Now I am employed and working in the Human Services field thanks to Employment Opportunities Grants. Thank you. Testimony of Todd Bieri Before the Appropriations Committee In Opposition to HB 5044 An Act making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Todd Bieri, West Hartford, Connecticut Good evening Senator Bye and Representative Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Todd Bieri. I am a registered voter in the town of West Hartford. I am here to testify in opposition to H.B. No.5044, An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to the proposed cuts to DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. When I was in a State Hospital several years ago, what helped was having quality staff and enough workers to provide counsel and therapeutic activities. A few days ago I visited someone in Connecticut Valley Hospital. Apparently cuts to the hospital staff had already taken place, because they were very short staffed. Granted it was a holiday, but a staff person told me that this is a regular occurrence. I learned that it is common for them to have 2—3 staff there for the entire unit when there are supposed to be eight staff. This is not only immoral, but unsafe for the patients. There are people who have physical impairments on the unit. If one person falls and is hurt and a fight is also occurring, the staff would have difficulty handling all of this. Some staff are working 75 —80 hours per week. This short staffing is a recipe for disaster. Next Iwould like to talk about case management services at UConn Outpatient Psychiatric department also slated for reductions. The case manager at UConn helped me with complex insurance issues, at a time when I was feeling very depressed and had to fill out paperwork for DSS that was causing disabling anxiety and depression. She gave me assistance and support which helped to ease the process of filling out the forms. Also a friend of mine, after 6 bad housing situations, was helped by a social worker at UConn who found him safe and affordable housing. Last, but definitely not least, I would like to talk about the Regional Mental Health Boards slated to be eliminated. They have helped consumers like me and other people with emotional challenges have a voice and input into the mental health system. The Boards and the consumers inform each other about mental health services that are working and make recommendations to improve services. The Board is an important liaison between the legislative process and the consumers, informing us on what we need to take action on. Without the Boards there are no checks and balances to help determine what the mental health system actually needs because people in authority wouldn’t know what kinds of issues people are having trouble with until they read it in the news. The State would dictate what they think we need without actually knowing what people in the community are really experiencing and actually need. Without the Boards the mental health system is like a ship in a storm, without a rudder, aimlessly drifting and destined for disaster and the people with mental illness are its casualties. Please fund the mental Health System adequately! Thankyou, Todd Bieri Testimony before the Appropriations Committee HE. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Andrew McA11ister, Windsor, CT Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Andrew McA11ister and I am registered to vote in the Town of Windsor. I am here to testify on HE. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the VMHAS and any mental health services and supports. I am opposed to the following: Carrying forward the $17 million in cuts from fiscal year 2016. Any grant reduction for mental health and substance abuse services. Any funding cut to Community Care Teams. Any cut or elimination of the Regional Mental Health Boards and Regional Action Councils. The consolidation of the operating funds of any agency into the one-line item. I urge you to keep crucial services available to the sentences available to the residents of Connecticut. Statement: PREAMBLE: please consider my argument because: 1. I am bipolar and l have experienced most aspects and ramifications of this endogenous, organically-based, yet psychologically, intellectually, economically, and socially injurious disease. 2. l have undergone most forms of treatment for this disease more than once, and l have suffered from nearly all the possible, negative side effects of said expensive, ineffective, intervening treatments. 3. I desire to move forward respectfully and constructively. | wish to invest myself in life, in proper self-conduct, in morality, with proper respect for the State and its Government, with love toward the community, and l aspire to humbly struggle spiritually. If I err in my testimony, please forgive me, and know that I do not complain about existing or past State Governance, which I respect . BELIEF: The single most important and easily addressed deficiency in mental health care in Connecticut is inadequate relief from social isolation. Funding self-empowerment community centers like Chrysalisi is cost-effective, beneficial for our entire community, and a good value for tax-payers who neither want mentally ill individuals to become homeless, nor wish to unnecessarily criminally administrate and/or incarcerate mentally ill people. The public also rightly does not want to support the existing cyclic (revolving-door) institutionalization of mentally ill individuals that generates a more dependent, less self-reliant, less healthy population within our community. The “hand-holding" provided in expensive, overly supervised, over-kill facilities (facilities that also and often, by the way, house court-mandated individuals who do not want to get well) engenders dependency and further disability. Such treatment is inappropriate for patients who sincerely desire to get well. Such expensive treatment centers and programs often wrong both patients (clinically) and the community, socially and financially. The Role of Community Self-Empowennent Centers: There exists a simple relationship between exacerbated mental illness symptoms, low self-esteem, isolation, substance abuse, and the consequences of these factors in bipolar disorder if not all mental Andrew McAllister, 2/18/2016 page2 of 2 illnesses. With community self-empowerment centers like Chrysalis, we can socialize the mentally ill in order to lessen all aspects of mental illness. Mentally ill people often have low self-esteem due to psycho-social histories of dysfunction. These people are ashamed of their dysfunction. As a result, they often recede into self-isolation, which they mistakenly believe to be “protective" or “insulating." More often than not, such isolation exacerbates organic symptoms. An exacerbation of symptoms like instability, depression, and mania, etc., further erodes self-esteem, leading to further isolation, a further exacerbation of symptoms, further dysfunction, and so on. Seeking alleviation of exacerbated symptoms, misled individuals consume illegal substances and alcohol, leading to further dysfunction, and thereby eroding self-esteem more again. Also, consuming illegal substances and alcohol will most likely exacerbate the mentally ill person‘s organic illness and thereby, again and profoundly, increase the actual experience of any kind of dysfunction, and/or subjecting said individuals to criminal, judicial administration, worsening dysfunction further, and exacerbating organic illness again and further, thereby eroding self-esteem again. And so on . . . By simply socializing a mentally ill person in a community self-empowerment center, we can improve self-esteem, alleviate symptoms, help the suffering individual avoid experiencing dysfunction, and reduce the likelihood that the mentally ill individual will choose (it is a choice) to consume illegal substances and/or alcohol. All this remediation, made possible by funding community self-empowerment recovery centers like Chrysalis, can help the State avoid paying for expensive incarceration and court and police administration, expensive ambulance services, expensive and ineffective in-patient lock-down unit stays, and expensive, disempowering, institutionalizing, enabling day programs. We must avoid such costly, ineffective, disabling, sickening, if not criminalizing measures by funding recovery centers like Chrysalis. More costly, intervening treatments do patients little good while they cost our government vast sums of tax revenues. At community centers, people find limited, measuredsupport. The benefit realized from funding self-empowerment community resource centers is tremendous and realized at a fraction of the financial and social costs incurred by other, more intervening, dependence- generating, and non-self—empowering treatment regimens, interventions, and facilities like prisons, inpatient lock-down units, and day programs. Unnecessarily taking away life responsibilities is not therapeutic and entails great costs for the community. Mentally ill people might be disabled by horrible, incurable diseases, but does this mean that these ill people benefit by enabling them to give up managing life affairs—including self-care—when itis not necessa/y to do so? What are the economic and social costs of generating and enabling a population of mentally ill people who do not even try to care for themselves and who even go so far as to break the law and consume illegal substances or alcohol, thereby making themselves more ill at the cost of the community and more burdensome for the police and the courts (who and which have more important matters to attend to)? Legislative action to cancel funding for community centers for patients who actually and presently desire to get and stay well is, at this time, in my humble opinion, ill-advised. Please do not cancel funding for the Chrysalis self-empowerment recovery center. I believe that doing so will not only hurt many people who sincerely want to get, be, and stay well, but will also be a disservice to the community. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports. llThe Chrysalis Center, located on Homestead Avenue in Hartford, where the Asylum Hill and the North—End neighborhoods of Hartford border upon one another is, as stated on the center’s website: ”a private, non—profit, socially innovative multiservice organization that serves individuals and families living in the State of Con necticut.” Testimony before the Appropriations Committee on Governor’s proposed Midterm Budget adjustments FY 2017 IN OPPOSITION H.B. No. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) Budget February 18, 2016 Mark Griffin, New Haven, Connecticut Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Mark Griffin and I am a registered voter in the town of New Haven. I am here to testify on H.B No. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts to the DMHAS and any mental health services and supports. a) Grant reduction of mental Health and substance Abuse Services b) Consolidation/Elimination of Regional Mental Boards and Regional Action Councils. b) Funding cut to Community Care Teams I opposed to these cuts because they affect the core services provided by DHMAS I urge you to keep core services available to the residents of Connecticut. Example: Young adult services: I worked with young adults and found out What young adults face many challenging problems every day. Like medical, a place to sleep when night comes, peer support and daily meals to name a few. Thank you for your attention to these important services and supports Testimony before the Appropriations Committee In Opposition to Governor Malloy’s Budget Cuts to DMHAS Thursday, February 18, 2016 Thomas Hope Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Thomas Hope and I am a registered voter in the town of Windham. I am here to testify on H.B. N0. 5044 An Act Making Adjustments to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. I am opposed to any proposed cuts of 17 million dollars from Mental Health and Substance Abuse programs. The crucial services in my life are the following; 1. United Services in Willimantic, including the Lighthouse Program and Vocational Services 2. Renter’s Rebate program 3. Energy Assistance United Services provides me with an expert psychiatrist and therapist. I’ve been mentally ill for close to thirty years. USI has never turned their back on me in thirty years. The Lighthouse Program provides social interaction with other members. There are meals for $2.00 or free for those who do chores. There are also trips in the community, an In—Shape Program with a Wellness Coach and Gym Membership. Other Lighthouse members provide growing and learning relationships and friendships. It's a safe place to test new things with other people and situations. Vocational Services has been crucial to the development of my part—time job at the clubhouse and they have given me steady support for the last six months. This removed a medical spend down from my life, a big financial relief. Renter’s Rebate gives support every year to my Eversource bill which adds up over the winter and year. Energy Assistance helps with electricity and a matching budget program which is affordable to me. This is a broad outline of the crucial services in my life. Any cuts in these services would be detrimental to my recovery and well—being. They keep my long—term mental illness more tolerable and abstinence from alcohol and drug abuse possible. I hope this testimony helps you to understand the quality services that help me and many others. I speak for many others in addition to myself in standing up for our rights. This is who I am and what I am about. We are important people and we should be treated that way. We deal with plenty of prejudice and stigma. Please don’t be guilty of that yourselves. Thank you for your attention to this testimony and these important points. Sincerely, Thomas Hope Advocate of Keep the Promise Coalition I , t. 4/ ”1111111111 ?/ I I 5 {O ”Ill/{la ’I ,.'/ ’2‘, Date: February 18, 2016 To: Appropriations Committee From: Susan Walkama, LCSW President and CEO Wheeler Clinic, Inc. Re: HB-05044 Department of Mental Health and Addictions Proposed Budget Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and Honorable members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Susan Walkama, and I am the President and CEO of Wheeler Clinic. I would like to thank you for providing this opportunity to speak today on behalf of my colleagues and the more than 19,000 individuals we serve each year. Wheeler provides a comprehensive continuum of mental health and substance abuse recovery, primary care, community justice, education, child welfare, early childhood and prevention and wellness services across Connecticut. The individual and families who come to us for care include some of the most vulnerable populations in our state including individuals with serious and frequently co-occurring mental illness and addiction, co-morbid medical disorders and histories of exposure to trauma and violence. The services we provide are highly effective in helping these individuals and families function successfully in the community, diverting emergency room and inpatient hospitalizations, and reducing truancy and recidivism, but these services are also chronically underfunded and seriously threatened in the proposed budget. We are extremely concerned that in total, the Governor has proposed cutting vital programs and services by over $408 million (or 72% of the total cuts of $569.5 million for SFY17) across the 14 state agencies that partner with nonprofit providers. Note: The $408 million number was calculated by adding up the total number of cuts to programs and services impacting nonprofit providers, from what has been actually appropriated in the biennial budget for SFY17 — current law. The numbers have been adjusted for fringe benefits and transfers. As it stands, each state agency would cut funding by an additional 5.75%. There is no assurance that state agencies would be required to evenly distribute this cut across all programs. These cuts could disproportionately fall on, and in some cases completely eliminate, critical programs that serve some of the neediest residents of our state. In the DMHAS budget, the Governor is also proposing a $34,528,203 cut to the combined block grant ”Agency Operations” account at DMHAS. There is no assurance that DM HAS would be required to evenly distribute this cut across all programs. This cut could disproportionately fall on, and in some cases completely eliminate, outpatient mental health and substance abuse programs altogether. At a time when the most acute human and financial costs of untreated co-occurring mental health and addiction disorders are evident in our emergency departments, on our streets and in our living rooms, these cuts would further exacerbate the unaddressed addiction and mental health access problem in Connecticut and weaken an already fragile, underfunded service delivery system. The proposed cuts will also negatively impact children. Many of the adult clients we work with are the parents or guardians of children involved in the child welfare system and are referred to Wheeler for domestic violence treatment, addiction and mental health care. Timely access to mental health and addiction treatment for adults is critical to reducing incidents of child maltreatment, keeping children safe and breaking the cycle of poverty, incarceration, illness and addiction. Individuals and families in need of critical community-based services will not simply disappear if care is no longer available. Instead, they will have to seek exponentially more expensive services in emergency departments and hospitals, or worse, seek no help at all. They may end up in jails, become homeless, more deeply involved in the child welfare system, or become a danger to themselves or others. The long-term costs to the state and to individuals and families are untenable. These are the worst cuts to mental health services in Connecticut in a generation and are targeted towards the most vulnerable individuals and families in our state. For the past two legislative sessions, the legislature has restored funding to maintain DM HAS mental health and substance abuse programs, proving that you take the needs, lives, and well-being of Connecticut residents seriously. Mental health and addiction services are an indispensable core component of any healthcare system. Please continue to support these vital services for all people in need within our state. ‘7” YALE NEW HAVEN HEALTH TESTIMONY APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Thursday, February 18, 2016 Yale New Haven Health System (YNHHS) is Connecticut’s 3rd largest employer with over 20,000 employees and 6300 medical staff. We appreciate the opportunity to offer testimony concerning H.B. No. 5044, AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017. We are deeply concerned about the cuts proposed to the DMHAS budget, including the consolidation of agency operating funds. Specifically, the Governor’s budget eliminates $3 million in funding for Community Care Teams, reduces grants for mental health and substance abuse services by $15.8 million, and consolidates behavioral health boards and councils such as the Behavioral Health Partnership Oversight Council, on which the System is represented by Steve Merz. These reductions will further burden an already overtaxed mental health system, and decrease access for a vulnerable population to services in the community forcing them to hospital Emergency Rooms statewide. The DMHAS grants that support community mental health and substance abuse services are lifelines and should be considered “core services”. Emergency room visits and hospitalization is an expensive and inappropriate alternative to community—based services. YNHHS hospital affiliates’ emergency rooms are filled with citizens with mental health needs. At Yale—New Haven, we built and staff a Crisis Intervention Unit inside our emergency department to keep these patients safe as we evaluate their acuity. On many days, patients overflow into hallways as the unit is consistently filled to capacity. Many do not require hospitalization, though they are in desperate need of ongoing community based mental health services. Many are in need of supportive housing, some need detox services. Both are in short supply. The cuts contained in the proposed budget before you will force more patients to us as community services currently supported by DMHAS are decreased. Our ability to provide this care is limited by the hospital cuts that we shared with you last week, as well as last year’s increase in the hospital tax. YNHHS hospital affiliates will pay over $180 million in taxes to the State this year. Despite this, we continue to focus our more limited resources on quality and patient safety initiatives, like the Crisis Intervention Unit, and efforts to improve care, like the Bridgeport and New Haven Community Care Teams which have proven to reduce the State’s Medicaid expenses. Community Care Teams play a vital role in the communities we serve. In Bridgeport and New Haven, our hospitals participate and lead Community Care Teams. Each month, hospital receives a listing of CT Medicaid patients who have had 6 or more visits to an emergency department in the prior 6 months. We host a multi—agency review of these cases with the goal of offering services to these patients so they do not need to use the ED as their primary source of care. This improves patient care and reduces cost. While we do this work with existing staff, there are many patients we have not been able to serve. The CCT funding must be restored. For example, on January 27th, Yale—New Haven Hospital received its monthly Frequent Visitor report from the State. In this report, 24 new patients were added to our list. These 24 patients had 249 ED visits in the prior 6 months, averaging more than 10 visits per person! More than 100 of