Kudos to the newest ballgirl at the Open. I'll be looking for her! read the entire article at the NY Times site.
By JOSHUA ROBINSON NYT 8/28/08
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/29/sport ... lgirl.html
After every few dashes across Court 14, Kelly Bruno reached down to her right leg and flicked at something. It was a gesture so slight and so fleeting, she could have been swatting away a bug. It was also the only thing she did that was not in the protocol for a United States Open ball girl — nowhere does it mention popping the pressure valve on a prosthetic leg.
Bruno was born with several defects in her right leg and has been an amputee since she was 6 months old. By 18, she had turned herself into a track star among disabled athletes, with her own sponsorship deals. And as a world-class triathlete and Ironman competitor, she has raced in some of the most grueling events on the planet.
Now, at age 24, Bruno has scaled back her training for three weeks to shuttle back and forth across a courts at the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center to scoop up balls at the net. In a job done correctly only by those who are barely noticed, Bruno has stood out by blending in.
“It’s definitely harder than I expected,” she said, flashing an easy smile. “For me the running is not as tiresome, but I didn’t think standing was going to be so exhausting.”.....
[ add comment ] | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink |
( 3.1 / 57 )Report Rejects Medicare Boast of Paring Fraud
By CHARLES DUHIGG http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/21/busin ... amp;emc=th
Medicare’s top officials said in 2006 that they had reduced the number of fraudulent and improper claims paid by the agency, keeping billions of dollars out of the hands of people trying to game the system.
But according to a confidential draft of a federal inspector general’s report, those claims of success, which earned Medicare wide praise from lawmakers, were misleading.
In calculating the agency’s rate of improper payments, Medicare officials told outside auditors to ignore government policies that would have accurately measured fraud, according to the report. For example, auditors were told not to compare invoices from salespeople against doctors’ records, as required by law, to make sure that medical equipment went to actual patients.
As a result, Medicare did not detect that more than one-third of spending for wheelchairs, oxygen supplies and other medical equipment in its 2006 fiscal year was improper, according to the report. Based on data in other Medicare reports, that would be about $2.8 billion in improper spending.
That same year, Medicare officials told Congress that they had succeeded in driving down the cost of fraud in medical equipment to $700 million.
Some lawmakers and Congressional staff members say the irregularities that the inspector general found were tantamount to corruption and raise broader questions about the credibility of other Medicare figures.
“This is outrageous,” said Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the top-ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, who has repeatedly credited the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services with reducing improper expenditures. “If heads don’t roll, you can’t change the culture of this organization,” he added.
Senator Grassley had not yet received the full report from the inspector general but had been briefed on its contents.
The report — a draft of which was obtained by The New York Times — will probably be made public within the next week, according to federal officials. The inspector general may change or edit the findings of the report before it is officially released. Congressional staff said the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services — the agency overseeing Medicare — was lobbying the inspector to play down the report’s conclusions.
A spokesman for Medicare said that the agency agreed with the inspector general that the agency’s reported level of improper billing for durable medical equipment, or D.M.E., should have been higher. But Medicare says the $2.8 billion figure is unsupported.
“Allegations of manipulation of this error rate are preposterous,” said the spokesman, Jeff Nelligan. “The agency has aggressively targeted fraud and improper payments in the D.M.E. program. We have a history of working closely with the inspector general and will continue to do so.”
A representative of the Office of Inspector General that created the report — part of Medicare’s parent, the Department of Health and Human Services — said it did not comment on draft reports.
Fraudulent and improper payments have long bedeviled Medicare, a $466 billion program. In particular, payments for durable medical equipment, like power wheelchairs and diabetic test kits, are ripe for fraud.
Equipment sellers have submitted counterfeit documents, forged doctors’ signatures and filed claims on behalf of patients who were dead or had never been seen by the prescribing physician, according to many reports by government oversight agencies.
For example, a Florida businessman was sentenced last year to 37 months in prison for submitting more than $5.5 million of fake claims to Medicare. The businessman operated for months, despite giving the agency an address that was actually a utility closet.
On July 1, Medicare instituted a new competitive bidding system that officials said would reduce both fraud and costs for medical equipment.
On July 15, however, Congress suspended the program, after equipment manufacturers and sellers began an aggressive lobbying campaign.
