Advocate Archives - Page 4 of 36

Joint Letter of Support: SSI Savings Penalty Elimination Act

September 12, 2023/in Advocate, Nonprofit professionals All States Advocacy, Social security Other/by Darcy Milburn

The Honorable Sherrod Brown
United States Senate
503 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

The Honorable Bill Cassidy
United States Senate
520 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

The Honorable Brian Fitzpatrick
United States House of Representatives
271 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Brian Higgins
United States House of Representatives
2269 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Subject: Support for the SSI Savings Penalty Elimination Act

Dear Senators Brown and Cassidy and Representatives Higgins and Fitzpatrick:

On behalf of the 370 undersigned organizations dedicated to improving the lives of older adults and people with disabilities, we enthusiastically endorse the SSI Savings Penalty Elimination Act, which – for the first time in over 30 years – would raise the amount of assets Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients can save without jeopardizing their vital SSI benefits.

SSI provides an extremely modest cash benefit for low-income individuals with disabilities and older adults that meet the program’s strict means-tested criteria. Around 7.6 million people rely on SSI, including 4.3 million working-age individuals with disabilities, 1 million children with disabilities, and 2.3 million older adults.

Unfortunately, SSI’s low, outdated resource limit of $2,000 for individuals/$3,000 for couples does not allow people to save for emergencies, such as a leaky roof, car repair, or other unexpected expenses. This makes it difficult for them to weather these crises. To make matters worse, the $2,000 asset limit does not adjust for inflation every year; in fact, the limit has remained the same since 1989 even though today’s cost of living is nearly 2.5 times higher.

The SSI Savings Penalty Elimination Act would significantly improve the lives of SSI recipients by raising the asset limit to $10,000 per individual/$20,000 per couple. The legislation also adjusts that number for inflation every year, a critical element in today’s inflationary environment. This will allow SSI beneficiaries to use their own savings to address needed emergencies when they arise. JPMorgan Chase recently noted that SSI’s outdated asset limit makes it difficult for SSI beneficiaries to achieve any measure of economic security and called for it to be modernized.

Thank you again for your leadership in introducing this critical legislation. We look forward to working with you to ensure this important change becomes law. If you have any questions, please contact Darcy Milburn, The Arc’s Director of Social Security and Healthcare Policy at Milburn@TheArc.org.

Sincerely,

The Arc of the United States
369 Organizational Co-signers (see full list.)

Press Release: New Bipartisan Bill Would Advance Economic Security for Disabled Americans

The Arc Responds to ED’s Proposed Rule to Remove Parental Consent for Billing Medicaid in Schools

August 1, 2023/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Legal Professionals, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Service provider / DSP All States Education Comments/by The Arc

The Arc submitted a comment on the proposed rule to streamline the parental consent process when billing Medicaid for services received in school. The Arc’s comments emphasized the experience of some families being denied outside services when Medicaid was billed for school services.

The Arc Responds to CMS’ Proposed Rule, Ensuring Access to Medicaid Services

June 29, 2023/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Legal Professionals, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability All States Community-based LTSS Comments/by The Arc

The proposed “Ensuring Access to Medicaid Services” rule would create new requirements for state programs to improve access to care, quality, and health outcomes and better address health equity issues in the Medicaid program. The Arc submitted detailed comments on the proposal, particularly related to access to home and community-based services (HCBS).

The Arc Responds to AbilityOne Commission’s Proposed Competition Rule

June 12, 2023/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Legal Professionals, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability All States Employment Comments/by The Arc

The Arc submitted comments for a rule that would advance workers rights in the AbilityOne program. The Arc mentioned concerns over the potential negative impact on nonprofit agencies providing quality jobs. The Arc recommends aligning the rule with the 898 Panel’s recommendations to mitigate these risks.

The Arc Responds to Proposed AbilityOne Policies

April 24, 2023/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Legal Professionals, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Service provider / DSP All States Employment Comments/by The Arc

The Arc supports the proposed rule but has recommendations. The recommendations include changes to strengthen worker protections and ensure clarity in eligibility and employment standards.

2023 Policy & Advocacy Kick-off Webinar

February 15, 2023/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc All States Advocacy Webinar/by Pam Katz

Hear from The Arc’s policy and advocacy teams about:

The latest on Capitol Hill and what to expect from the new Congress
Information and resources about the end of Medicaid continuous enrollment
How to get involved in advocacy in 2023

Download the presentation slides here.

For further questions, please email events@thearc.org.

Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools

November 17, 2022/in Advocate, Criminal Justice Professionals, Family member, Legal Professionals, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Victim Services Professionals All States Advocacy, Civil rights, Education Litigation/by The Arc

Filed: November 16, 2022

Court: U.S. Supreme Court

Overview: Amicus brief explaining that students with disabilities are not required to exhaust their administrative remedies to bring non-IDEA civil rights claims.

Excerpt: “…the decision below significantly undermines IDEA’s policies of protecting students’ rights and the use of alternative dispute resolution procedures as a preferred method for resolving IDEA claims. If allowed to stand, the decision will force parents who could otherwise achieve all available IDEA relief through settlement to nonetheless litigate their claims, lest they be left foreclosed from pursuing non-IDEA civil rights claims as Miguel Perez (Miguel) was. This would be true even though an administrative record regarding appropriate educational instruction serves no purpose whatsoever for adjudicating non IDEA claims and, more significantly, would delay the implementation of any appropriate IDEA remedy…In other words, it adds nothing of value and may further harm students who already prevailed on their IDEA claims.”

Case Documents

Amicus Brief

Press Releases

National Disability Rights Groups File Amicus in Perez v. Sturgis

National Disability Rights Groups Applaud SCOTUS Decision in Perez v. Sturgis

Disability Scoop: Supreme Court Unanimously Sides With Student in Special Ed Case

USA Today: Special Education Clash: How One Student’s Supreme Court Case Could Make Schools More Accountable

K-12 Dive: 3 Takeaways From the Perez Special Education Case

Promising Programmatic Practices for People With Dual Diagnosis

October 4, 2022/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Nonprofit professionals, Service provider / DSP All States Community-based LTSS, Direct Support Professionals Webinar/by Pam Katz

Incompass provides residential and day/employment programming for a dually diagnosed, forensically involved population as well as a residential program for individuals diagnosed with Huntington’s Disorder. In this webinar, Chris Snell, MS and Dorian Crawford, PsyD of Incompass Human Services will provide an overview of community-based service promising practices for an emerging, dually diagnosed population.

View session presentation slides here.

Engagement in the Early Intervention Program Planning Process for Parents and Professionals

September 26, 2022/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Service provider / DSP Advocacy, Education Webinar/by The Arc

Early intervention program planning can be challenging at times for students, parents, teachers, service providers, and administrators—but it doesn’t have to be.

Enter your information below to watch a free video. You will hear from Dr. Rachel Brady about IDEA Part C & B, program planning requirements, and strategies that support more meaningful engagement in early intervention programs. Equity issues and the points of advocacy at the individual and systems levels are also explored through examples, discussion, and a review of available resources.

^{By completing this form you agree to receive email communications from The Arc and/or our affiliated chapters. You may unsubscribe from these communications at any time. For more information, check out our privacy policy.}

Health & Hospital Corporation of Marion County v. Talevski

September 26, 2022/in Advocate, Chapter of The Arc, Family member, Legal Professionals, Nonprofit professionals, Person with a disability, Service provider / DSP, Victim Services Professionals Advocacy, Civil rights, Health, Health Care/by The Arc

Filed: September 22, 2022

Court: U.S. Supreme Court

Overview: Amicus brief explaining the importance of individuals having the ability to sue state and local governments when their civil rights are violated under Medicaid and other public programs.

Excerpt: The linkage between the RA’s and the ADA’s antidiscrimination mandate and Medicaid provisions implementing that mandate is evidence that Congress intended both aspects of its disability-rights scheme to be privately enforceable. That conclusion is bolstered by the fact that Congress, when enacting the ACA, broadened Medicaid’s “entitlement” provisions by expanding the definition of “medical assistance.” Congress did so in direct response to judicial decisions narrowly construing that term in § 1983 suits brought by people with disabilities. Petitioners’ request that this Court abandon its longstanding holding that Spending Clause legislation can give rise to a private right of action under § 1983 would undermine Congress’s scheme for enforcing disability rights. People with disabilities, including children, regularly bring private lawsuits to enforce each of their independent, mutually reinforcing entitlements under the RA, the ADA, and Medicaid. Those lawsuits have vindicated important rights, providing access to life-saving therapies and everyday living support services close to one’s family and community. Absent a private right of action to enforce their Medicaid guarantees, enforcement of Medicaid would be left to the federal government, which may have few enforcement options other than reduction of States’ Medicaid funding. That may exacerbate rather than remedy States’ failure to comply with Medicaid’s requirements.