these visits were for behavioral health needs. There are many patients who need these services and we cannot serve them effectively without an expansion of these programs. To date, the New Haven CCT has served approximately 100 patients and there are more than 300 patients on our list awaiting services. Expanding the CCT will increase access to services and decrease the cost of care for CT Medicaid. In closing, the importance of maintaining state detox bed capacity must be emphasized. A major finding in CCT efforts has been that many patients need access to detox services which are not offered in their communities by the private not—for—profit agencies. Many patients have unique clinical conditions, financial backgrounds or legal situations which make a state—operated facility their only option for care. The proposed closure of 20 state—operated detox beds at Merritt Hall and Blue Hills will significantly increase wait times for patients to get care. The current wait time for such beds for patients at Yale—New Haven, is typically 2—4 weeks and delays will only increase the number of avoidable emergency department visits and increase the use of costly medical—detox services in general hospital medical wards or acute inpatient psychiatric settings at the expense of the State’s Medicaid program. We respectfully urge you to restore DMHAS funding, specifically, Community Care Team and mental health grant funding. Together with our patients, their families, and our employees, we thank you for your consideration and support. February 17, 2016 Hello, My name is Edina Brownlow. I appreciate you giving me and others the chance to speak before you. I am pleading with you not to cut funding from DMHAS and or any other mental health services in our state. I am a proud person in recover, who receives services from Wheeler Clinic. Wheeler has helped me in so many ways in my life and recovery in general. They believe in me and support me in so many ways. I have dealt with mental health issues pretty much all my life and it would not be beneficial for our state to make these cuts. Many people in recovery would be effected in this decision. A lot of people will have no place to go for treatment. I am not just writing this for myself, but for all my peers in the state. We need these services! Please don’t shut the door on people in recovery whom are trying to make their lives better. We never asked for mental illness or other barriers in our lives, but we are asking for you not to give up on us! Sincerely, A proud member of Recovery, Edina Brownlow 3 LN a Sin: 3 V \ \ x \ “ Senator Bye, Representative Walker and Honorable members of the Appropriations Committee: I would like to thank you for providing this opportunity to tell you about the impact the proposed cuts to grant funds will have on me and my family. My name is Richard Gagne and | live in West Hartford. The outpatient behavioral health services I receive at Wheeler Clinic have prevented me from committing suicide. l have had 14 spinal surgeries and although I am on a non opiate pain medication, I am still in a 24/7 state of severe pain. The treatment I receive at Wheeler teaches me how to live mentally with chronic pain. If these services close I shudder to think what I would do and, more importantly, what it would do to my wife and daughter if I were no longer able to control my mental stability. Please I respectfully request that you do all that you can to stop the proposed cuts to DMHAS funding. Individuals with behavioral health challenges need your help. | and my family need your help. Thank you. Richard T. Gagne, Jr. 2 Selden Hill Drive West Hartford, CT 06107 February 17, 2016 Hi, my name is Carmen First I would like to thank you for giving me this opportunity. I am before you today to tell you how grateful I am to Wheeler Clinic. Thanks to their help I am alive. I have been dealing with mental illness and drug addiction for years. I did not want to live anymore and thanks to my case manager Julia intervention I was able to overcome this. Thanks to Wheeler Clinic program I am doing much better and have hope for the future. Without Wheeler Clinic and the staff in it just simply would have never been possible. Cannot stress enough how people like myself need these programs. Thank you very much for your time. Please make the right decision. Carmen Y. Martinez ,Nz-d V x \ R 5 \ e \ »‘ Q '§V.V '\\ V V V§V V Vw§w$VV A (.V-x '\ VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV \ Appropriations Committee Testimony, Hearing date 02/18/2016 Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and Honorable members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is David Pogg and | live in Ellington, CT. Thank you for the opportunity to address the committee today about the impact of proposed cuts to DMHAS grants will have on the many people who benefit and need the assistance that those funding sources help provide. I come to you today notjust as a provider employee, but also as a former consumer. In 1998 I was in the grips of active gambling addiction. I lost myjob, was facing possible incarceration, broke the trust of my friends and devastated the relationship with my family. I was told to contact 211 from a South Windsor Police detective. He was the first person to tell me that I had a gambling problem. I took his advice, made the call and was connected with services at Wheeler Clinic. I was at my whit’s end, depressed, no sense of self—worth and alienated by friends and family. But within a couple days of making the call I was engaged with services at Wheeler Clinic and began working with my clinician. She helped me to understand my addiction and we began the process of taking control of and rebuilding my life. My recovery was not easy. There were successes and setbacks along the way. As things started to get better, I made the mistake many have made before. I became comfortable and when there were bumps in the road, I gave up hope. During those first few years I was homeless for a time, incarcerated and tried to end my life. | tell you this not to elicit sympathy or pity, | tell you this to show you that recovery |S possible. But it is not a road that a person travels alone. There are many who help along the way, family, friends, Clinicians, Case Managers and peer supports to name a few. I work at 2 not—for profit agencies that will be heavily affected by the proposed cuts, Wheeler Clinic and Intercommunity Recovery Centers (formerly Alcohol and Drug Recovery Centers). At Wheeler clinic, I am the Peer Counselor for the Bettor Choice Gambling treatment program and at Intercommunity Recovery Centers, I am a Case Manager for the Recovery House transitional housing program. Both agencies serve client populations that are often marginalized, forgotten and fall through the cracks. There are those who would say that what do is nothing more than help perpetuate the revolving door of a welfare state. I am sitting here before you, proof that they are wrong. I am alive today because of the services that I received at Wheeler Clinic. I do my best every day to help others recovery from addiction, mental illness and rebuild their lives. At the Recovery House transitional housing program we help thousands of people every year with a safe place to live and the basic necessities of life while they are in the process of building their recovery foundation. The Recovery House is a fully grant funded facility. When the impact of the proposed cuts became apparent, I thought to myself ”How many people could be turned away?”, ”How many people could lose their lives?” because of funding cuts. The safety net that the many not—for profit agencies provide is a vital resource for the thousands of people in Connecticut suffering from mental health problems and addiction. The proposed funding have the potential to gut services and may even force some agencies to close. Please I respectfully request that you do all that you can to stop the proposed cuts to DMHAS grants. Individuals with behavioral health challenges need your help. I need your help. Thank you for your time and your service to the people of the State of Connecticut. David Pogg 51 Meadow Brook Rd. Apartment 52 Ellington, CT. 06029 HB-05044: DMHAS Funding Cuts February 17, 2016 Hello, my name is Daniel I don’t know when I started in treatment but when I was told about the opportunity to get help for my addiction, anxiety and depression, to be in groups to talk to others, I learned I wasn’t alone. I learned about me, who I was. I started to look towards the future. Without the help of Wheeler Clinic, the wonderful staff esp. Stephanie, and other clients I know I would have stayed the same — tunnel visioned, my head scrambled, seeing in black & white. Now I see things as colorful, I see the bigger picture, I am not so scrambled. My attitude has improved, I am more patient, I have more self-esteem. I have tools to help myself & be able to give to others. I am grateful for the services, that they are close by and easy to get to. I have been sober for over 2 years now- it hasn’t been quick or easy but it is worth it. I am proud of myself and can hold my head up — my Family is proud of me too. Please don’t cut the funding to these programs — everyone benefits. Thank you, Daniel F. Sypher . H . .. K “ x x . \ \ V \ x V x x H “ m “ .k. V..\..... n x x. S“ .4}... H\ x . “.5... xx “ “V ix “ .. V .. m H 5‘3 u \3 H H. ithnA \ \x H M \‘w. wH \ . .:\ v \H x n x. v\ H ..\\\\m .\\~ . M\ v... H .. H ....m . H ...m..« «xx. \x m w .. . \ ~... 5 x “\E. \ wa .. H x x m 6‘... .S m.“ x... . k} x .. . .\ ....\ , .V\. V ........\.. .. on . H 3. .....i\\\\~\.» . x m .........:\. m \\§ V. Y . . ..-\§.\.. . . «K. . A. Ni .~\\\\i x. x ..«..u\.... ..\ a \.... i§\\\ . ....\ “2‘ » \..\\....~. \ x. . 3‘ ‘ x \ o \\$.H ,. . x w...“ . H H . .V . ..........V x x J \ . “ n x .. V. ‘ v . V n u v.5». its... “:3... .32..“ V \ . . . . x \ . w “ m H . .. . . . . nL\ \\ m .. t. .. .3 . .. \ . . 0“}; WK .. . ‘ . .~\\ m . .14.... . . . . \ m \.“ “ x n. “ u \ ii... “wk . \ _ . . \\\\.\\... _ x . H H ..\\ {a n __ A. n “ .. .. . . . x v u .. . “ .. .. A... “.3... . .... . .x.“ .. .. “x . .r. . n w s...»\\ H n \ . V, x..\ .2. \\ “ ho m. . . .1. m ... H . \ . H . .x... x . H A. . “ \ifiio . H ..\ . m “ H. .\\..... .m m ,VA. _ \\\\\\~. Q A m .. x V\ x .. n i ‘ ix.....\}. .5. -....\\ H. .. v. . .V\\.§.\\ .n-“xwunnn-u , z... H \‘\\u V V ..““..“$m~“~‘>~‘ .\\\“‘““.V V . V VTFV‘\“\“ 4......H \\\\\\“““»VVVVHHHHHH. . .X‘x gmkku... V Ann“ ...._ M.5\\.V\¢\ . “ .. . \ :0»sz \er ‘. \ ‘\......\.. \..\s \“\\““w .3\\\\\\\\\\\\‘ ‘ - - » . . >\\\“«\.‘. . . . . . \ \\\~\‘ .\\~\' "\\\\\\\-.\\\ .-““m;\“.‘m“, \ _ . ‘\\ 8““ . \“Nv \ \xw‘ \ V V‘V\V\\““u ““nx‘“... . \\\..m$\- \ n.“ eggxiwb“ ~ - - ~ ~ \\\'\\‘\ \\\‘.\“u . x u\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\N\ss\\\\\\ . \\ SECURWY 35 RWCE eraflment a? Mafia? Veh‘iicfie Annua§ Receigtss by Lacatinn Fismi Year 20.15 . Other, 353351.239, ' 2% AAA Offices, $17;669.,659 A 4% Internet Registratien Renewai, $22,5?8,676 , 5% Internationaf Registration Plan ERR, $34,453,378 , 3% Fiscal Services, $30,205,399 , 5% MaiE Operatiuns, $13,584,962 , 3% / Drivers Services'« / Suspensions; / $8,347,369 ‘. 2% Web Based \ \- ‘ ‘ \ Mm'Scheduiing, \\\\ i """""" \511,933,391, " 3'-\‘ “5%: _. " RNK \ f‘\ \ On Line Dealershi Transactéo .\ $46,976.. &\\\%\~\\i’ Aggrapriatiam mmmittee February 8, .2815 fimflomfiwéo so nmumvaa Emfihmdéfiwz .. 350m fins/mm swank? ' swung} stnliozm . mmm: f smmm : smziflm mam-m: swung!!! smzlum T mflmm stbilaom 7 finish/'1; ‘ sternum _ srmwm 1 stbzflnft; / .9. to»: _ fifiafiuxfi ksxnaq us. flaw—«unflwmwm M953... 5 wfin‘hmnu. mu.) 3% fiucaEhnoSEu Ema. E3333.— amficfihuu uzm m3“ ‘3 gunman“. 3 «.3383 3333 «mafia wumwcmaua uzmmwawh mun: uuflou “mamas: mam “E: 335 wanna?“ axfiaé «285%.. $2: 85%. EEOMEK .fiEfi flab.» quE& in. nun “5358 tmsu mam.— mgw$sém «6 mm mufiwaa WEE Sufi 3%..me a3 3 En 535$ .39. m2? “mug mwmhwaq February 17, 2016 Senator Bye, Representative Walker and Honorable members of the Appropriations Committee: Hi, my name is Eric Walz, Sr. First I would like to thank you for giving me this opportunity. I am before you today to tell you how grateful I am for first of all, all of the state funded programs, and of course for Wheeler Clinic. I cannot stress enough how because of Wheeler Clinic I am at where I am in my life today! I have been dealing with mental [health] and alcoholism for over 30 years. Have almost died 3 times and because of the staff and Wheeler Clinic’s available programs for 2 years now it has absolutely helped and allowed me to work on my areas in my life and to save my life! Without Wheeler Clinic and the staff in it, it just simply would have never been possible. Cannot stress enough how people like myself need these programs. Simply said, IT IS LIFE AND DEATH. Forever grateful for your time and most importantly Wheeler Clinic and the staff around my support network without them I would be dead. Thank you very much for your time. Please make the right decision. Eric Walz, Sr. New Britain, Connecticut HB-06824: DMHAS Funding Cuts YALE UNIVERSITY School of Medicine Department of Psychiatry Stephen A. Kichuk, B.A. Research Assistant Clinical Neuroscience Research Unit 34 Park St, 3” Floor New Haven, CT 06519 203-974-7534 To Whom It May Concern: I am a research assistant in the Department of Psychiatry at Yale University, and I am also a graduate student in public health at the University of Connecticut. 1 write today to call your attention to an important matter, and urge you to take action. As was my reaction at this time last year, it was with great alarm that I learned that budget cuts have been proposed once again to mental health and substances abuse services. Psychiatric disorders (“mental illnesses”), ranging from anxiety and depressive disorders, post—traumatic traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia, are serious public health problems. They are leading causes of disability, costing hundreds of billions of dollars annually. They also contribute to the worsening of general medical conditions. These conditions have a devastating impact on society, causing untold suffering of millions of people across this country. The majority of cases strike people while they are young, and seriously affect the trajectory of their entire lives. Fortunately, many people in Connecticut have services to rely on which they wouldn’t be able to obtain without the state contributing funds. Nevertheless, all too many still can’t get the help they need. Those suffering with psychiatric disorders face tremendous difficulties in obtaining much needed and overdue care, with the net result being that all too many don’t receive any. Slashing funding means that this basic problem of access to care will deepen. While it may save money in the short term, it will ultimately cost more in the long term. This is in addition to the human costs. Much talk has been made about increasing resources for the mental health field. It is alarming to find out that yet again there are proposals to do the diametric opposite and decrease resources through slashing funding. These cuts would reduce the ability of the already overstretched mental health system to provide care for those in need. I recognize that when it comes to budgetary issues, hard choices must sometimes be made. However, in the end, making further slashes to mental health services will only end up costing everyone more. I urge you to oppose these proposed reductions in funding. Thank you for your time and consideration, Stephen Kichuk Research Assistant Department of Psychiatry Yale School of Medicine Master of Public Health student University of Connecticut Connecticut Mental Health Center — 34 Park Street, S’dfloor — New Haven, CT 06519 Email: stephen.kichak@yale.eda Telephone: (203) 974—7534; Fax: (203) 974—7662 Good afternoon, and thank you for the opportunity to address the general assembly and legislatures of the great state of Connecticut in support of activities being rendered and implemented by DMHAS, otherwise known as the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. As an individual who has been afflicted with various addictions and mental health issues, and who has been in recovery and substance free for over 4 1/2 years, and virtually symptom—free with resistant bipolar disorder for nearly the same amount of time, I would like to share my testimony about the various substance abuse and mental health issues that are currently affecting the populace of the state, and some proposed solutions that I believe will be cost—effective and medically and socially appropriate in the treatment of these disorders. It is common knowledge that Connecticut has been cutting funding for various mental health causes during Governor Malloy’s tenure as the governor of this state. This has included the treatment of addiction, mental health, living arrangements for those suffering and afflicted by both, and congregate care for children that are in need of these services. In fact, Ihave had to advocate heavily for my son with the Department Of Children and Families (“DCF”) to secure the congregate care services for my autistic and emotionally disturbed son, who is clearly in need of these services, for the safety of himself, and for others. Citing this as a cost factor has been met with disdain and resistance by those members of DCF that are involved in fiscal planning for the agency. In light of the tragedies that occurred in Sandy Hook, it is prudent that we exercise due caution and diligence in dealing with mental health matters that may affect the welfare and well—being of the general populace, not implement short—term cost saving measures to combat mental health issues that will combat the safety of all of us. Part of the mission of DMHAS is to protect the rights and welfare of those afflicted by mental health and addiction, as well as their families. It is important that these individuals understand their rights, and receive the proper funding for their illness. In comparison to a diabetic, who may find it medically necessary to take insulin to combat their disorder, similarly, mental health and addiction patients may find a similar biological component that requires treatment. Some of the medications that are necessary to treat these afflictions are more modern and current; although the pharmaceutical companies may develop a formulary dictating to the patient that older medications at a far lesser cost are effective in treating mental illness, in fact, it is the more current medications that have been and are currently being developed that may be effective at a lesser cost than institutionalization, in treating these maladies (i.e. antipsychotics, SNRI’s). Attempting to treat mental illness with pharmaceuticals that date back 60 years may be effective in some cases, but as a general cost—saving measure, it often creates a situation where a short— term solution is realized, that is, saving the cost of the high—cost current medication from being prescribed. In fact, it more often creates a situation where the patient is required to attend inpatient treatment, since they are not receiving the appropriate care that they need. In consideration of inpatient treatment, there are times in which these stays are absolutely necessitated, both for the welfare of the patient and for the safety of the society as well. Medical care is aggravated by the threat of lawsuits, which drive up the cost of the stays at said institutions, and decrease the time of the stays medically necessary for the patient. Insurance institutions are retained for the purpose of paying for these stays; people pay for these services. The insurance companies, in turn, balk at paying the medical institutions necessary for these stays. Some type of regulation would be helpful and necessary to ensure that the insurance companies do what they were retained to do, and pay for the necessary stay time. Again, I had to advocate heavily for my son during his stay at Yale—New Haven Children’s Psychiatric in order for him to stay for as long as was necessary, and receive the services that he needed in 2015. The testimony of one (or more) psychiatrists in that institution should have been enough to combat the imminent premature discharge date that the insurance company insisted on implementing. Indeed, there are some instances, although being deregulated, that inpatient stays are necessary. Although organizations such as Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous exist that benefit millions of people, and that may require more education in order to assist more people, there also exist many rehabilitation centers in this state that are designed to help others who may not have benefited from these services, or may have not tried them. More awareness must be brought that addiction is an illness that needs to be treated and funded, albeit with the consent and willingness of the afflicted. Not every situation for each and every individual is black—and— white, either. There is often comorbidity among the mentally ill where psychiatric conditions exist alongside addictions, and where the addict is medicating themselves with substances in order to attempt to treat the psychiatric condition. The patient should not be shunned for their addiction; rather, more education and funding needs to exist to promote their welfare, and eventual recovery from these afflictions. It is important to recognize that simply treating the illness in the short—term is not a long—term solution; prematurely discharging someone in an effort to save money will in actuality cost more money, as the patient will likely be reintroduced into the congregate care community due to lack of long—term planning. This is not a prudent or permanent solution. It appears that at least in part, people who DMHAS may be servicing may not be receiving the financial resources, support, or education to combat their symptoms. It is imperative that the legislatures of this state, which ranks among the wealthiest in the United States, be cognizant of this fact, and take the appropriate actions to service those who are in need. I would like to cite the example of the highway funding in this state. Although I do not have the figures at my immediate disposal, I do know that a disproportional amount of funding from the taxpayers is being set aside for construction projects in Connecticut. Although these projects are necessary and appropriate, they may be laid out in a number of years, freeing funding up for other issues such as mental health in this state. It appears to be common knowledge that mental health issues are being pushed aside for other funding for issues that may be less prudent. If we do not address these issues now, and cut funding, the mental health issues will become more prevalent. Issues such as Autism Spectrum Disorder have received much attention in the last 10 years; Mood Disorder has also received attention and more prevalent. The widespread use of narcotics such as OxyContin’s has increased greatly, and more regulation has been required. More, not less, attention and funding and required to keep these issues from becoming more epidemic. In the long run, a veil of denial and ignorance is going to make the problem worse, not better. These issues affect many lives, and it is time that the state legislature support DMHAS in their efforts to treat these maladies, not pretend that they do not exists, or provide taxation funding disproportionally to other causes which may be less pressing at this time. Respectfully submitted this day of February 18th, 2016, David 1. Marcus Melissa Marshall 10 West Normandy Dr. West Hartford, CT 06107 860-561-1089 Melissa.g;3:=g Testimony: Appropriations Committee H.B. N0. 