Elderly Health Centers in Jeopardy
One of the larger items in trouble as House and Senate budget writers reconcile their dfferences is medical care for hundreds of frail, elderly people.
It’s the work undertaken by dietitians, physical therapists and nurses at non-profit centers, mostly affiliated with local hospitals. They’re helping keep adults physically active in the face of time’s ravages.
When the state’s all-cuts budget last year reduced funds for adult day health services, it restricted services to people who weren’t currently in nursing homes. One King and Snohomish County day health operator lost 40 percent of its clients overnight.
Then a federal court mandated that the state must re-admit the adults. When they came back, says Jerry Reilly of the Eldercare Alliance, staff noted that the lack of routine physical therapy had caused more serious problems. So “We know the devastation [the cuts have] wrought on people,” he says.
The House’s $12.5 million budget reduction means a 611-person decline in the number of clients between now and June 2011. That would force more of the 36 centers in 17 counties to close, says Reilly, who notes that 7-8 centers closed since last year.
Both the House and Senate budget cut funding for the programs, but the extra million dollars in the Senate’s “phased reduction” of $11.5 million, according to the AARP, would save 300 clients. Rep. Sherry Appleton (D-Poulsbo) has put forth an amendment to the Senate budget, now being considered by the House, to fund additional spots. Her proposal would up the client base to 1,678 people — the same number as was enrolled in the centers in January.
Reilly backs Appleton’s amendment, acknowledging that it’s not the same as the 1,900 seniors being cared for by such programs before the current biennial budget was enacted in June 2009. He wants the state to spend unexpected federal money on current health needs rather than amassing an end-of-year reserve.
“I’m not an economist,” but “I’ve heard people talk about bond issues for 35 years, and states that raise revenues attract good bond ratings,” he says. “It shows a willingness to pull together.”
Comments
By Revel Smith on March 6th, 2010 at 7:12 pm
It’s common knowledge in the social services community that it’s cheaper to provide day services to aging and disabled people, than it is to cut services, accelerate their deterioration and suffering – then attempt to meet more intensive health care needs in costly full-time situations.
Whether they live independently or within one of the already overextended nursing home situations – healthier means cheaper. (Look, we’re talking deterioration over a 6 month to 2 year gap). I speak from personal experience. On top of this is increased need for service providers jobs, right now.
Bonds are not the worst way to accomplish a contained short-term goal, like building a bridge, but there will always be competition with other statewide projects that don’t directly impact human life. Maybe this is the only way to hold-on, for now. So be it. But may we choose to prioritize the well-being of our aging family, friends and neighbors in our regular budget, next session.