Senator Grassley said Congress might push for an investigation into the private company that was hired to fulfill Medicare’s auditing program, the AdvanceMed Corporation, a division of the Computer Sciences Corporation. The report mentions AdvanceMed by name.
Representatives of AdvanceMed did not return calls. The company has received contracts worth more than $34 million from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services since 2005.
“This report doesn’t surprise me,” said Representative Pete Stark, Democrat of California and a senior member of the Ways and Means Committee. He has pushed to cut improper Medicare spending. “To look better to the public, you cook the books,” he said. “This agency is incompetent.”
The Office of Inspector General’s report details scrutiny of a program known as Comprehensive Error Rate Testing, or CERT, that audits a sample of Medicare claims submitted by sellers of durable medical equipment. That program is supposed to randomly choose claims and review the medical records and other documents supporting submitted claims to determine whether payment is justified.
According to the inspector general’s report, officials at Medicare instructed AdvanceMed to disregard those policies. Instead, AdvanceMed was told to examine only the documents submitted by the companies selling the medical equipment, rather than verify those documents against physicians’ records.
Medicare reported to Congress that, for the fiscal year of 2006, AdvanceMed’s investigations had found that only 7.5 percent of claims paid by Medicare were not supported by appropriate documentation. But the inspector general’s review indicated that the actual error rate was closer to 31.5 percent.
For instance, according to the report, the Office of Inspector General examined a claim for an electric wheelchair that AdvanceMed had said was appropriate. The inspector general’s investigation revealed that the physician who was listed as having prescribed the wheelchair had no knowledge of the prescription.
The person who received the wheelchair said that he had never met with the physician, that he did not need a wheelchair and that he had never used it, according to the report. His wife had also received a wheelchair that she had not asked for and never used.
Equipment sellers can pocket more than $2,500 every time they send a powered wheelchair to a patient and bill Medicare.
“This is like letting the fox guard the henhouse,” said Malcolm Sparrow, a Harvard University professor who focuses on health care fraud. “The supplier has an incentive to supply fabricated documents or to imply that medical records support a purchase when they don’t. If you don’t ask the physician or ask for medical records, you can’t really verify anything.”
[ add comment ] | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink |
( 3.2 / 41 )August 15, 2008
Issue: Call the Governor--Don' t Cut Funding to Independent Living Centers and Home Care!
Background: Despite the fact that Independent Living Centers and home care are critical services for the disability community in New York State , Governor Paterson has proposed serious cuts to these vital, cost-effective services.
The Governor has proposed immediately cutting Independent Living Centers by 6% on "remaining disbursements" this year. His proposal then carries over this cut into FY 2009 and beyond. These Centers were already cut by 2% this year so this cut would be on top of the original cut to ILC funding in the enacted FY 2008 state budget. That means the Governor has proposed reducing on-going Center funding by 8%!
The Governor is proposing to cut home care by eliminating the "trend factor" and cutting an additional 1% from reimbursement rates. Because this year's home care rates are based on actual expenses from two years ago, the trend factor is critical to adjusting these rates for the increased cost of doing business, including attendant wages and benefits. These cuts will significantly affect the ability of home care agencies to pay for wage increases and handle the ever-increasing cost of providing benefits, including health insurance, potentially forcing good attendants to look for other work.
Action:
1. CALL the Governor TODAY!! Tell him that you want the cuts to Independent Living Centers and Home Care stopped.
The number is: 518-474-8390
2. If you haven't already sent a fax, please do that as well. Here's the link: http://capwiz. com/rochestercdr /issues/alert/ ?alertid= 11797711&type=ML&show_alert=1
Although we are only calling the Gov, the capwiz fax contacts your legislators as well. It's important that they ALL hear from us.
3. SPREAD THE WORD and ask other people to call and fax! If we want to preserve funding for home care and Independent Living Centers we REALLY need to turn up the pressure. We need to get as many calls and faxes in as we can.
Please report your efforts by emailing Mgodino@bcid. org
If you have any questions about this work alert, please contact Mike Godino at 718-998-3000 or mgodino@bcid. org
__._,_.___
[ add comment ] | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink |
( 2.8 / 40 )
Call to IMMEDIATE Action!