5044 AN ACT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO STATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2017 February 18, 2016 Good evening Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Melissa Marshall. I live in West Hartford and I’m here today in my capacity as Coordinator of the Connecticut Cross Disability Lifespan Alliance, a coalition representing people from all disability groups. I’m here today to urge you to oppose cuts to the DMHAS, DPH, DDS budgets. Occasionally, in a coalition such as the Alliance, there is disagreement about approaches to situations or priorities. The Connecticut Cross Disability Lifespan Alliance is very clear and in complete agreement that the Governor’s proposed budget is injurious to people with disabilities across the board. Last week, many of us testified in opposition to the DORS budget which would eliminate Centers for Independent Living. Tonight, we are advocating for very basic needs of people with intellectual disabilities and people receiving services from the DMHAS and DPH. I will begin with the cuts to DMHAS. This is not in order of priority; each set of cuts will be devastating to their respective disability communities. First, we oppose specific cuts. The proposed budget effectively eliminates the Regional Mental Health Boards. This will ultimately cost the state money. The five Regional Mental Health Boards with two staff each mobilize 500 volunteers annually. The Boards’ collaboration helps bring in $23 million in federal funds to the state. Plus, they are a vital liaison between the state local communities and service providers. The Boards assess service needs and evaluate services to ensure that the state is spending its dollars efficiently. Other direct cuts will be devastating and should be stopped. This includes carrying forward $17 million in cuts from the current year. Grant reduction for mental health and substance abuse services should be stopped. Although almost $16 million is projected in savings based on reimbursements to providers under the ACA, these reimbursements are insufficient to cover the actual cost of services. Cuts to Community Care Teams, don’t make fiscal sense either. This program has already been demonstrated to save the state money by encouraging collaboration between hospitals and community care providers to stabilize individuals who live in the community. We oppose consolidation of agency and operating funds into one line item. The legislature should have input into where and how tax dollars are spent. Programs that are vital mental health services would be consolidated and subject to $34 million in cuts. These programs include the Connecticut Legal Rights Project, Jail Diversion, Young Adult Services, home and community- based services, discharge and diversion services, housing and support services, grants for mental health services and employment opportunities and grants for substance abuse services. All of these programs save the state money. The state must begin to look to solutions that don’t end up costing the state money in the long term. We also oppose cuts to the Department of Public Health’s school-based health centers. Do not cut is already underfunded vital service. The state needs to continue to invest in supportive housing. The evidence clearly demonstrates that supportive housing ultimately saves money in Medicaid expenses. Now I turn to the DDS budget. Those of you serve on the I/DD Caucus are all too familiar with the pain faced by people with intellectual disabilities and their families in the state. We urge you to stop the $59 million cuts to DDS. People with I/DD are already going without vital services. Ironically, despite these difficult fiscal times and calls from people disabilities, family members, advocates and national experts to close Southbury Training School and the five Regional Centers the state continues to fund them with precious state resources. Keeping them open is a wasteful use of state dollars. We request that DDS develop a concrete plan for savings that can be achieved by improving management practices, cuts to excessive overtime, unit consolidations in institutions and public to private group home conversions. It is imperative that DDS savings into be diverted into the DDS waiting lists and into community based supports, as would be required under HB 5128.In the long term $90 million in savings from the closure of South bury Training School and the Regional Centers should be captured to serve people with ID/D. The State of Connecticut must break its pattern of making shortsighted budget cuts that will in the end cost the State a significant amount of money and not making cuts to institutions which are costly, ineffective and hurtful to people disabilities. Thank you for your time and consideration today. macfimi Testimony to the Human Services Committee Presented by Mag Morelli, President of LeadingAge Connecticut February 18, 2016 SB 17, An Act Implementing the Governor’s Budget Recommendations for Human Services Good afternoon Senator Moore, Representative Abercrombie, and members of the Human Services Committee. My name is Mag Morelli and I am the President of LeadingAge Connecticut, a membership organization of 130 not—for—profit organizations representing the entire field of aging services and senior housing. On behalf of LeadingAge Connecticut, I would like to testify today on long term services and supports and aging services as they are addressed in the Governor’s budget adjustment recommendations for the Human Services. I am pleased to be testifying in support of something that is not mentioned in the bill before you, and that is no proposed cut to Medicaid funding for long term services, supports and care for older adults. In fact, when the Governor proposed to maintain the current levels of Medicaid funding, he specifically pointed out that Connecticut is successfully transitioning the Medicaid program through several initiatives, including a rebalancing of the long term services and supports system so that more people can receive long term services and supports in community based settings. We are pleased that the Governor is supporting the state’s rebalancing policy for long term services and supports. This long standing policy has provided older adults the right care, at the right time, and in the location of their choice — while saving the state millions of dollars and slowing the increase in Medicaid expenditures for long term care, services and supports. The Governor’s proposal recognizes that success and maintains the funding to continue the progress. While we support the proposal to maintain current funding levels, we do so in the face of the state’s financial crisis. We realize the budget situation, but we want to make it clear that quality aging services and supports cannot be sustained without adequate rates of reimbursement. And the demand for aging services will only continue to grow as our state population ages. In the face of this reality we must continue to work together to ensure that our state is equipped to meet the demands of an aging population and the financial needs of a quality provider network. Connecticut is not alone in facing the increasing demands and rising costs of long term services and supports. The increasing burden of this core function of state government is impacting every state’s Medicaid program. This needs to be a bigger conversation. Together with our national partner, LeadingAge, we are ready to begin this conversation so that the state and the nation can address the issue of how we will finance long term services and supports and ensure that we can provide services forfuture generations. We do want to make the Committee aware of proposed cuts to other funding related to aging services that is very concerning. In the Department on Aging, the Statewide Respite Program and Fall Prevention funding are threatened with line item cuts and other funding for senior citizen programs within the Department of Aging would be part of the proposed consolidation of operating funds and subjected to the across—the—board cut. Experience in the field tells us that these cuts do not make sense. Respite care is cost effective to the state and invaluable to family caregivers. And we know that falls are a leading cause of injury among older adults. The prevention of falls is a critical intervention that helps older adults maintain their independence in the community and avoid the trauma and cost of a resulting injury, Our closing message is this. Please stay committed to the vision and progress we have made in the area of long term services and supports. Continue our Medicaid initiatives; maintain the rates of reimbursement to ensure a strong network of providers; and expand the conversation to the larger concept of how we can finance long term services and supports in order to meet the future demand. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. We have provided the Committee with additional written testimony and I would be happy to answer any questions. The New Reality of Health Care The aging services and health care delivery systems in Connecticut and across the country are in the midst of positive transformational change. This change is being driven by the move to coordinate and integrate care, as well as by the Affordable Care Act’s triple aim of improving care quality and outcomes, and achieving positive patient experiences for all. The goal is that by providing better, more efficient and effective care, it will, in turn, slow the future growth of healthcare costs. In Connecticut, this change is being implemented through several Medicaid initiatives, including a strategic rebalancing plan that will allow more people the opportunity to receive aging services and supports in community based settings. And it is working. The Medicaid strategies that Connecticut is implementing, including the rebalancing plan, are outlined in the Department of Social Services’ publication, ”A Précis of the Connecticut Medicaid Program.” This publication also reports on the success of these strategies and the promise for future improvement. Nursing homes, home and community based providers, physicians and hospitals are working hard on these Medicaid initiatives and they are making a difference in peoples’ lives every day. We urge the members of this Committee to stay focused on the vision and on the current Medicaid initiatives that are providing effective care, reducing costs, and slowing the growth of Medicaid spending. The Continuum of Core Long Term Services, Supports and Health Care Quality aging services — whether they are provided in the community or in the nursing home — cannot be sustained without rates of reimbursement that cover the cost of care. Medicaid providers are currently struggling to serve the older adult Medicaid client and many providers find it increasingly difficult to stay in the program. We have made strides in transforming our Medicaid program and system of aging services. We need to stay committed to that path as our work intensifies and those we serve become frailer, older, and in need of more care, not less. Nursing Homes Medicaid is the single most important public source of funding for nursing home care, but the fact is that current Medicaid rates do not meet the cost of providing this care. 70% of residents living in nursing homes count on Medicaid to pay for their care, but the average daily Medicaid rate that is paid to a nursing home is significantly lower than the cost of providing that care. Connecticut’s current Medicaid rate structure is outlined in statute and based on a calculation of the allowable costs of providing daily nursing home care. (Follow this link for an overview of Medicaid rate setting for nursing homes.) We are extremely grateful that the state provided wage enhancement funding for direct care employees of all nursing homes last session. We are working with the Department of Social Services to implement the distribution of that funding. Prior to this wage enhancement, the only nursing home rate increase since 2008 was the direct result of an increase in the nursing home user fee (provider tax) in 2011; in 2013 the nursing homes sustained a rate cut; and in 2014 there was a no rate increase. Meanwhile the cost of providing high quality nursing home care continued to increase. 70% of our nursing home costs are related to direct care personnel — the compassionate caregivers who dedicate their lives and careers to serving those who live in our nursing homes. Our other cost centers are heat, utilities, food and medical supplies — costs that continue to increase year after year and beyond the control of the nursing home providers. It is important to keep in mind that nursing homes are required to pay a nursing home bed tax rate of $21 per bed per day. The proceeds of this tax go toward funding of the entire Medicaid system of long term services and supports, not just nursing home care, and must be paid even if the resident’s Medicaid application is pending and there is no payer source for the bed. This is one more cost burden placed on nursing home providers. Connecticut’s Medicaid program is aggressively pursuing a systems change in long term services and supports and nursing homes are at the center of that change. Connecticut is seeking to rebalance our system and wants nursing homes to realign their structures, redesign their environments and intensify their work as those they care for become frailer, older, and in need of more care and our members are responding to that demand. But it must be recognized that while the state anticipates the need for fewer nursing homes, it must invest in the nursing homes that will still be desperately needed by those who cannot be cared for at home. Today’s nursing homes are caring for an increasingly frail resident population while embracing culture change and person—centered care in environments that more closely resemble a home than an institution. We are on the right road and the state will move toward an acuity based rate system for nursing homes. Medicaid Nursing Facility Rate History Rate Period Increase/Decrease Cost Report Year 1/1/05-6/30/05 1.0% 2000 7/1/05-6/30/06 14.0% (4.0% net - Rebase with Tax) 2003 7/1/06-6/30/07 3.0% 2003 7/1/07-6/30/08 2.9% 2003 7/1/08-6/30/09 0% 2003 7/1/09-6/30/10 0% 2007 7/1/10-6/30/11 0% 2007 7/1/11-6/30/12 3.7% (1.25% net w/Tax Increase) 2007 7/1/12-6/30/13 0.33% (.17% net w/Tax Increase) 2007 7/1/13-6/30/14 -0.273 (Decrease) 2011 7/1/14-6/30/15 0% 2011 7/1/15-6/30/16 $26 million wage enhancement 2011 Nursing Home Moratorium The nursing home moratorium was originally set in statute in 1991 on a temporary basis, but last session it was made permanent. The moratorium sets restrictions on nursing home bed supply and bed placement throughout the state. While the state may never need to increase the supply of beds, we may need to redistribute beds or create new nursing home services that this moratorium may prevent. We therefore believe the moratorium restrictions should be revisited periodically and included in the scope of planning for long term services and supports. Residential Care Homes The residential care home setting is both supportive and affordable and is a setting of choice for many older adults. It can be a valuable community based housing choice for those choosing to receive Medicaid funded home and community based services and supports and therefore we are currently working with the state agencies to ensure that residential care homes can choose to can qualify as a community based setting for the purpose of Medicaid funding. Home and Community Based Services The Connecticut Home Care Program for Elders is the heart and soul of our state’s rebalancing plan when it comes to aging services. It is this program that helps eligible clients over the age of 65 continue to live at home and to age in place. It is the delivery of the services provided within the Home Care Program for Elders, packaged in an individualize care plan for each client, that allows an older adult to remain at home or to return to home through the Money Follows the Person Program. That is why it is vital that we continue to invest in this program and in the providers who deliver the services. Community based providers are meeting the growing needs of Connecticut’s older adults and their caregivers while preventing or delaying placements in skilled nursing facilities and helping to prevent the need for more expensive health care settings such as emergency rooms and acute care hospitals. The latest available annual report of the Connecticut Home Care Program for Elders indicated that in state fiscal year 2014, $87,662,725 in net savings were generated as a result ofthe reduced utilization of nursing facility beds due to the Connecticut Home Care Program. These community based services should be encouraged and we ask for your continued support. Previous Cut to the State-funded portion of the Connecticut Home Care Program for Elders Intake into the Category 1 level of the state—funded portion of the Connecticut Home Care Program for Elders was frozen for two years in the current state budget. This is the level that provides services for those who are frail and in need of services, but not quite at nursing home level of care. The budget also increased the co—pay for individuals remaining in the state—funded portion of the program from a 7% cost share to a 9% cost share. Previous Cut to the Alzheimer’s Respite Program The current state budget funding for the Alzheimer’s Respite Program reflects a 5% cut from previous years. Many elders with dementia live within their own homes for many years with the majority of the caregiving being provided by a spouse, relative, or close friend. It is both the elder and the caregiver who are served by the respite program. Family caregivers provide countless hours of unpaid long term care, services and supports. They are the true heroes of our long term services and supports system and providing them with needed respite is not only the right thing to do, but it is the prudent thing to do as they save our Medicaid program millions — possibly billions — of dollars every year. The rebalancing process is working. More of our elderly are being cared for in the community. We must not stop now. This systems change is not only the right thing to do, but it is slowing the growth in Medicaid expenditures for long term services and supports. We urge the state to work with us and the other dedicated stakeholders to continue this progress. ‘ flee“ Mu {hematite Resources of Potential Interest to the Committee a Aging Servicegz The Not—fer—Prefit Difference e wwwieadineegeflierg a State Of Cemecticet Strategic Rebeiencine Pian; A Pien to Rebeience Long Term Services and Supports 2913—2915 a 25316 State Lane Term Services and Sueeerts Pian e Medicaid Rate Setting Nursing Home Gverview 9» Leedineeee Articie an the Financing 0i LTSS a 2:316 Pathways Reeert: Perseectives on the Chaiienees et Financing Loneuierm Serviceg and Stteeorts Thank you for your consideration of this testimony. LeadingAge Connecticut mmore||i@leadingagectorg (203) 678—4477 110 Barnes Road, Wallingford, CT 06492 ‘l“\‘fi €3- u : 3:. Q . . CQm-mrimi ALZHEIMER'S RESOURCE CENTER OF CONNECTICUT ALZHEIMER’S RESOURCE CENTER OF CONNECTICUT, ADULT DAY CENTER AT JEAN STOLBA CENTER AVERY HEIGHTS HOME HEALTH AGENCY & ALSA AVERY HEIGHTS VILLAGE BISHOP WICKE HEALTH CENTER THE BRADLEY HOME CAPITOL TOWERS CEDAR MOUNTAIN COMMONS CHERRY BROOK HEALTH CARE CENTER CHURCH HOMES CONNECTICUT BAPTIST HOMES COVENANT VILLAGE OF CROMWELL CROSBY COMMONS, INC. DUNCASTER ELIM PARK BAPTIST HOME FAIRVIEW ODD FELLOWS HOME OF CT FEDERATION HOMES FELICIAN ADULT DAY CENTER GRASMERE BY THE SEA HARBOURSITE HEBREW HEALTH ADULT DAY SERVICES HEBREW HEALTH CARE HEBREW HEATLH VISITING NURSES HOFFMAN SUMMERWOOD COMMUNITY HOLY SPIRIT HEALTH CARE CENTER IMMANUEL HOUSE INGRAHAM MANOR JEFFERSON HOUSE JEROME HOME JEWISH SENIOR SERVICES JUNIPER HILL VILLAGE KING'S DAUGHTERS AND SONS HOUSING LEEWAY LOCKWOOD LODGE LOURDES HEALTH CARE CENTER LUTHER RIDGE AT MIDDLETOWN LUTHERAN HOME OF SOUTHBURY MANSFIELD CENTER FOR NURSING AND REHABILITATION THE MARVIN/UNDER ONE ROOF MARY WADE ADULT DAY CENTER MARY WADE HOME MASONICARE MASONICARE AT ASHLAR VILLAGE MASONICARE AT NEWTOWN MASONICARE HEALTH CENTER MASONICARE HOME HEALTH & HOSPICE THE MCAULEY MCLEAN MCLEAN ADULT DAY HEALTH CARE MCLEAN HOME CARE & HOSPICE MERCY COMMUNITY HEALTH MISS LAURA M. RAYMOND HOMES MONSIGNOR BOJNOWSKI MANOR MOUNTAIN VALLEY PLACE MULBERRY GARDENS ADULT DAY CENTER AT MARIAN HEIGHTS MULBERRY GARDENS OF SOUTHINGTON MULBREERY GARDENS OF SOUTHINGTON ADULT DAY CENTER NATHANIEL WITHERELL NEW INN NEW HORIZONS VILLAGE NEW SAMARITAN CORPORATION NOBLE HORIZONS NOTRE DAME CONVALESCENT HOME OGDEN HOUSE ORCHARDS AT SOUTHINGTON ORMONT COURT, INC. PIERCE MEMORIAL BAPTIST HOME POMPERAUG WOODS POND RIDGE THE RETREAT SAINTJOSEPH LIVING CENTER SAINTJOSEPH'S RESIDENCE SAINT MARY HOME SAINT MARY HOME ADULT DAY CARE CENTER SCHOOLHOUSE APARTMENTS SEABU RY MEADOWS SEABURY LIFE SEABU RY VISITING NURSES-SEABU RY CARE NOW SEYMOUR I. HOLLANDER APARTMENTS SOUTHINGTON CARE CENTER SOUTHMAYD HOME STEVENS WOODS ELDERLY HOUSING STONINGTON ARMS SU LLIVAN-MCKINNEY ELDER HOUSING TORRINGFORD APARTMENTS TOWER ON E/TOWER EAST UNITED METHODIST HOMES VICTORY CATHEDRAL APARTMENTS VICTORY GARDENS VILLAGE AT WAVENY CARE CENTER WAVENY ADULT DAY PROGRAM WAVENY LIFECARE NETWORK WELLES COUNTRY VILLAGE WESLEY HEIGHTS WHITNEY CENTER WOODLAKE AT TOLLAND/ ECHN ELDERCARE SERVICES Commmity Health Ctttet Asaomahon of Connecticut 151m}. E\\ 11 1-31 11131.3 2'61 fax s:.§.-‘\_s..;1i)tl,,,3>e ll} ’8 “"1 J.,1..115.t.11..1.&.>t§‘g Testimony of Deb Polun Director, Government Affairs/Media Relations Community Health Center Association of CT Regarding the Health Provisions of Governor Malloy ’s Budget Proposal Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Thank you for the opportunity to testify about the Health provisions of Governor Malloy’s budget proposal, which will impact hundreds of thousands of Connecticut residents. On behalf of the Community Health Center Association of Connecticut (CHCACT), and its fifteen member federally—qualified health centers, I offer comments on the following: Reduction in funding to F QH Cs: The State of Connecticut has been supportive of federally— qualified health centers (FQHCs), which, altogether, provide over 350,000 state residents with high—quality primary, dental and behavioral health care services. As you can see from the list at the bottom of this testimony, FQHCs provide care all across the state, in urban, rural and suburban areas. All of you on this Committee have health center patients in your districts. Our state has been supportive of federally—qualified health centers through public policy and through state grants from the Department of Public Health (DPH) (specifically, the Community Health Services line item), in recognition of the large number of uninsured and underinsured patients seen by health centers. These grants supported clinician salaries, administrative and other costs associated with providing high—quality comprehensive health care services. Last year, the legislature shifted most of those funds to the Department of Social Services (DSS), in order to receive a federal match. However, $422,327 was retained at DPH, to be distributed as grants. To date, in Fiscal Year ‘16, these grant funds have not been distributed. Now, the govemor’s budget proposal removes that funding for FY ’17. Some might argue that the Affordable Care Act, which has increased the number of insured people in our state, eliminates the need for this grant. However, health centers continue to see uninsured patients — in 2014, 18.5% of health center patients were uninsured — because they are some of the only providers who will. Additionally, many of the plans sold on Access Health CT come with large \Cl 1attet Oak Health Center{ C‘1FC Greater Dan‘outy Community7 Health Center‘i' Commtu 11ty Healtl t‘1 SEER/1088‘: Community Health 8: Wellness Center of Gteatet To1‘t1t1gtot1 EComell Scott Hill Health Center Fait Haven Community Health C entet E First Choice Health Centetsii ECwenetahons Familv Health C ente1 ‘x_ E lntetCommunityT Netwalk C community Health Cente1 \LE 01311111113 Health C are Southwest Community Health Centei {:E StayWell Health Center EUnited Community & Family Services {:3 Wheel e1 Climm deductibles, some as high as $6,000. Individuals seeking health care services before they have hit their deductible are often unable to pay full cost out—of—pocket; at health centers, they are offered payment on a sliding fee scale. These grants are needed to fill in the gaps left by underpayments through both Medicaid and the sliding fee scale. The loss of this grant funding will be one more cut that will reduce the ability of health centers to maintain their full array of services. The real impact of this cut will be a reduction in clinician or support staff hours, leading to decreased access to health care. I urge you to reject this proposal. Reduction in Funding to School-Based Health Centers: CHCACT opposes the govemor’s proposed cut to school—based health centers, which are critical providers of medical, behavioral and oral health care in school settings. In Connecticut, most FQHCs also operate School—Based Health Centers (SBHCs), which are proven to keep students healthier and better learners. In 2015, through budget reductions and rescissions, state support of school—based health centers was reduced by over $1 million, approximately an 8% cut. Governor Malloy now proposes to reduce funding yet again by another $1.24 million. School—based health centers represent a success in our state. Research supports their effectiveness in providing health care, specifically mental health care: students who use SBHC services are 74% more likely to receive the mental health care they need than students who do not. Reducing support to school—based health centers would be a backwards step for our state, in trying to improve access to health care for children. Block Granting of State Agencies: CHCACT continues to strongly oppose the govemor’s proposal to block grant certain funding streams to state agencies, which would shift some of the responsibility of appropriating taxpayer money from the legislative branch to the executive branch. As this Committee knows, the legislature has direct accountability to its constituents, and hearings like these are a testament to the importance of public input in crafting state budgets. Please do not accept this proposal, and instead, allow the legislature to retain the responsibility of creating the state budget. Thank you for your consideration and your hard work on behalf of our great state. \Cl 1arter Oak Health Center{ CElFC Greater Danbury Community7 Health Cente1*ZCom1n11111ty Heall t1 Serviceséi :Community Health 8: Wellness Center of Greater Towington é‘lComel Scott Hill Health Cente1 Fai1 Haven Community Health Centerti ‘ First Choice Health Centers": ‘anenerations Familv Health C ente1 ‘x_ E lnterCommunityT Nohxialk C community Health Centet O Optimus Health Care Southwest Community Health Centei 5:}. SiayWell Health Center BUnited Community & Family Services if} Wheel 91 Climm Testimony for February 2016 Public Hearing on the Governor’s Proposed Budget for DMHAS, DPH, & DSS My name is Vered Brandman, and I’m a Norwalk resident and a person in recovery from mental health issues. My current diagnosis is Major Depression with PTSD and an eating disorder. I’m 28 years old and while I’ve had symptoms most of my life, it wasn’t until I was 20 years old that I was able to get real help that helped. Since then I’ve been a client at a Social Club (Keystone House in Norwalk), a member at a Clubhouse (Bridge House in Bridgeport), I’ve completed my Associate’s Degree, gotten certified as a Recovery Support Specialist through Advocacy Unlimited, served as Project Coordinator for TurningPointCT.org, and more. Last spring I was nominated to the Board of Directors for the Southwest Regional Mental Health Board, one of Connecticut’s five state—mandated private—non—profits. You’re going to hear about the different services the Regional Mental Health Boards provide, so I’ll stick to the pieces that have impacted me the most: my Regional Mental Health Board has been an impartial hub, a neutral place for me to connect with advocates living and working in my part of the state—people like me who are in recovery; people who work in the mental health and addiction system, both in the private and public sector; our loved ones; and concerned citizens representing their towns. My Regional Mental Health Board isn’t an office, it is a network—it connects advocacy organizations, service provider agencies, the people they serve, and the people who love us, so that we can all work together from our different vantage points towards a better mental health and addiction services system. They are, as Imentioned earlier, an impartial hub for any organization, agency, group, and individual in the region to come and be heard, to come and be part of the changes we all know our system of care needs. The Regional Mental Health Boards may seem less important than direct care services, but they are not—please resist proposed cuts the Regional Mental Health Boards. I’ve learned about more organizations, advocacy opportunities, trainings, and initiatives in the past three years since connecting with my Regional Mental Health Board than in the previous six years of my recovery, to say nothing of the four years before that when I was in and out of ineffective treatment. I can’t overstate the importance of the resource my Regional Mental Health Board is to me, every day. But just as importantly, my Regional Mental Health Board acknowledges my role as a community resource for others. My Regional Mental Health Board—as an organization and through the individual people involved in it, particularly the Executive Director Margaret Watt—has provided tremendous encouragement and support in my efforts to become a valuable resource to my peers in recovery and to my community at large. Please protect the budgets for DMHAS and the Regional Mental Health Boards—we are all doing What we can to make our service system more effective. The proposed budget cuts will destroy four decades of coalition building and will leave community members with no place to go to be heard. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee In Opposition to Governor Malloy’s Budget Cuts to DMHAS Thursday, February 18, 2016 Good Evening, I, Benjamin Rivera, am a 40 year Latino and resident of Newington who struggles with bipolar disorder. I have been receiving various treatments from InterCommunity such as medications, psychotherapy, and employment assistance. Also, I benefit from services from D88 and participate in social activities rendered by Advocacy Unlimited that help me cope with my daily stresses of life. My faith and all of these programs funded by the DHMAS budget have helped me maintain sobriety since July 31, 2014, part—time employment since January 27, 2015 and good health. Also, I have managed to maintain community and personal relationships which was terribly impossible for me to obtain before. I believe that entertaining the notion of these budgets cuts that will impact the DHMAS budget will be unproductive and a significant case of callus neglect toward individuals with special needs. This will not only affect me it will also affect families and communities in the State of CT. If it weren't for these existing services and agencies, I do not know where I would be today. Mental illness is a growing epidemic, not just in Connecticut, but also at a national level. It needs to be addressed appropriately and taken into consideration. I think it would be a shame to digress from the progress that has already been made. I humbly request that the Appropriations Committee exhaust all means possible in order to avoid implementation of these budget cuts. Thank you to the Appropriations Committee for the opportunity to testify here today. Thank you to the keep the promise coalition for enabling me advocate for people like myself with mental disabilities who will be directly affected by these rulings. God bless, Benjamin Rivera Testimony of Planned Parenthood of Southern New England Susan L Yolen, Vice President, Public Policy & Advocacy Appropriations Committee Hearing on the State Department of Public Health Budget February 18, 2016 Thank you, Senator Bye and Representative Walker, for this opportunity to comment on the Governor’s proposed budget for the State Department of Public Health. I’m Susan Yolen, Vice President for Policy and Advocacy at Planned Parenthood of Southern New England. Planned Parenthood of Southern New England (PPSNE) is the largest provider of family planning and reproductive health care in Connecticut. We operate 17 health centers, and receive approximately $1 million annually from the State Department of Public Health to support access to family planning services to thousands of patients each year, most between the ages of 18 and 30. For many of our young patients, PPSNE is the first and often the only health provider they see. The funds we receive from DPH enable us to offer basic reproductive health services to uninsured, low income women (and men) at a fraction of the cost of a private physician’s office. Family planning is a key component of DPH’s new Preconception Care Initiative to reduce infant mortality and morbidity. This project will attempt to make sure that women are making healthy decisions by getting preventive reproductive health care prior to pregnancy, to insure the healthiest possible birth outcomes. State funds enable PPSNE to offer a range of FDA-approved contraceptive methods to such patients, including the most up to date long-acting reversible methods (LARCs) such as IUDs and hormonal implants. The use of safe, effective birth control methods has made an enormous positive impact on teen and unintended pregnancies in Connecticut and nationwide. When they leave PPSNE, 78% of our female family planning patients are using a highly effective method of contraception and 15% are using a LARC. In a recent research project, Yale School of Public Health students used respected national models to estimate that Connecticut saves nearly $9 million for its investment of $1 million in family planning... S9 for every dollar spent. Most of that savings comes from averting the costs of pregnancy to our state Medicaid program: a Medicaid birth in Connecticut costs an estimated $10,500 according to the Guttmacher Institute. Nearly half of all births (45%) in the US are paid for by Medicaid. PPSNE opposes the proposed 5.75% cut to discretionary programs delivered by state contractors. However, we worry even more about the wisdom of requiring state agencies to determine line item budget cuts and spending. The block grant scheme proposed in the Governor’s budget removes line item control from committee members accountable to the public, and gives this role to the agencies themselves, under the guise of redefining the core mission of state government. As advocates and as health care providers, we have a limited ability to impact internal agency cuts that will be decided without public scrutiny. We have no way of knowing whether our programs or those of other decades-long non-profit contractors offering vital services, will remain ”core” to our state’s mission. As a fiscally responsible nonprofit, PPSNE has just completed our budget process for fiscal year 2017. We have no way of projecting the outcome of this process, the possible loss of state funds, or how we would reallocate our services after such a blow. We implore this committee to find another approach to the budget, rejecting across-the-board cuts and ending any consideration of block granting discretionary spending. Long term, our state must examine and adopt any one of a number of reasonable approaches to generating new revenue that will allow us to preserve or improve the standard of living for all residents of Connecticut, that most of us believe is not negotiable. Thank you. My name is Roger Levesque and | live in Newington CT. I’m here to give you my 2 cents on a couple issues that I, and a majority of your constituents feel, are important. I dare you to try and find someone that has not been affected by or is only one degree away from cancer. I have personally had multiple family members and dear friends, not lose their battle, but run out of time in their fight with cancer. I can't help but think that some of them could have been saved if they had caught it earlier. My father in law who had actually become one of my friends, Gary Scheyd, was told he had pneumonia for over 3 months before they did an MRI and found a mass. It was a very aggressive form of cancer. They found it too late, Gary ran out of time in his fight 7 months later. 3 1/2 years ago my sister, Diane, was diagnosed with a cancer that is the most harmless and easily treated when caught early, melanoma. Unfortunately she was told not to worry about that new mole by her regular doctor, so her cancer turned into one of the most deadliest when it metastasizes. Diane ran out of time on April 28th 2014. She was the strength in life when I needed it and I miss her every day. You have an opportunity to make sure someone else's Gary or Diane has a chance with funding programs like the Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Programs. This program could possibly save one of your spouses, one of your siblings, a parent, maybe a child of yours. You also have an opportunity to help the tobacco users in this state. My friend Gary was a smoker, it’s probably what brought on the lung cancer. But think if he was educated about the dangers of tobacco when he first started. I have a 13 year old daughter named Evelyn and a 10 year old son named Brandon. |t scares me to death that even with a good upbringing that they will one day try some sort of tobacco product. I know how addictive it is, I was hooked for 28 years. Until losing Gary scared me to quit. If you don't find a way to restore funding for tobacco control programs, many of the kids in this state won’t get the kick in the rear they need to stay away from it. As a cancer advocate for ACS CAN it blows my mind that a conscious decision was made by this State’s leaders to eliminate funding for this program. We are by far, one if the worst states in the Union in what we spend on tobacco control programs. We are spending less than 10% of the CDC's recommended amount on Tobacco Control Programs. My kids are both worth more than 0 dollars. Please restore funding to CT's Tobacco Control Programs! And please continue funding the state’s breast and cervical cancer early detection program! Thank you! STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 2800 BERLIN TURNPIKE, PO. BOX 317546 NEWiNGTON, CONNECTICUT 061313546 Office of the Commissioner An Equal Opportunity Employer Testimony of Commissioner James P. Redeker Appropriations Committee . Fiscal Year 2017 Midterm Operating Budget February 8, 2016 1:00 p.111. Legislative Office Building, Hearing Room 2C Good afternoon Chairwoman Bye, Chairwoman walker, and members of the Committee. I am James P. Redeker, Commissioner of the Department of Transportation. I am pleased to appear before you today to discuss Governor Dannel P. Malloy’s recommended mid-term Operating Budget for the Department of Transportation. i would like to begin with the Department’svision. Let’s Go CT! is the Governor’s 30-year, $100 billion vision for transportation. It represents a historic roadmap for Connecticut’s future. Last year marked the 120‘11 anniversary of the establishment of the Connecticut Department of Transportation, the oldest DOT in the country. Last year also marked the first transportation vision based on economic growth and quality of life for this state. Never before has there been a vision to propel our economy and make Connecticut a place where people and business want to locate because of the ease of safe and efficient travel with or without owning a car. This transportation vision has a laser-like focus on strong economic-growth, energy efficiency, sustainability, and exceptional quality of life in Connecticut. This is a complete departure from historic plans that, at best, made investments to minimally address system crises and deplorable highway, bus and rail performance conditions. In an effort to simplify this very comprehensive transportation program, the vision of the DOT is to deliver a transportation system that: o Eliminates pervasive, obsolete and deficient highway, bridge, and rail system conditions 0 Invests in high performing, new rail, bus, highway and pedestrian and bicycle capacity 0 Propels Connecticut’s economy and distinguishes the state as a premier choice for residential, business and recreational location ' The Department and I appreciate the Legislature’s actions during the 2015 session. Approving the five—year ramp up pian was the beginning of an ambitious, progressive and long-overdue multi-modal program to address the state’s transportation infrastructure needs. I also appreciate the General Assembly providing the Department with the critical staffing it needs to deliver our services and projects to the citizens of Connecticut. We endeavor at all times to provide the best return on that investment as possible, with continuous improvements in all areas being our philosophy and goal, as I will discuss in more detaii next. The Department is taking strategic, yet judicious steps to address the ramp-up program, while remaining dedicated to our core services. The citizens and businesses of Connecticut must be able to count on the Department to: o Operate and maintain safe and efficient state—owned highways, bridges, rail, transit, bicycle and pedestrian systems Be accountable for system conditions and performance 0 Deliver capital program priorities based on asset management and economic impact priorities The Department will manage this budget with the discipline and management principles that we have adopted since I have been Commissioner. In all of our actions, we embrace the values of integrity, communication, customer service, cost-effectiveness and innovation. I would like to offer a few examples the outcomes of this organizational focus. First, when I_ became Commissioner, the DOT initiated a total of $400 million of construction awards. Three years later, with the same staff, we set a goal of $800 million in awards, but actually achieved a record $1.2 billion in construction awards. Second, we successfully demonstrated significant innovation by utilizing Accelerated Bridge Construction and replacing the 184 bridges in Southington in a single weekend (and finishing 9 hours ahead of schedule). A third and major achievement was the opening of the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge this year with the overall program 8 months ahead of schedule and $200 million under budget. As we plan to administer the proposed FY2017 budget, we are guided by the following specific management strategies to meet or exceed the requirements of the FY2017 operating budget. We will: 0 Continue implementing LEAN in DOT 0 Implement new technology for operations and capital program management 0 Redeploy existing staff and expand cross training where possible I Focus hiring on positions that align with agency core services Governor Malloy’s recommended Special Transportation Fund appropriations of $708 million and Capital authorizations of $1.35 billion for the Department demonstrate a continued, dedicated commitment to improving Connecticut’s multimodal transportation system of roads, bridges, buses, trains, maritime, and bicycle and pedestrian systems. The Governor’s proposed midterm Operating Budget essentially sustains the funding levels enacted last spring, and also includes new proposals to fund the establishment of the Transit Corridor Development Assistance Authority, and the launching of Bus service between Waterbury and Torrington The recommended budget also contains a shift of $68 million in funds from the State Comptroller to the Department for specific Fringe Benefits, so those costs can be reported as part of agency operations, rather than centrally. This consolidation will give more flexibility in managing the Department and more transparency as we report Department expenditures. In total, apart from the Fringe adjustment, the Department’s bottom line appropriated budget reflects an increase of less than one half of one percent. The majority of the Department’s Operating funds are dedicated to providing transportation related services that the citizens of our state have all have come to expect. Public Transportation services, including Bus, Rail and ADA account for more than fifty percent of our funding. The majority of the remaining resources are dedicated to essential highway safety, roadway maintenance and snow plowing. The Department will continue to strive to perform its core services in the most cost-effective manner by streamlining agency operations and taking advantage of technology and process improvements through LEAN innovations that are central to the Department’s business practices. I look forward to working with you to implement a budget that allows for continued preservation and improvement of the State’s transportation network, and enables us to deliver the superior transportation system that the citizens of Connecticut deserve. I will be happy to answer any questions. My name is Kelsey Phillips. I am writing to support the current funding to the state’s Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program and in opposition to the elimination of the $12 million transfer to the Tobacco and Health Trust Fund (THTF), the primary source of tobacco control funding. Cancer has deeply affected my life and I am thanking you for supporting policies to reduce cancer in the state so that others don’t have to go through what I have. At the young age of 16, I lost my mother to breast cancer. My mom was my best friend, and one of the toughest people I have ever met. She went through every chemotherapy treatment with a smile, and made sure dinner was on the table every night, no matter how sick she felt. She never once took time to feel bad for herself; instead putting whatever energy she had into taking care of my brother and |. At the time, I thought watching her hair fall out and her skin turn grey was the worst thing I’d have to see. I hated witnessing my mom cry when she thought no one was looking. I hated knowing how much she was suffering. Eventually the cancer spread to her brain, and watching her hair fall out and skin turn grey seemed like nothing compared to watching her turn into a person who I didn’t know. Slowly the cancer took over her body, and my mom went from the brightest person I knew, to not even knowing where she was. That was the defining moment of my life. I had to watch my mother die. There wasn’t anything I could do to help. I was able to say goodbye to my mother on September 19th, 2004. I held her hand and told her it was okay to let go. I told her how hard she fought, and how proud I was that she was so tough, but it was time for her to let go. Everyday I think about people all over the world who have to go through what I did, and my heart breaks knowing their pain and suffering. I think about my future. What if I have children, and they have to go through what I did? I recently learned I am BRCA positive, making my risk of breast cancer skyrocket to 87%. I'm also 5 months pregnant. I'm lucky enough to have the resources to do prophylactic surgeries, or advanced screenings to ensure that I don't go through what my mother did. I am so thankful for the care I have received and the amazing doctors who have helped guide me through this process. Thank you for not cutting the budget to the Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. This program protects those most vulnerable in the state. The women that would lose access if this program were to be cut, will now have somewhere to turn to get the screening they need. Thank you for giving these women the chance at life they deserve. Hi, I'm Donna Rogers. | live in Higganum; and I am a 7—year breast cancer survivor. First, I want to thank you for leaving the funding for the breast and cervical cancer early screening program in this year's budget. I am here because of early screening. I was fortunate to work for an employer who provided access to health care for his employees; so I was able to have annual mammograms. My tumor was tiny when it was discovered; and my required treatment was minimal compared to what many go through once the cancer is more advanced. I lost a dear friend to breast cancer the year before I was diagnosed because she was not able to afford yearly screenings. As part of myjourney with cancer, I have drawn closer to my family and become more active in my church and my community. Most importantly, I have been privileged to mentor other women who have been diagnosed with breast cancen | feel very fortunate; but I feel it is important for all women to have the same opportunities I had. When detected early, breast cancer is a lot less expensive to treat than when it is diagnosed in stages ”I and IV; and the survival rate for women diagnosed at stage I is 99%. The thousands of women in Connecticut, who aren't fortunate enough to have insurance, like I did, rely on the state's Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. This vital program provides free mammograms and Pap tests in an effort to detect cancer at its earliest stages when the chances for survival are best and the cost of care is the lowest. Maintaining funding will ensure that these women continue to have access to the screening that could save their lives. A breast cancer diagnosis doesn't need to be a death sentence for anyone. Again, thank you for leaving this item untouched in the current budget; and I would urge you to continue to support it in future budgets. To: Senator Beth Bye, Chair and Members of the Appropriations Committee. From: Carolyn Wysocki, CABOH Leadership Council Chair Connecticut Association of Boards of Health. My name is Carolyn Wysocki and as Chair of the CABOH Leadership Council Ithank the Public Health Committee for the opportunity to provide testimony regarding the Governors HB BILL No 5044 Connecticut Association of Boards of Health (CABOH) is a fairly new organization which was established in 2012 as a section of the Connecticut Public Health Association (CPHA). We are designed to provide opportunities for networking among local boards, orientation and training specific to local BOH roles /responsibilities, and a platform for advocacy on important public health issues such as HB 5044 CABOH is extremely concerned about this proposed legislation which would reduce the amount of funding to Local and District Health Departments for the second year in a row by some $500,00 and may put in jeopardy several public health programs and services. Sufficient funding helps to keep us in a position to inspect restaurants, pools, motels, water, and septic tanks as noted in the state public health code. In addition we provide emergency preparedness, lead poisoning, flu vaccine clinics, dental care for seniors and wellness programs. All of which and more are included in providing the 10 Essential Services of Public Health and towards meeting the Public Health Standards as Noted in the Accreditation Process of PHAB. As an advocate for Public Health and in promoting and protecting the health of our communities, CABOH is also very concerned about the impact of these continuous cuts in per capita on emerging issues such as health effects of climate change, zitka virus and the impact of social determinants on health. Please contact me at 860-828-4200 if you have any questions about CABOH, Boards of Health or other Public Health issues. PUBLIC HEARING 2/18/16 Testimony on Budget cuts Department of Public Health Children and Youth With Special Health Care Needs Medical Home Initiative at FAVOR Joy C Liebeskind Statewide Coordinator 860-436-6544 or203-641-0679 {ETmmEcaEhome@F&VQR~CT.org I am the statewide Coordinator for the Medical Home Initiative at FAVOR, a Dept of Public Health program: Children and Youth with Special Health Care Needs. I am also the parent of 2 young adults with special needs. I bring my years of experience raising them to help other families. Nationally, across the lifespan caregivers report the need for respite to be the number one unmet or under-met need in caring for their family members. Our families indicate in program surveys that their needs for respite is very important and very hard to find and afford. Respite allows families a much needed break from care giving to allow them to continue to care for their loved ones. For the majority of our families, this program is the only help they receive. It is a very small but important program to them. I have attached a chart to my testimony showing how many families and in which towns received funds for respite last year, as well as a document of quotes from some families who have been funded in the past. It is amazing how much these families can get for the $500 in funds they receive to get a break from the stresses of care giving for a child with serious medical health care needs. Many of our families have medically fragile children who really require a nursing level of care but they either have no coverage, very limited coverage, or are on wait lists for that care. Many do 24 hour a day care seven days a week with no help .Some families use the funds for time with their spouse or other children. Some do family activities, while others use it to hire a mother’s helper to allow them to do normal things most families do. Families continue to call our office for resources as they attempt to deal with accepting new diagnosis for their children, learning what it means for their future, and how best to deal with all this new information being sent their way. It is comforting to them to hear there is some help available, that other families are dealing with similar situations, and that there can be positive outcomes for their children and families. They are thankful to learn how other families have moved forward, that they are not alone, and that we are here to help support them down this road. Our contract, which is only part of the total program, provides the Extended Services Funds, Respite Funding, and some Care Coordination and Transition Services to families. This is my 9th year running the program. Since its inception, our program’s budget has been reduced from $700,000 per year to $340,290 this year. Over the last calendar year our budget incurred $220,332.00 in budget cuts. Because our program has less than 2 FTE staff, most of these reductions translate into direct losses to families in need. That is more than a 50% cut over that time, while we currently serve about 40% more children. Currently about 2,800 children are getting some sort of services from our office. As the result of the most recent budget cuts, we have had to make drastic changes to the eligibility requirements for our program. We have lowered the age limit for Respite funding. We added an income cap to respite services, and we have had to cut the hours we are available to answer phones and offer assistance and support. PUBLIC HEARING 2/18/16 Please consider returning at least this year cuts to our budget so that our families can continue to take advantage of this small, but very valuable program. I want to continue to be that voice on the other end of the phone for them. I want to continue to help support them to keep caring for their children at home which keeps the family together and saves the state a lot of money. I do not want to be the one telling them that there are no funds available because other items in the budget are more important than their children and their families. If you have any questions I can answer, or help or resources we can provide you with, I can be reached at either 860-436-6544 or 203-641-0679 CTmedicaEhoma—zfi)FAVORnCTorg PUBLIC HEARING FACTS about CYSHCN RESPITE in your town by families currently being served Numbers given below are by family, not by child. For more than 60% of these families, this program is the only help they get for their children. As of 10/1/2015 2/18/16 Andover Cheshire 3 Fairfield 5 Lyme 1 Ansonia 11 Chester Farmington 1 Madison 1 Ashford Clinton 1 Franklin 1 Manchester 29 Avon 4- Colchester 1 Gales Ferry 2 Mansfield 1 Barkhamsted Colebrook Glastonbury 4 Marlborough 2 Ballouville Collinsville Goshen 1 Meriden 20 Baltic Columbia 1 Granby 2 Middlebury 2 Bantum 1 Cornwall Greenwich 4 Middlefield Beacon Falls 1 Coventry 3 Griswold 1 Mlddletown 16 Berlin 2 Cromwell 3 Groton 8 Milford 12 Bethany 3 Danielson 6 Guilford 4 Modus 1 Bethel 5 Danbury 26 Haddam 2 Monroe 2 Bethlehem Darien 3 Hamden 20 Montville 1 Bloomfield 6 Dayville Hampton Morris Bolton 2 Deep River 1 Hanover 1 Mousup 2 Bozrah 1 Derby 1 Hartford 179 Mystic 3 Branford 2 Durham 1 Hartland Naugatuck 13 Bridgeport 67 Eastford 1 Harwinton 3 New Britain 69 Bridgewater East Granby 1 Hebron New Canaan 4 Bristol 24- East Haddam Ivoryton New Fairfield 1 Broad Brook East Hampton Jewett City 2 New Hartford 1 Brookfield 2 East Hartford 46 Kennsington New Haven 99 Brooklyn East Haven 4 Kent Newington 8 Burlington 2 East Lyme 1 Killingly New London 10 Cannan 1 Easton Killingworth New Milford 5 Canterbury East Windsor 2 Lakeville 1 Newtown 1 Canton 1 Ellington 4 Lebanon 2 Niantic 2 Centerbrook Enfield 19 Ledyard 2 Norfolk 1 Central Village 1 Essex 1 Lisbon North Branford 2 Chaplin Fallsvillage Litchfield 2 North Canaan PUBLIC HEARING Safisbury Northford 1 Sandy Hook 2 Trumbull 5 No. Groversdale 2 Scotland Uncasville 1 Nothavm1 1 Seynunn‘ 5 Unhn 1 No Stonington 1 Unionville 2 Norwalk 39 Sharon 2 Vernon 9 Norwich 14 Shelton 5 Voluntown 1 Oakdale 1 Sherman Wallingford 4 Oakville 5 Simsbury 2 Warren Old Lyme 1 Somers Washington Old Saybrook 3 So. Waterbury 77 Glastonbury Orange So. Norwalk 1 Waterford 1 Oxford SO. Windsor 8 Watertown 5 Pawcatuck Southbury 2 Wauregan 1 Pleasant Southport Westbrook 1 Valley Plainfield 7 Southington 10 West Hartford 23 Plainville 2 Sprague 1 West Haven 3 Plantsville 3 Stafford 1 West 1 Simsbury Plymouth 1 Stafford 1 Weston 2 Spfings Pomfret 1 Stamford 36 Westport 2 Portland 1 Sterling Wethersfield 14 Preston Stonington 2 Windsor 11 Prospect 4- Storrs 1 Windsor 7 Locks Putnam 5 Stratford 1 1 Willington 1 Quaker Hill 2 Suffield 1 Willamantic 23 Quinibaug 1 Taftville 1 Wilton 1 Redding Terryville 4 Winchester Ridgefield 1 Thomaston 3 Windham 1 Rockfall 1 Thompson 1 Windsor 1 Rockville Tolland 4 Winstead 3 Rocky Hill 4 Torrington 9 Wolcott 2 Rogers Woodbridge 1 Roxbury Woodbury 2 Salem Woodstock 1 Total: 1275 As of10/1/15 2/18/16 PUBLIC HEARING 2/18/16 Connecticut Medical Home Initiative for Children and Youth with Special Health Care Needs* Medical Home Initiative at FAVOR 185 Silas Deane Highway Wethersfield, CT 06709 Tel: 860-436-6544 Toll Free: 855-436-6544 Fax: 860-563-3961 Email: CTMEDICALHOME@FAVOR-ct.org These are comments from families who received funds when reporting back on their expense reports. The Respite Program has been a tremendous help to our Family. As our daughters condition gets worse, it helps us by allowing us to esCape our day to day world and Focus on what matters most OURFAMILY! And making memories we will always have. A Family From Bloomfield Thank-you so much for the respite check. You will never know how much it meant to me. My mother is going through Chemo treatments and I felt like I really needed to be there for her, but couldn't afford to travel. Then the check arrived. Tommy and I used it to drive home and spend 2 weeks with my folks. Tommy and my dad went fishing, hiking and lots of outside activities. I took my Mom to her treatments. You will never know how much this meant to all ofus. A Mom from East Haddam I wanted to let you know how we spent our respite check. We love to get away for weekends, but my son screams when cooped up in a hotel room. We purchased camping equipment at COSTCO and went away for our first weekend. It was great to get away from home. 0ur other 2 kids had a good trip also. . No screaming! Now we can get away often. The break is great! It is really nice to do something as a family. A Waterbury Family I was so surprised when you told me I could hire someone to care for my daughter while my husband and I went out to dinner with our check. We have not ever left her, and haven't gone out to dinner alone since she was born seven years ago. It was heaven. We saved the rest to do it once a month for a few months. Just knowing we can get away has helped with the stress of her surgery planned for next month. I can't say thank-you enough times. We hope we will be able to get this help again in the future. A Fairfield Family We are so grateful for the check we recently got. My husband has been out of work for 8 months now and it has been very hard on our children, especially since one is autistic and his medical needs take so much of our money. I can only work so much and still it seems there is never anything left for an extra treat and the other 2 kids try not to complain. We have decided that every time we have to come into Hartford for medical appointments we will do something fun as a family on the way home with our funds. This way the money will last awhile and we will all get to relax together and have fun. We will send a picture f our family having fun together. A family from No. Groversdale We have 3 children all with different problems. We do not have any family in CT. We moved here for my husband’s job, but it was very hard to leave our family and Ct is a very expensive place to live and I can’t work since there is no one to watch the kids. Respite and the help of your money has made a very big difference for us. I took your advice and got volunteers to take the two boys out in the community. They are both doing scouts and swimming with their teen friends. I get to spend time with my daughter while they are out. We took our check and joined a YMCA so we all get to swim as a family as well as the kids taking swimming lessons. Thank-you to everyone in your program 3 happy kids in Groton PUBLIC HEARING 2/18/16 Cmmhmwkmhymbwwbywwmfi”whnfiwdgékmmwgmwbqflwwwfimAkwMybmdwgkBamwud@meM¢dgmwg" @thwmmmwfiyJmemybflbythmfimuwgbwmfimwbhfiQfimkbpwwhwdflflgucwhwmdmmbmflmwmdpmdkhm deémlwddvrdngylmvarmmm @mmflba/wyfamlvmdmmwmlwfimmdmmlgm Mddrhamgb‘glufiz (Vandal/t lawlmlmlzh’rbbmdzgafiz @MWWWWWMWMfihWMMQVfi @Mfmdbmdmpwdmtfm WWMWW Wanna Muffin (W I was so excited to meet you at the conference recently. I do have a copy of the respite book, but had not filled it out till after we spoke. We used it this past weekend we left our 2 boys with Autism at home with an aide, and used our respite check to go away to a family wedding. The boys are 4 and 11 and it was the first time we have ever left them with someone else. It was so good to both get to go to a family event together. What a wonderful break. We look forward to getting back on the respite list and doing this again some time. A Southington Family It was such a surprise to get a check from your program the other day after we had just spoken and you gave so much help with figuring out how to transport my son home after his surgery. We are saving our funds till he is home and feeling better and then my wife and I plan on some date nights out for dinner with no kids. We have never left my son before, but you are right we do need a break. This is a wonderful program! Dad from Woodstock What a great idea you gave me. When I called your office for help I really didn't think I could afford Respite care for my mother. Now I have signed up for a program with the Area Agency on Aging just as you suggested. It worked so well I decided to try a volunteer like you suggested to help keep Mom busy and free some of my time. A young nursing student from a local program has been lined up to come sit and read to Nom two afternoons a week. I feel like a new person. I am not alone and I can now go visit my grandchildren and see their sports activities with out worrying about Mom. I wish I had found this help earlier. I will spread the word to other friends that are caring for their elderly parents that help is available. Family caregiver in Torrington. Wanted to let you know we got your respite check in the mail last week and we immediately signed both kids up for 2 weeks of summer camp. They are so excited to get a chance to go to camp like other kids from school. With all our medical bills they have never been able to go before. Thank-you Thank-you 2 happy kids from Clintonville My family was in desperate need when our respite check arrived. We both really needed to get away from it all, and our parents were also having medical issues they needed help with. I got to spend some time with my other son while a sitter watched my boy. We also got a sitter to stay with the boys for a few days while we went to visit and help our parents. It was time I really needed to recoup to be able to care for my son. A Waterbury Family We use our respite check for camp whenever we get one. My daughter loves her week at camp but without your help we would not be able to send her as my wife stays home to care for her and with all our medical bills it is very hard to provide extras on one check. Thank—you for your help. A Dad from Stratford PUBLIC HEARING 2/18/16 Respite is very important to our family. My husband travels a lot for business which means I am the only parent home with 3 children. My son has CP and uses a wheelchair all the time. He is also nonverbal, so it is hard to find someone willing to care for him. After school programs won’t take him so I do all his care. I also care for my mother who lies in the next town, but barely can lie alone any more. She used to be my back up. We really appreciate that week off we get when he goes to the respite center. My other kids also really like the special attention they get during that week also. A Mom from Cromwell I was able to hire extra child care and work a few more Shift thiS Summer So I could buy my kids clothes and School Supplies. We also went and had fun in the amuSement parks twice during the Summer. I was really glad thiS panned out for uS finally becauSe I have 3 kids with impairments of different kinds. This makes it hard to find a Sitter and expensive. A Bristol Mom The respite check came just at the right day. We were going to visit grandma, my daughter's favorite person. The air conditioner in the car died. We were staying home since my daughter can't travel with out it. I had no idea how I would tell her the trip was off. I said a prayer to give me the words I needed, and half an hour later the mail came and there was our respite check. The next day we again left on our trip with AC working. It was the best break we could have gotten. A grateful Mom in Barkhamstead You ask why respite is important to our family. Siblings need time also. My twins need not to feel like it is their fault we never get out. My husband works hard to support us and help with the twins when he is home. He deserves a night out once in awhile. We try to stretch our respite checks over 5 or 6 months. A movie night with siblings one month, dinner out one month, you get it. It is what keeps us going. I wish there were more funds available to families like this. Thanks from Madison Ct CW5 1555117551 5111 15117115 5/155k 111 1/15 1115171551151; (5715 111555111511 [111 117511 51 515 5517. CW5 1175111 51751 1115/11 15 635—63@ @551; @51511 5715/ my 1511 1/1555/11 11 117511 1/15 5511 1/11'115 /15 /1515/ 51751 515115 (5715 @6515/ /1515/ 51 [1'11 5fb551/11'11511 51775111155 51715/f51 1/15 fl111 111115 51751 111155 1175 /1515/ 1151511 111; 5111557151 51715/ @7 1175111 15 511111151 51/5115 (@5115111115 1175 117515 111 1/15 157115 5111511115) @71 117511 /15577511/ CW5 /151775 11151515 15151175155111 15 /151775 51y€1// 11755/15115/1'11 (Di/@1115 (CT/1515515511 111511151151 1117/ 1115577 111551115 51751 1115171; 5f 1/15 1555/1 5/51y1 CW5 551711 1/15171/1y511 5115115/1 A W 5117 (Di/@5151 @5ng My children go to camp for the first time this year. Thank-you. God Bless. We never think we get help like this for our children. A Thankful Bridgeport Family We were so thankful for the respite. We have 4- children. We decided to send our son George to a typical preschool camp this summer. It was a perfect transition before entering the town preschool. He felt like his siblings going off to camp this summer. A Greenwich Family We want to thank you for our respite check. It has provided physical relief. My daughter is unable to support herself and she is very heavy. Being able to hire someone to help me with dressing, bathing, feeding etc allows me to stay strong in order to care for her in the long run. A CT CYSHCN's Family Thank—you for the money. It gave us the chance to relax and not stress about not having the money or time to ever go somewhere to enjoy life. We enjoy our little break so much. A New Britain Family Thank-you Thank-you I use it to pay For an aFtBYSChOOI program with Other children For m son. It was really a wonderful thing. PUBLIC HEARING 2/18/16 A thsor Mom Easy for children to go to camp. It so help us with what it costs. It was fun to have some time just parents while children at camp.Thanks. A Norwalk Family Thank-you for The check. IT assisTed me To bring my son To The amusemenT park and Then my friend Took him for me for a day and Took him To The movies. I very appreciaTe iT and Thank you also because we boughT him a bike To ride like oTher kids do. A Plainfield Family We goT our respite check a few weeks ago and I Took your advice and hired a mother's helper To come ouT wiTh my daughter and I on our errands. IT has made a huge difference in my day and our week. My husband was so grateful for The smile when he came inTo The hou5e on Friday, and enjoyed The special dinner I had made for all of us while someone eISe waTched my daughter. I Think I will Try your idea abouT using a girl Scout nexT. I can'T Thank you enough for The funds and your Suggestions on how To lower The stress level wiTh iT in our home. I can'T waiT Till I can aTTend one of your respite workshops. A sTr'eSSed ouT Mom in Plainfield This check enabled myself and my husband to end my son to camp where he could ery'oy his summer with kids who don’t have medical issues. It enabled us to do daily tasks without won'y about his needs. It enable all of us to enjoy summer for the fi fist time. We can’t thank you enough and lool< forward to the next time we get help like this. This is the only help we have ever gotten for ourfamily. A Family from Hebron This money helped us to send our kids to summer camp this year. Special camp is expensive and we were trying to make payments, but were just not up to date. When your check came it let bus make the last payment so both our children got to go to camp this summer. I hope we can get this again. New Milford Family Witfi twins wit/i autism summer is [ong and we just coufdn’t aflordtfie type of camp tfiey needed Tfien your cfieck came. Camp was great. We need to know flow to get t/iese funds again next year. Tfiank you so muc/i. JZI j-‘amify in Qayfordsviffle I had been waiting for these funds for a long time. It came just in time for my sons birthday. This made it possible for my son to have his first Chucky Cheese Party like many of the kids at school. I bought him books for his birthday. We also went on 2 family trips. One to Lake Compounce and one to Orchard Beach. This program was a blessing. I am still not working, but when he goes back to school I hoe to work again. Bless You. A Hartford Family We took a Family trip to 3 baseball games. IthlhK my son now underStahds the game and so we bought him a bat and ball. I h0pe and dream that he>1’/// ”0/ % n a 5': ct lit a a l\£°‘“ sort \‘x 4'6 Albion Street Bridgeport, CT 06605 (203) 330— 6000 968 Fall-field Avenue Bridgeport, CT 06605 (203} 330-6000 1046 Fairfield Avenue Bridgeport, CT 06605 (203) 330-6054 5 i 0 Clinton Avenue Bridgeport, CT 06605 (203) 366-4000 "743 South Avenue Bridgeport, CT 06604 {203) 330~60l0 School liased Health Centers Basslck High School Cesaf Estella Central High School Curiale School Blackham School Read School Roosevelt School W EC Silo £020 Feirfleld Avenue Bridgeport, CT 96605 l’lomeiess Shelters Eritfgepm? Sires CASA Helping Hand Pivot Ministries Prospect House Harrison Apartments 1'12!er -I’ :3 Mia Operation Hope to l// // // / m I //A I (1 W4 77/, f ’4/2 ’/////4 V///// W% //A //////. fl ‘3 7 .4 m 21 star -( E 2 February l8? 20 l 6 Testimony to the Appropriations Committee Imgiaet of the Governor’s Proposed Budget Cots Southwest Community Health Center (SWCHC), located in Bridgeport, provides comprehensive medical, dental, and behavioral health services to over twill}? persons from 5 main sites, 7 schoolbased health centers, and 6 homeless shelter clinics. The majority of clients reside in census tracts designated as Medically Uhderserved Areas and Health Professional Shortage Areas and 993% $553? rrlieel‘s lessee. gross of solos-i Art-sis.“ . (‘13.. \C", i J” m. . 3' r '3: x'“ "(or A" is :24. ,r . V .w .24., fieli9/o of; we esteem; 3 owl‘s; serves. .83.? ml; 3,. oil/,9 so on {alleles wees senseless iéi X/s‘ i: my. Awesome: llleltszo‘i‘mero ol’ E‘ehlic ”lion lill‘ll} l)':‘ioiar}-‘ Calf-e grarlt dollars directly supported salaries of medical, dental, and OB/GYN providers. EPH lending cuts since 20l2 have eroded support for delivery of primary health care to our medically needy City residents: Dl’ll Community Health line item outs to SWCHC: *as ole/30H”; $356,’l38 *as Gf5I'30/l43 $248,74l *‘l‘as of 6/3 01' l 5 3 $225,034. (at item mosey {l‘it'ff‘é’fii'l to {383} *as of ‘7/‘l/l 5 $2 l ,922 ”Proposed 2/16: $0 lo 6/ l 5 the legislature approved transfer of the Community Health Center line ilem loads to DSS. The intended purpose was to allow DSS to obtain Federal match in Medicaid funds; distribute funds to FQHCS on a cost, volume, quality basis; and to hold each health center harmless—~ so SWCHC would have received @S225,000. "li'o £3 WC iii? has resolved Ni} l?l.li\ll}$ from {3‘03 ‘h’itlfii the it?l‘£}§3§3$i§il elio‘iioaiioo SWCilC has lost $22fs€éfitl used to sewer: («fin {iflahA/v ‘-‘ ’A - '-‘- - ' ”Evin” . 55‘“ i} v+ me lose stem iii the novelooi o boosts, eeeess to core sei‘Vioes. a; Since 2009, SWCHC has provided medical, dental, and behavioral health services in 7 Bridgeport Schools. A {IRE-i Sehool~l3ased Health Cooler {SBlli‘I} grant has supported 50% of the cost for delivery of primary care in 5 out of its 7 SBHC sites. Sites include 2 High Schools (Bassiclc and Central), and 5 pre—K—El Schools. DPI—l support is critical as SWCHC cannot hill uninsured students for services at SBHCS and some schools have uninsured rates: 28% at Bassick High and 30% at Blackhem School. These measured children must have access to the comprehensive care offered through the SBl-le. \ \\\9‘J \ \k\\\\ caamumn‘x‘egux DPH SBHC dOEEarS have been cut over the past two years; *as 0156/30/13: $599,186 *as 0f6/30/15 == $56, , ()1 1130111 11111017169115 E11111 m {KEEENE} =3 3 $1333 (13‘ Li 2‘ I * ~ 1111111131311 1112111131 @1311»;- 0121.5 ? :1- 11¢ ‘2‘ 117 Further, if DPH is authorized to out an additio11ai$38M from its agency budget»- without Eegisiative oversight- the SBHCS couid receive a massive cut that WEEE may render service levels unsustainabla In '0'“ {1131' “£31 SEEKERS £11111 {‘0 31111‘W33133ys 3 13011 GE AMEN 11111331313111 SEEK: 1:11 1311.31111E13 ,1 13”»? $211111? E15311 E113 EZE1.11=3111111“3 13111111131311 HE‘S-111E113: E13111 23111.,1‘1 111113 11.1" AE-‘RN 1.1.1. 1119111111. E131 2.111 1E1~m§1€31111110 11111§Ei11we 1:11 be. 11E1111E11-511311, prior 1112111}; 111E1313311-1111121:1311111311111113, Often smdents came into the SBHC compiaining of medical issues; but, their problem has mentai heaiih origins. If early identification of behavierai health issues in children is 0111: 01115.6 Governor’s siatsd priorities for CT, than cutting SBHC funding erodes this intent and WEE} diminish SWCHC’S capacity to identify antiwsmciai behaviors, trauma exposure, violence, depression, substance abuse, and suicide Edeation. I urge the .Legiflatars m reject {'12 ese (Zeirimerzial cuts 1‘0 (IT’S most vuirz‘emble residents» pear children and families. Sincerely, 1~ ” 15‘." E ' 9&1?) (,1, Q - 12112111251112 Katherine S. Yacavone Resident/CEO Transit for Connecticut Hefpfng @eopfe, Elie rEconomy and £52 Environment Appropriations Committee Public Hearing — February 8, 2016 In Support of Funding for Transit Service Dear Sen. Bye, Rep. Walker and members of the Committee, On behalf of Transit for Connecticut, a statewide coalition of 33 business, environmental, social service, pianning, transportation, and civic organizations advocating for improved and expanded bus service, I ask the Appropriations Committee to support funding necessary to maintain existing transit service across the state. In these critical economic times, transit service is needed more than ever. Investing in transit not oniy creates jobs but transit gets people to their jobs. Use of transit relieves congestion on our roads and helps reduce harmful air pollution. Transit service helps senior citizens “age in place” and remain in their homes and provides low income residents with transportation to job training, interviews, and places of employment. It is a very exciting time for transportation in our state. Please approve the funding necessary to maintain existing bus service and provide the groundwork for the increased transit service that is needed now and in the future. Thank you for your consideration. Karen Burnaska, Coordinator Transit for Connecticut Karen Burnaska. Coordinator, Transit for Connecticut (310 Connecticut Fund for the Environment. 1422 Temple Street, 3rd floor, New Haven, CT 06511 (203) 261—Q243!kbumaska@ctenvironment.org February 18, 2016 Appropriations Committee Legislative Office Building 300 Capitol Avenue Hartford CT 06106 Re: Governor’s FY 2017 Midterm Budget for the Department of Public Health Dear Senator Bye, Representative Walker and members of the Appropriations Committee, My name is Mary Moran Boudreau and I serve as the Executive Director of the Connecticut Oral Health Initiative (COHI). COH| is the only non-profit in the state with the sole mission of Oral Health for All; specifically, we advocate for increased access to oral health care and coverage, and oral health equity. I am here to address Governor Malloy’s midterm adjustments to the FY 2017 budget for the Department of Public Health (DPH). These adjustments will affect oral health service delivery, coverage and equity. We urge you to reject any proposals to dismantle the effective efforts of the Department of Public Health, including support of Community Health Centers, School Based Health Centers, and the Office of Oral Health. Governor Malloy’s budget eliminates grant funding from DPH to the Community Health Centers. The State of Connecticut has been supportive of federally-qualified health centers (FQHCs), which, altogether, provide over 350,000 state residents with high-quality dental care, among other services. FQHCs provide care all across the state, in urban, rural and suburban areas. All of you on this Committee have health center patients in your districts. Some might argue that the Affordable Care Act, which has increased the number of insured people in our state, eliminates the need for this grant. However, health centers continue to see uninsured patients — in 2014, 18.5% of health center patients were uninsured — because they are some of the only providers who will. Additionally, many of the plans sold on Access Health CT come with large deductibles, particularly for oral health care, making these plans inaccessible for adults and children insured through Access Health CT. Individuals seeking health care services before they have hit their deductible are often unable to pay full cost out-of-pocket; at health centers, they are offered payment on a sliding fee scale. These grants fill in the gaps left by underpayments through both Medicaid and the sliding fee scale; namely, they support clinician salaries, administrative and other costs associated with providing high-quality comprehensive health care services. I urge you to reject this proposal. Additionally, the Governor’s budget reduces funding to School Based Health Centers (SBHCs) which provide vital dental care to children that are statistically low utilizers of oral health care. SBHCs are one of the most effective ways to keep students healthy and attending school so they can continue to learn. SBHCs cannot sustain these cuts and still meet the increasing demand for services that keep children healthy and in school. Report Cards show success of SBHCs in improving the physical health, mental health, and dental health of our most vulnerable population. Lastly, we know that there are difficult decisions ahead in this budgeting process. Governor Malloy has proposed that at least 1000 jobs should be eliminated from state government to reduce spending. Should you concur with this finding, we urge you to reject any proposal that eliminates or reduces 175 Main Street, Hartford, (3106106 Phone BSD—2452644 info@ctmalhealthor“ www.ctoralhealthorg funding to the Office of Oral Health. The Office of Oral Health leads programs affecting the dental health of children and older adults, to reduce dental disease within these populations. Notably, the Office of Oral Health provides oral health data surveillance used to obtain federal grants, and used in planning by the State Health Improvement Plan, the Connecticut Coalition on Oral Health, the Consortium on Oral Health for Older Adults and the Connecticut Oral Health Initiative. The Office of Oral Health also administers programs addressing fluoridation, dental sealants and the integration of oral health into health systems. Most significantly, all of the measures addressed above have the underlying theme of health equity. The disparities between regions and populations in Connecticut are of great concern to many advocates. Oral health advocates are pleased to say that we are ahead of the curve in addressing issues of equity, due to the work of Community Health Centers, School Based Health Centers, and programs and services such as those offered by the Office of Oral Health. Although we have much to do to close the health equity gaps in Connecticut, the aforementioned programs and services are vital to this continued work. We urge you to reject any proposals to dismantle these efforts. I would appreciate your consideration of the aforementioned concerns during your budget deliberations. I am available for further discussion of these issues at your convenience. Respectfully submitted, Mary Moran Boudreau Executive Director 860-246-2644 Extension 203 n‘earyb@ctoraihealth.org 175 Main Street, Hartford, (3106106 Phone 3560—2452644 info@ctmalhealthcr“ www.ctoralhealthorg W8? W meson-a1 amuse Testimony of Dr. Michelle M. Cloutier, Director of the Asthma Center, Connecticut Children’s Medical Center, to the Appropriations Committee regarding HB 6824, An Act Concerning the State Budget for the Biennium Ending June T hirtieth 2017, and Making Appropriations Therefor and Other Provisions Related to Revenue February 18, 2016 Senator Bye, Representative Walker, members of the Appropriations Committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. My name is Dr. Michelle Cloutier, and I am the Director of the Asthma Center and the leader of the Hartford Childhood Wellness Alliance at the Connecticut Children’ 3 Medical Center and a Professor of Pediatrics & Medicine at the University of Connecticut School of Medicine. I am submitting this testimony as a pediatrician and lung specialist in support of restoring funding for Easy Breathing in the State budget. Asthma is the most common, chronic disease of children and the leading cause of school absenteeism. Asthma disproportionately affects low income children and children of color. In 2009, Connecticut 5 pent over $112 million for asthma care of which 6 “/0 or $78 million was paid for by pubiic funds (Medicaid or Medicare). While there are many reasons Why asthma prevalence is higher in the Northeast than in other regions of the country, the major reason for high asthma morbidity and associated cost is under— recognition of asthma, especially in children, and inadequate or inappropriate treatment. The Easy Breathing program has been improving asthma management and care for children in Connecticut since 1998 and more recently for adults. Easy Breathing is an evidence—based, proven effective, asthma management program for primary care clinicians that guides physicians in diagnosing asthma and in instituting appropriate asthma therapy. Since 2002, Easy Breathing has been supported in Connecticut with Tobacco Settlement funds. Funding for Easy Breathing is not included in the Governor’s proposed budget. We are requesting that the funding be restored for this program for the following 2 reasons. 0 Easy Breathing serves all of the children in CT. To date, more than 150,000 children in CT have been screened for asthma and more than 38,000 children with asthma have been identified and now receive appropriate asthma treatment. These children live in 159 of the 169 cities and towns in our state. 0 Easy Breathing saves the State of Connecticut money. For every dollar that the state spends, it saves $3.5 8/child with asthma per year in reduced Medicaid spending. In 2014, Medicaid children enrolled in Easy Breathing experienced an 18% decrease in ED visits for a cost savings to Medicaid of almost $2 million. This savings occurred as a result of a Cloutier testimony, Connecticut Children’s Medical Center 02/18/2016 35% decrease in Medicaid hospitalizations for asthma, a 31% decrease in Medicaid emergency visits for asthma and a 19% decrease in urgent care outpatient visits for Medicaid children enrolled in Easy Breathing compared to Medicaid children not enrolled in the program. Easy Breathing is now being used in 5 other states with similar favorable results. It is a national model for improving asthma care for large numbers of children in a cost effective manner and has won national awards from the Environmental Protection Agency for its success. I have attached to my testimony an article published last week at www.ctmirrorcom. It details some of the key successes of Easy Breathing. I urge you to restore funding for Easy Breathing in the State budget because it improves health outcomes for children with asthma and the dollars it saves Medicaid far exceed the State appropriation that supports the program. Thank you for your consideration of our position. If you have questions about this testimony, please contact Jane Baird, Connecticut Children’s Director of Government Relations, at 860— 837—5557. Cloutier testimony, Connecticut Children’s Medical Center 02/18/2016 ”,Ifrying fer a breath of fresh air in treating asthma I The, CT Mirmr Fags: 1 of 7 L\\\ x f: 7 VC§S \‘3 W“ \K‘ §§3§ A The CT Mirmr (hiIps:{isEtn'iri'm'm‘gIZOJfifflflfUSfi{ying~for~a«bx‘eafl1~of~fr€s§xairvinwtreaa‘iug~astmnnfi / / / w \\\\\§\\§\\\\\§\\ Trying EM 3, Emmh @f fmsgh air in Emmmg mm a By: I L E LEVIN B 'CKER E February 8, 20-15 Because $10ng up With a. twin sisicr with asthma, Joanna Quilcs was Esmething afar: unofficiai expert on g \\ the somdiiian long before her mm son, Al, was \\ : \ \Q . v , fl . g. a ‘ 1§ Gmgnovwi wnh 1L. \\ \ \ i ‘ f" . 5§ But despfi’fe Quiiesq knowledgqensuring that her son’s aszhma is under swim} Imnains a saurce 0f J‘msiraiimn She’s been scared while AJ. wag atnschuol, worried about the {eve}: of: expertise, lhesc‘iuml mime has: in wtsm mum ' , ~ 3 V r‘ ‘ {httmfl’FSxaBanxHfi 1‘ I 37bbfiofimfizwfé?aamnenginechInan be a~1§fe¢hrcat6ning conditimi. Once, the 591300} sent AJ} cdnxomf {1126st E‘ 6le"asthma—aimcksjmg} comgmcm 595mm. Aasmmmtm: ~~ who isvmm in [h ini guide wits.) thB lumpitaI in an ambulaacc fur somuthing Quiics said squid héi‘yifibflfifl. handim routinely A}: image thin; the Cannecticm Hospital Assnciation‘s "When asthma attacks" campaign, intended m change She. ends up sewing as the intermediary between her sun’s VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV dacioag , shoal mass: and their phammCy on matiers as simpicias medication minis. fisheduiing app‘oii‘fimcms‘. at a specialty clinic can he 3. chanmxge. And me gtemid Al, takes its cmltmi his? asthma has: had to» we§ght gain. He some-Limeg geis pécked on 31301:: it. “It’s just a struggic," {2133133 said. Asthma strikes Cmn-ecticm rasitients at higl]fili'1‘fli€3 {hem residents {K the nation overall; sfiacfir‘tg i 3.3 pageant ofthildren and 9,2 pércem 0f adults in the state. It‘J-ed :9 11:38:13! 1,009 lmspiiaiizatinns gunning chiidrcn and more. than 3: i 00 amang adults last fisgafi yam". And, afihough ewe-sis den‘t know whygil‘s becoming mare-commits. Can C(l‘nnecficut. maks‘; headway is chflngingfiae caus‘sc Gi‘the di5C2186, mfiking it samething that patienis Sanvrouiiflsiy Central in the cmmmstsity rams: than something that 08m brings {mafia m the Emspiml .i-s) csisés‘? httpzflctmit‘wr.orgi’20 I HOE/GSXM'flng~fbrdarbreafivof~fresh»air~in~ix‘fia{'ing5~asthniaf 21/912016 Trying for a breath 0f flesh air in'treafing asthma 1 Tha CT Mirror Page 2 0f 7 Quiles is mnang Ihose trying. She’s part of a. Hartford effort In 334': design a new moclcl, dubbed an “asilnna neighherhmd, mr llxanagi‘ng the candititm. I: is (me ofmultlple 3313118 in $119 State “Peapfe are surprfsegj i0 hear 'ibcused net on flew treatments but lJctlelm‘Umfiinafing the systems {"th paopse (If? f? {'1 I 3 0f lmtsents enrf‘msn,l§a‘uw Elicluding sclxosils, phm'filfléiéf‘g lmme Vlsfimg ‘ pragmmsa doctm's‘ GIIIQ’S and lmsplsais _ and lmdgmg gaps that 5011191??ng #13"? 33?? :38 can lead to en‘les'gmcy mam visits: in lmspllakllzalirms. controlled and man-aged; it“s acone'cpi l’hal 30mg if! health cam say "'33, {filmm well, . . _ become a modal l'o-r iid*ll’€33;i;i£{ Miler thronic Liise'ts‘es filial ere Renee Colemanmllmmhell ‘ ‘ “ ' ( CONN ECTlCUY DEPA RTMENT GF PUBLlC HEALTH mare heavily influenced by what hag-puns in a patiem’s daily life than limellment in llm minimal system. ll, camesal mime whex hézail'h cam previliexs m‘a bch'ag pushed is take an more respmlslhilily fur keying pzxtienis well, raihm' than simply Healing acuiesillnesses when they occur. “We have to get away fmm “the. doctor is the me. whe’s goissg, m solve. everything all by themsflvea in thalr officgf bananas: we. Can’g” said Dr. Sandra Carbenssri, a. W-atei'bm‘y pedlatrician and immediate- past'pa‘csiden‘fi 0f llic Cmmccticut Chapter of'thc American ABMs-my 9f Pccllal‘rics. “‘Wcfima’i know what’s going 911 in the Selma}. We (Emfl know what’s gfliflgml at llfin'lfi.” The Cmmaclicul I'lospjtal Assncialiun has also launched an iniiiative 'l‘acuwl largely on trying to ensure that asihma can be managed twang}: primary care and canmmn‘lly support. “Asthma 55 still Vél’)’ much a public health {salsa and camera,” said Rance, (Yulemanml’vlltclzcll,_ Cilia? (a‘l’lhe community, Il’ami'ly and hcallh equity semifinal the: (Iotmecti'sslsl Department DfPtlhlic: Heallh, miDPH. “Pmple m‘asmpriseil to hear film: {maple $3331 (lie {If Smmlhmg that can, be mntmlkd and managad.” Asthma was J‘fisponslble far 50 (lea-ills, :3, £46 {unplializmlam; and 24,239 amalgam}; mam visits in "2&09 w as “fellas (11056126 60,,illiO‘ migscd days of sclmol 01' day carpi, accordinmo DPH {Elllnflu-‘wwfl mwféphfiibldnly'lmus/Main:aissdft’sl‘al’c 'asllmm Dlfll’s SISEUiBfln‘m . And the madman (llsprolmstlenasely 3:36:13 cenrlaln gmups. Residents Gl‘Coanecticm’s furs largest cilia-s * 17.5 percent thllc state population 7 accmmtctl far 40 perccm (if asthma lmSpilallzafians in 2689, awarding to ‘lIiI’H Em w:/;‘www.cl_ _' : l L‘ A Awarding to film Crmncclictsl Empiml Assaciafion, Latinas in Cunrzecticm :wm‘e 4.5 times more likely than :s’vlzites to visit {he smergen'cy mom because of asthma in 20 i, 3‘ Among blackg ihe rate was more than five times higher. Tlmscsiaiisllcg (hm’i nmasuse the fl'lléili‘fltlm} 017133135313 like Quiles,‘btsi1‘ecem Ibeusgmups islNe-w Haven, Brldgapm‘é and, Hastford found that many 0f lam" cmc‘efims were calmed by albums who diva} with asthma. Parems described anxisfiy 'abmxt smxdlng'éhcli‘ c‘lillclrcu to SC§100§ bemuafl 0f triggers - li‘xs: dust or the lack (if air c‘ml‘ditlmling .2 and concems; almallhe sclxml slafl”s ability Lo manage {he candllligssx. “Parents reported feeling overwhelmed by managing Shel r children's a‘Sl‘lxma,”-salcl :a ragxnt on the fimusr groups: wuclzsclecl farther hospital assuciailml {339 iii»: Hispanic Health Calms-i}. “Adults with asthma expressed feclingfi (sl‘helplcssnfisa and embarrassm-Sm related to the impact asthma had on themi" K httpflfctmin01: orgjz 016/0230:gfllyitlg—fmjrva-breath—01??ersh~21if«infirmfifigfls’ihmaf 2/9/20] 6 Trying for a bmath 13f fresh air in treating asthma I The CT Minna" Page 3 of ‘1’ A 'neigjhbmhmd’ 3311;31:0th Lats 13f inserveniions 1111-111: {1123:} deveiaped that seemed 1;) make 11- difference With asthma, said Dr. S‘vfichélle'Cémlfim', direcmmf 111$ asthma center 21!. Connecticut Children‘s Mcdicai {Esme-r, But she- said, offisn they had Mile effect on 16923-163?!“ Gutwmcs; Many relied on fimdfii'g smu‘ces that dried 11;). The? asfihma neigllbms‘hmxi pmjecfi, which is funded by a planfling gram fi‘osnihc Natimm] “chart, Lung; and Bkmfi Institute 111‘ the Nafimaj institutes 13f Health,.is hut-£116.01! t0 flcvclop a program that can be mplicatcd and susiai‘nmL and 1:0 devanp '21 niinical trial t1: test wl ether it s'cthcea hospitalizatiung emcs‘gcney'xrtmm visits and 513.3100} & absences. Thc‘ planninr! mam involves a wide 11313960?” i“~\3§\\\ . ‘ ‘E ' ' V §\\s= $V <=1 mmmim)" gl'mi‘P'5> WHERE 31km Q1315“.- W101"? agarnc'scs (hit :flr’3xa35112xfr61i7bb£3021nfizwf333.w an zine.ne‘tdna~ and Pi‘m‘mm‘m- cdngmnfilesiféfl lfi/OZfMishelEe—C] 0111561231125) AREELLE LEVIN BECKER! mmmmaflm The tsrm “neighbofiamtfi” refers m the many facmrs {hat Br. Michelle Gautier influence a child’s health ~inc§m§i11g the fismfiy, medic-Ls! community; city, iand‘lm‘ds anci Schmls, The Ciinicfl trial wiii focus on bringing togethcz'fmsr imcrventians than already Exist 1m: aren’t coordinate : ° Easy Brcathing, a. pi‘mgt‘am that teaches primary Lam ciinicians to diagmse and treat asthma; «1 A's/6151011.91"an Braaflfing11113011001 nurses» that Cicutim‘, said has heiped w cut absenteeism in I-{artfimi Schools; 4* Hams Visitatifln programs in which .21 60111111111133,» health warlmr goes to a fami‘ly’fi ho'mt: £0 11631} address things that 111igi‘nt fixacarbate asthma3 Eike Limiter; 1* Speciaity asthma clinics with intensive case111anagementforchildmn with save-ska 021365. The, idea is LL). {{evgi-op 1133318111 éhat, far (121111311111), 16-11;» 519110113 nurses and primary care ciinicizms communicate mguim'm or afio‘ws pharmacistS if: get in touch M91} a child‘s szcémal nurse. Thosc tyms of systems already exist in other mmexis w C1011; i131 pointeé to autonmicd notifimfions people get from {heir pharmacies wl1maprescrip1idnis ready for pic}: up: ch‘hapsifi phewmngy couid have a system to eat! 11 dummy if a, pmiem hasn’t pickt‘fi up a prescfigfiem 3m nmre than 9(1daya, alinwisag the physician is follow up andfigum out why, she said. ngress thmugh simpflicitgr , Clmafier has cxpcrimas develaping a program that 36:15 {6311113. She ere-(1:66 Easy Breathing, the. asthma. unnagmncrst yi'ogram that pcdizattricians 5213‘ firmna‘iicaiiy impmved care, hfipn’.’ ctmirmrmg."2{}l $02.1 0811131111 g—Eo manbreathuof—fre51131141141321Eingaasfln‘nal $91201 6 Tr rinO‘ far a breath of fresh air in h‘eaiin { asthma The {1'1“ Mirrm- fine 4 of '7 3 La E in it grew mu oi‘CkmeEeris axycriataws working with familics 35 pan: of a paw nouns-sling pmgram neariy twc decades age. W 11314: she was; iaikislg 1:0. 5 minim? 'ahuut haw i0 'elitfministcr hfil’ Chiid’s asthma madisaiion. the woman tolgi Cloutiei‘, “Even when I meme meéici'ne, my child‘s: not wail.” After askivngrfor‘ details. Clmiti-er realized the prahicm was that the Chiid had been prescrihefi the wmng medicatien. “So {has} i begin In think about. ‘Maybe it’s not a mamas of education for fill‘fiiiies’, maybe the piase-‘m stem is getting them m: the right therapy.” .Clouti‘cr said. Sim talked to primary care deems, win) mid hex“ ihey needed help with asfln‘na. The program Clouiier deveiap'cd, bascéi an their input, fiwused (in diagnosing asthma am} getting a-chikl‘ 011 She light therapy. 112mg eigillmiESiimxs. it incluaied a treatment plan'tilat had been taste-Lil with families. {0 ensure they wmld undCISIfiBd it. Easy Breathing hagan in Hartford and £135.5incc sxpamim} Smmwidc and t0 5mm Ether stains. (In Cmmemicm. the program has {men funded by money the state receives from a ms‘ficmem with 1013me Companies, but the budgti 30v. Démnci i). i‘viaiiuy pmpes‘ed 12352 weekcalis for difiwntismiszg Easy i‘h‘caéhing’s fimding and using the nmney to pay for mixer state operations} Studies r‘htijpjffwww.aims.conifis)Asmaisl'iSsueflfliifilfififflOfi-Gfiwa!.lfi—néi’gjmc 09km cloutier 1445:0351/3’3) have; fmm‘d the. program has had, significant effects. Gne study of iriartfei‘d ciiiidren ( {mmifwwu-zsi-‘sbi.33i111.11i§1,g§wflm1m§gfil§ Ema; Easy Examining found they were. 35 pennant icsslikcly m be haspitaiized, expez’iesmgd a 1i? parcani. {Imp it: umhma émcrg’sncy room visits am} a 19 pm‘ecnt (1er in ouipatieni visits. Among-providers in the pragram, the mic of'foilewing natiim’ai treatment guideiinas 1036 from 38pemei1t-m 9:5 percent. ""1316 ktzy was fliczsimpliciiy oi’it’,”‘Cimuimr said. And as- pediati'icimls, became mare com fumble: .xaritiz'flm haSiiiS'Uf’ asthma; Clouiicr said, many came back it: ask her for more advanced tools in manage the disease. Dr. Rabat“: Zamski, a pediatrician who serves as the madicai directm‘ far quizicc’ticm’s Medicaid inngram, said Easy Breathing is unimm mnangdisease management programs; most 91" which, he said, offer‘ca'rmcd strategies, rmiuce- 9605.116 .1) their (iiyez‘mes: and and up unused. \. . . “Whiz: Easy Breathing did was itmadfi it iiai‘dcr for gx‘ovidcrs :15: m prQV-ide gem! care," he said. “it made it 3:) much casier’ to da the right thing and proviéc tht: right care.” It has llp-U'Sviifiie science.) and has been rapcatctily i‘cfincti. Iftecfiaid. it’s simple, Clea-31' and provides written :insn'uctions {m ‘gmiiesats. fillings Zav‘aski said arc‘key ~ and min ofign not useé in health care. At hflspitais, simgaiifying instxucfians Sis-nplifyim;imbue-t £0315 patients: gct and trying to heater iink éiiifcrcn‘i Q-ip’es (aifps’cwiders BI‘EEV-iliSO key parts-011% imspiial amociaiism’s-asthnm initiative. The Cmnecticut Asthma. initiativc: focuses on three. imp: ’Ictmirror.orgf2016/0210Slayingdbrowbreath~0iifi‘esh~air~inun-eatiHg‘asti‘n'nm’ 2/9120 1 6 Trying for a breath of flesh air in "treating 21$th 1 Tha CT Milit‘or Page 5 0f ”.7 .‘ti:'\>f§\\‘:_~.\\\\\ \\§~ . iniervmztiom; \ .§\$~\ \ ~: :. \. \ , G Ensuring that patients sat to lame the emergency mom are- i‘au-ght haw to use {Emir inhaler and than ”temh back? Eli's: 111:3:th t0 Shaw they understand; '9 Giving p‘aliants leaving the hospiial a .'\'\\“\ . , H :.:.l l discharge plan that includes an asthma { http:/f3xa'35n2xtr61 l7b€3502$1152,waGRWDEQEIMQHBiéfifia~ actiun plan We)" can Shaw all their health Gilli-Cmfi/filSS/m l 54/92135lhinfl"~’lfim*3.3439} . Jar .-: .srz. “11‘6mede (“ONfiFCH m HOS? m A HQHATION An image; From a viflen by the Cmméflticut Haspitai a Ensua'i [12‘ that pallBfltS leaving the Assnciatimx, gart of a camyaigu 3:0 change patients‘ . l u perfieption of asthma and give tips 011 managing it. hasplml have alullww-up appointment ~ , . . . . . u l A . .- with a: primary care 'provlclm‘ amt if necas-sat‘y, a cannection to. other support sm‘xfiiws, likg case management. 'il'l‘tes‘e‘é; 2313:) a 11:53; lzmgibl's goal: Change; the way pmplc'wiih lastlmm itlxinlivabnuuhe uomlilium from (me in which patients are. powerless am} likely 1.9 end up in the smergency mom, to 9213 in which they have comm}. Since many patients arakidm this hcxspital we: fi'ihlin back a nains‘t asthma (1m ',:/I‘C§flsll!!na.Ber/rtatfiifisf'a , {Hula vicleo mini? flit: sum-them f11flpszlixrinm3.com/149875552) {hat mm be: sham: in dnmmts‘ offices to teach basic management §s1lbrmaiiom "y. 3.0:. :1 c ,~ .- ‘ mun-mknixmm «lawn-A-.s-,-.\-s.-mm“.0mm“ Him Mei‘iutlion can be a particular challenge far patients; hospital officials and mspimtmy therapists said during g)1'€3€i3tatia)mj Easel month a! [11?) hospital association. Clfim, patients don’t knew haw lo um theia' mediwfian‘n‘r (lun’t'ulfiurfimufi why it “13 paresm'ihed. Am! Emma cast so much hundreds Qf dollars _ galleries {Isn’t use lhcm. N Day Kimball HOS-pita! in Futinazsmnany patients were leaving the imspiial and mi filfing prescripiiuns; raspiratur-y'z‘hmapist .Armlvlaric DeMcrcham said. 80 patients there. him: receive a lief: inhaler and sp’acm‘ — a device thal helps the medlcaiimi read! flit: lungs when illey’z‘e dis-charged. Afid no asthma patient: in {hocmcrgency mom can leave until the ' slim " av respiratmfy theraglssl they know how in use timir inhaler. Oihev barrier; hospital affici‘als $21M, include a 'Eassk ol’t‘s‘anspmimilon 61' mt be§ng able 1:0 read. Sacral programs now fams an giving special alley-Kim; t9 paiicnis “film era-me £0 thi: emergency room. St, Vincent‘s Medical Center in Byklgepm’r $121551 nurse maviga‘m in the emergency rmm win) works with asihma patients 10 Schedule- appointments will) a, prin'tasy care pmvidctx She. can camdissate tsunapnrhatlun'slo appointsnenls‘and, 'lfa paziclni needs help aficr hours (if (m weakenéa ammge for than] N) ha seam at an urgent can: facility :in’iliat£:t§ will} ihs hospital, httptf/mmil‘i‘m‘nrgr’lfi l 6/82108ft1‘ying—fora—breathuolilfiesh~21itdfidrfitiflg«asthma! EfQ/Ell'l 6 Trying’fmf a brsath of fires}: air in treating asthma The, CT Mirror Page 6 0f ’7 Anti ihc hospital‘s family health team; which. provides mimary cam: for pom’pafiemfi, cs‘iizséefi a diflic fin: aSiImm paficnis, giving 'iI'IfZ-m access in a scam} wmker whc: am he in them Clean up {he-if flames and. gal heip wfih medicafim costs. Expats at Lawrence + Mammal Hospital. in New Lmuimi worked wiih schsolv nurses and dcveioped samplg notes {ha masses mm give so pilffiims saying their child was; in the Vafficc mat day, a hoiiafgiatc later they can semi t0 gn'i'maiy can: providars m .htrip them conmmnieaic abgut a chilti’s asthma, and information they can 133310 talk {‘0 iejaci‘xcrs about signs to Watch in chiidmn wéth asthma and QM ways to sreduct: issshma niggms in the classroom. . K W ,7 {htmn‘r’fi xa3sn2xtr61 I 7bb60211162wf’8621wpengitmnéidnw Urderthew-Iym‘eis currevxtiy paid fin ggccpm Ejlfififllb Cdngcom/fi1'e3fmE{i/€}2fasthxha~1m»dEschal‘greiiastructionsjgm) _.,-( g, ,, ‘. * , ,gt " ' ' Gui ofshe. imSpI-tal 1slafinanc1al hu- fnr iauspuals, noted {AWE N 5‘ MWO’ N ”08?er Made-kins Biendolillo, the hospital association’s vice; Lawrence + Mesnnrial finspital‘s revisefi discharge presidentfm pgpugmion management. instructions far asthma patients, which fen pagiemfi what :0 dc first after leaviflg the. ER (fin the prescripiion, take your medicaticn) and after that {call you): floater {mt an appointment). gtxprsctcd to 'incxreasmgiy [kt gaymcm: :10 both care quaiity """""""" But the paymeui metici for care is; changing and is and costnbfi’cctivcmss, and so emphasize keeping paticnis wciifi rather than simp§y~ treating their amie itlnaxsas‘ ’I‘hat’s agitated m encmn'age heapitals :9 von with other» iype-snf {mu/{days — inciuding-xmming Emma, home {care grmridersvamd cmmmmi‘ty p jy'sitians — to ensure patienta” condiiious are under cm‘ltmL Asthma made sense as a caridition. f0: hospitals {:0 focus; In]? Bjorldoli'] to saicL b’cCausc ii: can he cared for in the comumnit}; net in Eiosggilais. “it“s 5‘65:in quite imn'ifyi'ng in people that {ifmumevcticul residents are dying" fmm asthma, 2-2136 said. http:i'x’c:tn;i.r1*0r.mgf2C}I 6,f02/'08ft1'ying— ibrwa—brea’thnm f— fmsiwd ir—ii1«u‘eating—asthn'xa/ 3’93’201 6 \\\\\\\‘: \QQ We. .. .-;' . .-. .t .. .t meat-«a ., w- :srimga-u‘mnwig was: when \s“ February 18, 2016 Appropriations Committee Testimony: Governor Malloy’s Proposed Budget Cuts to Local Public Health My name is Ashika Brinkley and I am Executive Director of the Connecticut Association of Directors of Health, representing Connecticut’s local health directors. The Governor is proposing deep cuts to an already under—funded local public health system. The proposed cut of $576,000 will have extraordinary ramifications for the delivery of core public health services. This assault on local public health comes at a time when the citizens of Connecticut are already being short—changed on their essential public health services; the demands on local public health continue to increase with new state mandates, and local public health is being called to the forefront as new epidemics such as the Zika virus continue to emerge. Local public health departments and the municipalities they serve protect the public and cannot sustain these cuts without significant reduction and in some cases, elimination of public health services and programs. These cuts will have a significant impact on the health and safety of our residents and communities and this proposal will cost the state more in the long run. Direct public health services are provided through local health departments, not the state Department of Public Health. Local public health provides health education and early detection to reduce the impact of chronic diseases such as cancer, heart disease, asthma and diabetes. These diseases are strongly affected by social and behavioral factors that can be modified through local public health efforts. Preventing disease costs far less than curing it or treating it. Local public health keeps the community safe from infectious diseases including meningitis, sexually transmitted diseases and TB. Local public health protects the health of our children through immunization outreach efforts, smoking and substance abuse prevention, lead screening and abatement. Local public health ensures the safety of our water, food, schools, daycares and swimming pools through inspection and permitting. Many of these core public health functions will be severely reduced or eliminated entirely if these cuts are implemented. In addition, local health directors will be forced to prioritize statutorily mandated public health activities resulting in suboptimal public health protections. In conclusion, I would like to address the myth that federal funds being received by local health departments for emergency preparedness will reduce the burden of state per capita reductions of funding. This is absolutely false. It is a dangerous misperception. The federal grant guidance explicitly prohibits the supplanting of state and local funding of core public health services with federal bioterrorism monies. Cutting the state per capita and reducing support of core public health functions will compromise emergency preparedness efforts. Even with the additional stipulated funds for preparedness, local resources invested in this effort have extended far beyond the federal funding received. Bioterrorism and public health emergency preparedness are built on the foundation of strong local health departments that provide the core public health functions. Our Directors worry everyday about how they are going to meet their obligations to protect public health, and ensure public safety with dwindling resources and added responsibilities. According to the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), Connecticut’s investment in local health is already half the national average. On behalf of all local health directors I urge you to consider the implications of this under investment in local public health, and rescind these cuts. lsiQE :-"~ {8% \1 ”n \i 30a ~‘\§ §§ (X.:' a 0* hm \. " 5%.. 0% § " \“C‘S\ g? finiw“ Ct}: \% ti». 3:. s; \‘ “95‘ #3:: My name is Kathleen Sauer. I am a member of the Board of Directors of Greater New Britain Teen Pregnancy Prevention, Inc., also known as Pathways/Senderos. I am speaking today to appeal to you to protect the State funding previously approved for teen pregnancy prevention. I live in New Britain and every spring for as long as I can remember, l have observed a disheartening phenomenon when I drive around my city. Just as flowers emerge when the weather warms, so do the new, teen mothers, pushing their babies’ strollers along the sidewalks, sometimes accompanied by the young fathers. So many of these girls and boys—- And I use these terms deliberately and advisedlywshould be in school at the times I see them. It saddens me to know that they will never realize their full potentials, will fail to meet their children’s needs, and will perpetuate the cycle of poverty because they became parents before they were ready for the task. Because I volunteer each week at Pathways, I have been able to witness a very different scenario. In the positive, nurturing environment of the Center, our students come to realize that, through hard work and commitment, it is possible to escape poverty. HOPE IS A POWERFUL “CONTRACEPTIVE.” Staff members motivate our young people to avoid pregnancy by providing them with real evidence that good things can happen in their lives. Some of the students who were served by Pathways in the “early days” have now graduated from college. They come back to the Center and are role models for the younger kids. It is very gratifying to see the children begin to believe that they, too, can achieve successful futures through delaying parenthood and embracing education. There is no doubt that Pathways is successful in its mission. Our efficacy has been repeatedly demonstrated by outside evaluation. In a time when it is more important than ever that public funds be allocated to only the most credible stewards of those funds, you can be assured that we meet the criteria for results-based accountability. Pathways has been nationally recognized for its nearly unprecedented success. The program has an outstanding, small staff which is dedicated to the long-term success of our students. Pathways is a precious gem of which the State of Connecticut can be extremely proud. Keep it going. . n; 3:" K K x x», 5 £3 x ‘ hanfieflmui‘ sin M w u . .5: W is g e \k x :5. . ‘ E “22., ree: 5” \ '\ :u w. w xi: (my St kWS\ .meH K& x \ mean Praise: " '. §§§§Mumma 3’eaowra 179 Water Steal Tasmanian Connecticut 06799 ‘1 gee-4:398:98 .' WWW ‘ '- Basmoioimtcn . _ Name f—‘aikeenarp. PW! , - , Mark FWQW. WFWW3_ ' Aaron Hammer). MSW? , Bob 387509. seminary.- Kfiién Beadle . Mark 8:6?me .‘ mmGraan , _, '_ .; baseman; " NW. Kialy ‘ Jacqueline Hagar - . Catharina 068¢1h .‘i‘udfiosiad y ‘ *Miriesalomefle' , Manama Sinllh . einéywaehams ‘ L"... 3;“;ng 1361:6598 Claudette Bari: .- Al£a6 897971855 :eamaraouuuiass 3 Han. $871.6.th '_:' ' SaunElils ".- Jeanne Fit'zGar'ald Elisabélh causal: Marl-mallonn Useliornu _, . SusnnJordar-i -: '" 14:52:th . 7,. 3:1:an ‘. ; .- DiamMEhl' _- ',US 56081512 .-;‘... chmoanrMuth 8‘ * Claudiaccaslol" ; ~ . Gal! Gian. , 1‘ 'vrdaseauidc‘ {SusanPaynL ‘ ' ESarb'ara Putnam ‘ CynthiaOflifin , ' .‘Susanfiaaj 7 I ‘ Nancy Rogers ' Philip smponaro fiery Schm Dennis 31:96:: End: Srriiih EilenTille:58n' L SQWWtW- Executive Director. . Menu 5 Firm February 16, 2016 Senator Beth Bye, Co-Chair Appropriations Representative Toni Walker, Co—Chair Appropriations Senator Kane Representative Ziobran Dear Senator Bye, Representative Walker, Senator Kane, Rep. Ziobran and Members of the Appropriations Committee: Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony. My name is Jeanne Fusco. I am Executive Directoi of Susan B. Anthony Project (SBAP), a nonprofit, community services organization serving sexual assault and domestic violence victims in northwest CT. lam writing to oppose HB 5044 and Governor Malloy’s proposal for a 5.75% budget cut. I also oppose consolidation of funds for sexual assault victims into a general fund. In the aftermath of devastating and life changing experiences of sexual violence, victims often tell me they feel ”invisible.” The proposed plan to remove a specific line item in the FY17 budget to address the needs of sexual violence survivors sends a strong message that their personal experience is not significant enough to warrant focusedresponse by our State of Connecticut and facilitates the idea that survivors and their needs will become invisible. Susan B. Anthony ProjECt provides sexual assault crisis and response services 24/7, 365 days per year at no cost to victims in twenty towns including Barkhamsted, Canaan, Colebrook, Cornwall, Goshen, Hartland, Harwinton, Kent, Litchfield, Morris, New Hartford, Norfolk, North Canaan, Salisbury, Sharon, Thomaston, Torrington, Warren, Washington and Winsted. We are the only service provider in our region that specialize in the delivery of counseling and advocacy services for sexual assault victims. Any budget cut is devastating to a nonprofit, community based organization such as SBAP. No position is fully funded and there are limits to fundraising from private foundations and individual contributors. In recent years, we have worked to reduce our reliance on federal and state funds from 65% to 43% by our commitment to fundraising on behalf of the victims in the communities we serve. Funding for rape crisis programs in the Department of Public Health budget is critical to continue to provide these services. We cannot absorb additionai cuts. It should be stated that legislative initiatives have resulted in an increased demand for prevention and education programs. For instance, Northwestern CT Community College and UCONN Torrington have extended additional requests for services as they form their Sexual Assault Resource Teams on campus. Local high schools have reached out for assurance that we will be able to respond in the event of a school crisis involving sexual assault. We WANTto be available to meet the needs of victims, schools, private businesses, and anyone in our community who requires our expertise. Our connection has proven to be positively life—altering to those who have received these services. I would like to tell you about a success that illustrates the ways in which _ maintaining a visible and supported presence will improve the lives of victims, such as Phil. As an 8 year old, Phil was sexually abused. He found comfort in alcohol and drugs as he developed. After several rehab attempts, a program he was a part of included a counselor-advocate from Susan B. Anthony Project. Phil and the advocate met weekly. Phil was able, through this process, to tell the story of his childhood sexual abuse and with continued support from his advocate was able to share it with his program clinicians. He is clear that this has made all ofthe difference in his ability to be clean and sober—for ten years now. He has offered his support to SBAP and has allowed us to tell his story and use his image because he is grateful for the ways in which this supportnhas brought positive change in his life. Consider Phil and the thousands of CT residents who seek services for sexual assault each year. The needs of survivors must not be consolidated in ways that compromise service funding. Oppose Governor Malloy’s proposed budget plan and restore the rape crisis line item at full funding. Thank you. Sincerely, Jeanne S. Fusco Executive Director Sim-1rd of Directors February 18, 2016 TESTIMONY OF IVONNE ZUCCO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT CRISIS COUNSELING AND EDUCATION Respectfully submitted to the Appropriations Committee of the CT State Legislature Dear Senator Bye, Representative Walker and committee members, The Center for Sexual Assault Crisis Counseling and Education provides free and confidential counseling and support services for all victims of sexual violence, including children, women and men in Lower Fairfield County (Greenwich, Stamford, Darien, New Canaan, Norwalk, Weston, Wilton and Westport). Our bilingual (English and Spanish) services are available 24- hours a day, 7-days a week. We are there every step of the way from when the victim enters the emergency room, to assisting with police statements and preliminary court proceedings, all the way to trial. We deliver goal oriented counseling and support groups to help victims and their loved ones heal. We also partner with many agencies in the community to obtain other services our clients need. The Center is one of the nine member sexual assault crisis service programs of the Connecticut Alliance to End Sexual Violence (formerly CONNSACS.) Advisory {Lt wait v- \\ We also provide prevention and appropriate response education to the community at large, including parents, human services professionals, college campus, law enforcement, and hospitals in our area. Additionally, The Center provides free age-appropriate prevention education for children ages 4-18. Being in the classroom, give us the opportunity to receive disclosures and be the first responders and reporters. Thanks to the support, through the rape crisis line item in the State budget, The Center has been able to provide crisis counseling to 484 individuals, respond to 253 hotline calls, and respond to 23 hospital calls in the 2014-15 fiscal year alone. Thanks solely to the generosity of our donors and other grant sources, we have been able to provide prevention education to nearly 14,000 students and community members. Everyday we assist many on their long journey to recovery. Here is only one example of why our services are so critical: The Center received a hotline call at 7:00am one morning from a local hospital. An adult female had just been sexually assaulted while running on a track at a local public beach. Our counselor/advocate immediately met the victim at the hospital and spent the following six hours accompanying the victim during the initial interview with the police, performing the Evidence Collection Kit, and per victim’s request, stayed with her until rmmwowm discharge. Later that evening, our counselor/advocate then accompanied the victim at the local police department during the filing of the formal police report. In the weeks after the assault, our counselor/advocate provided free and confidential crisis counseling for the victim. In addition to providing the crisis counseling sessions, our counselor/advocate also assisted the victim in navigating the victim compensation program and filing a claim to ensure that she would receive compensation for all items lost as the result of the assault and the ongoing investigation. Hotfina T: Without the 24-hour hotline, crisis counseling and advocacy services, this victim, and so many others like her, would not have had the knowledge or emotional ability to navigate the criminal justice system or the tools for ongoing healing and recovery. Many times, The Center is the first and only place a victim can turn to for support. Because Sexual Assault is a silent, shameful crime, it is not easy for victims to come forward, so it is important that services are delivered in a professional, caring, trauma sensitive manner. In order to ensure that we can continue providing the community with these professional services, we need to make sure that our funding will be kept at the same level. The statistics are staggering: 0 Every 107 seconds another American is sexually assaulted 0 Nearly 1 in 5 Connecticut residents has experienced a sexual assault in their lifetime and 14% of Connecticut residents has experienced a childhood sexual assault. 0 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 6 boys will be a victim of sexual violence before their 18th birthday. As you probably are aware, non-profit organizations, which support the communities with the much needed services for the disadvantaged are constantly at risk. On one hand, we are asked to manage our services more like a for-profit business and are held to high standards of outcome reporting, which is absolutely fair. On the other hand, it is very difficult to manage our organizations when funding is constantly at stake. Moreover, sexual abuse services, is one of more difficult issues for which to find private funding. Yet, it is one of the most traumatic situations a person can suffer and the effects of a violation like this can last a lifetime inadvertently affecting families and our communities at large. Now that we are reaching a higher level of awareness, and federal and state laws encourage reporting, collaboration and prevention, this is not the time to cut direct support to the victims who might be finally feeling freed from the silence they were forced to endure for many years. The Governor’s proposal, which consolidates and reduces all line item funding for public health related budgets, will have a significant impact on our ability to provide these services. Additionally, because of the reduction to the total amount allocated from Public Health, nonprofits that support the most vulnerable in our population will be forced to compete for essential funding. I thank you for your prior commitment to help victims of sexual violence. We ask that you maintain your commitment and support funding so that we can continue to support those victims and survivors of sexual violence who need our help to seek medical care, emotional support and justice for the crime committed against them. Sincerely, Ivonne Zucco Executive Director NATASHA M. PIERRE, ESQ. State Wdz'm Advocate Testimony of Natasha M. Pierre, Esq., State Victim Advocate Submitted to the Appropriations Committee February 18, 2016 Good afternoon Senator Bye, Representative Walker and distinguished members of the Appropriations Committee. For the record, my name is Natasha Pierre and I am the Victim Advocate for the State of Connecticut. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony concerning: House Bill No. 5044, An Act Making Acn'usnnents to State Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ending June, 30, 20] 7 The Office of the Victim Advocate (OVA) understands the fiscal challenges that the State of Connecticut is facing and that difficult decisions need to be made to address these challenges. These challenges extend beyond the funding of state agencies and impact the funding provided to many non—profit organizations that provide critical services to the residents of Connecticut—w particularly to the Connecticut Alliance to End Sexual Violence (the Alliance), formally the Connecticut Sexual Assault Crisis Services (CONNSACS). The Department of Public Health provides Rape Crisis funding which supports the Alliance’s nine community based sexual assault crisis services programs. Those services, which have been provided for more than 30 years, include a statewide 24 hour hotline, hospital and court accompaniments, support groups and crisis counseling for survivors of sexual violence. Such programs are the only programs in Connecticut that specialize in both the counseling and advocacy needs of sexual assault survivors and their family. House Bill No. 5044, specifically the Department of Public Health budget recommendations concerning the Rape Crisis funding (T368), proposes to eliminate the line item budget for Rape Crisis and allow the Department of Public Health to determine the funding. Connecticut has been a consistent partner and strong supporter of funding the Alliance and its member programs. The Alliance must maintain this consistent funding and support to ensure that the services currently available to victims and survivors of sexual Violence will continue to be available. The OVA strongly recommends that the Rape Crisis funding continue as a line item in the Department of Public Health’s budget. Thank you for consideration of my testimony. 505 Hudson Street 5‘11 Floor, Hartford, CT 06106 - Phone: (860) 550-6632 - Fax: (860) 560-7065 - www.ct.gov/ova Testimon} D6111 3121111101 Bye,Rep1menta1we Wallse I am 1111111111; 111 1111 11113111011 to the (1011611101 5 12801111111111 1111101110 cmwolidatc sevetal item 3 in H18 Public 1113111111 Badge 61. specific Crisis line- 1112111. This 13.21 crucial‘ 11111: item 11f 1.111: budge 1 The Rape C1 1311; hull fine and 1.131 muss ptovi‘ded 1:0 Vic: 11113 11110 1"“ 1 3:39;: in oppasition to line itams mnw ed {101 '11 Agency Budgei‘s Rape Crisis Line hem .A‘yppi‘opi‘iatiaas, (3011111111181: February 13, 3016 crucial m pmieclinc victim 13' and shoal d 1'? 11121111 1111:1111 This consolidati 1111 wi ii {311: Judicial 1311111611 budgat spa 1l1 all in {1111‘ state. laur‘a Devlin Stare Repramnmn‘ve 1‘3 411‘1 [3.1311 1'1! fié‘atmr T011); ‘ H wang Smi‘e Sax-safar 2131}? Bisfricl The Center for Family Justice BOARD or DIRECTORS: CHAIRPERSON: Judy Stevens, Attorney, State of CT Ann E. Clark, PhD Community Leader Donna Craft Community Leader Fentyshia Daniels Social Worker Valerie Foster Testimony Regarding Appropriations Committee Meeting February 18, 2016 Governor’s Budget Preposal Senator Bye and Representative Walker, I am writing on behalf of The Center for Family Justice which is a sexual assault crisis agency, domestic violence crisis agency, and accredited child advocacy center. The Center serves the towns of Bridgeport, Easton, Fairfield, Monroe, Stratford, and Trumbull and IS one of nine community based programs of the Connecticut Alliance to End Sexual Violence (formally ConnSACS). Marketing Conraltant, Editor, Writer Iessa Francis Sikorsky Airerafi Catherine Gallagher Community Leader Thomas A. Gallo Sikorsky Aerospace Services Maurice Hill Community Leader Anthony Iannini GE Capital Karen Izzo Community Leader Patricia Johnson Piracy Bower, Inc. Rachel Volkman Kushel Attorney, Robinson ('9' Cole Robert Larson Community Leader Nancy Lessard Community Leader Kathryn Maiolo Community Leader Joseph Marrone St. Vincent’s Coiioge Debra Menich Community Leader Donna Milne First Niagara, Private Client Services Janet Navon Community! Leader Matthew C. Reale Attorney, Anthony 6‘? Reale Veronica E. Thomas Educator Lisa M. Todd Community Leader Carly J. Yearsley Community Leader PRESIDENT, CEO: Debra A. Greenwood As a sexual assault victim advocacy program we adamantly oppose the Governor’s proposed budget as it would decrease funding for vital services in our state. Funding for rape crisis programs in the Department of Public Health budget is essential for advocacy programs to provide crisis intervention and advocacy services to both children and adult survivors of sexual assault. Connecticut has made tremendous progress in regards to sexual assault awareness, addressing sexual assault on college campuses, and prevention measures. A cut in budget would directly affect the community based sexual assault advocacy programs’ abilities to provide direct services to survivors as well as statutorily required prevention to children and college aged students. The Center for Family Justice provides free and confidential services to survivors of sexual assault including hospital accompaniment, advocacy, counseling, information and referrals to other agencies including the Office of Victim Services, and legal/ criminal justice advocacy. Sexual assault advocates work with primary victims as well as their families. Children who have been victims of sexual abuse benefit from advocacy services and their parents do as well. Supporting a parent of a sexually abused child is critical for the healing of the entire family. Our agency provides culturally competent services for survivors of all ages through the 24 hour hotline, walk 1n hours, support groups, and individual sessions with advocates. The Center also provides prevention education to college campuses and K- 12 students. The primary prevention programs are critical to promote healthy environments and behaviors for Connecticut’s youth to reduce the likelihood or frequency of sexual violence occurring. The Center’s prevention/ community educators also provide trainings and education to professionals such as law enforcement, health care providers, campus Strengthening families, preventing anuse CH . RFN'S ALLIANCE‘ 753 Fairfieid Avenue, Bridgeport, Connecticut 06604 0 Tel: 203/334-6154 0 Fax: 203/579-8882 0 Website: WWW.centerforfarniiyjustice.oiy The Center for Family Justice BOARD or DIRECTORS: CHAIRPERSON: Judy Stevens, AirwayJ State cg" CT Ann E. Clark, PhD Community Leader Donna Craft Community Leader Fentyshia Daniels Social Worker Valerie Foster staff, and other community members who maybe providing services to sexual assault survivors. While it is difficult under the proposed budget to speak to an unknown specific cut, any monetary cut to sexual assault services would impact semce delivery throughout the state. I thank you for your time and consideration on this matter and urge the committee to oppose the Governor’s proposed budget and restore the rape crISIS llne 1ten1 at full funding. My contact information is listed below and Marketing Camlma Edgar) wwwam available fOr any questions or to expand on the specific services that Jessa Francis Sikorsky Aircraft Catherine Gallagher Community Leader Thomas A. Gallo Sikorsky Aerospace Service: Maurice Hill _ Communiw Leader Anthony Iannjni GE Capital Karen Izzo Community Leader Patricia Johnson. Pitney Bower, Inc. Rachel Volkman Kushel Attorney, Robinron 6‘ Cole Robert Larson Community Leader Nancy Lessard Community Leader Kathryn Maiolo Community Leader Joseph Marrone St. Vincent’sr College Debra Menich Communim Leader Donna Milne Firrt NiagaraJ Private Client Service: Janet Navon Community Leader Matthew C. Beale AttorneyJ Anthony 2’9“ Reale Veronica F. Thomas Educator Lisa M. Todd Community Leader Carly J. Yearsley Community Leader i’RESIDENT, CEO: Debra A. Greenwood this funding allows sexual assault crisis agencies to provide. Kayte Cwikla—Masas, M.S. The Center for Family Justice Assistant Director of Programs Coordinator of the Greater Bridgeport Multidisciplinary Team Telephone (203) 334—6154 x 117 kcwikla@centerforfamilyjustice.org Strengthening familiesJ preventing abuse ”mam; CHILDREN'S ALLMNCE" 753 Fairfi'eia Avenue, Bridgeport, Connecticut 06604 0 Tel: 203/334-6154 . Fax: 203/579-8882 0 Website: wwa.centerforfamiiyjusticemy Mcdonalci, Deborah