As a supporter of Canine Companions we thought you'd be interested in participating in a rare call to action.
Canine Companions needs your help TODAY!
Background: The Department of Justice (DOJ) provides the legal definition of a service animal. They are currently revising the definition and have allowed CCI as well as other service dog organizations to provide input, which we have done.
At this time, they are accepting public comments. We know that numbers matter on this issue. Please support our position to the DOJ on this topic by submitting a public comment.
The deadline for comments is August 18, 2008, so please act now.
SAMPLE COMMENT YOU CAN USE:
Please eliminate the ambiguous phrase "DO WORK" from the new definition to prevent misinterpretation; retain the definition that service animals must be individually trained to "PERFORM TASKS" for the benefit of a disabled individual, as stated in the ADA Business Brief: Service Animals in 2002.
In response to Question Nine, please delete the word "protection" from the definition, as the word means "aggression training" in the dog training industry.
Thank you for clarifying the ADA grants public access to anyone with a disabling mental or physical impairment who works with a service animal who has the required training.
Here are the steps for making public comments on the DOJ website for this topic:
Visit the regulations website to submit a public comment.
Complete the required information and choose next. Do not submit CCI as the organization name in order for your comment to be submitted as a separate comment.
Verify that your submission is correct and choose submit.
Once you hit submit, you will be taken to a page where you can print a copy of your submission if you prefer.
CCI has worked closely with Coalition of Assistance Dog Organizations (CADO) and Assistance Dogs International North America (ADI NA) to determine the industry response. The full CADO recommendations document and the CADO Minimum Behavior and Training Standards can be found on our website at cci.org/pressroom.
For your convenience and as background, here is more information on our position:
1. Question Nine: MINIMAL PROTECTION: We urge the DOJ to remove the phrase "minimal protection" from the new definition of a Service Animal. "Protection" means aggression training in the dog industry; this will lead to misinterpretation.
2. Question Ten: OTHER SPECIES: We ask the Department to consider establishing guidelines that would limit the use of other species only to animals who can be trained to meet the same standards for behavior and training that assistance dogs must meet to qualify for public access.
3. Question Eleven: A SIZE OR WEIGHT LIMIT: We oppose a size or weight limitation on common domestic animals like assistance dogs! It would discriminate against disabled persons whose weight, height and/or the severity of their mobility impairment necessitates that they work with a dog of a breed of sufficient size and strength to prevent falls or perform other tasks without injury to the dog.
4. Problem: The DO WORK phrase in the Definition: We urge the Department to eliminate the "do work" phrase in the proposed Definition and continue to include the requirement that service animals must be individually trained to perform "tasks" for the benefit of a disabled individual.
Thank you for your help and support of CCI. We appreciate your time as we continue to uphold our role as leaders in the assistance dog industry.
Corey Hudson, CEO
Clark Pappas, National Director Participant Programs
[ 1 comment ] ( 10 views ) | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink |
( 3.5 / 37 )New York Times, August 10, 2008
Disabilities
Moves to Strengthen Disabled Access Law
By JULI S. CHARKES
Link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/10adawe.html
Peekskill
ON a Saturday afternoon here in her hometown, Lisa Tarricone wants a cup
of coffee from her local coffee shop. For Ms. Tarricone, a director at
Westchester Independent Living Center who uses a wheelchair, that everyday
wish brings a series of maneuvers.
First is a call to the shop to ask that a rudimentary wooden ramp be
positioned atop a deep step; then a request to an employee to prop open
the door so Ms. Tarricone can use both arms to wheel herself up the
nonregulation ramp (no handles; improper pitch); finally, the navigation
of a crowd of customers that is complicated on this day by a performer
stationed near the door.
It is time-consuming and cumbersome “and all of it in front of an audience
of people who are staring while you’re trying to get inside, maybe annoyed
that you’re letting the air-conditioning out — just for the sake of a
latte,” she said several days later.
Life in a wheelchair is a series of carefully calculated moves, Ms.
Tarricone said, and some of the obstacles are not merely inconvenient —
they are also a violation of the federal Americans With Disabilities Act,
enacted 18 years ago last month.
Advocates for people with disabilities hope such incidents of
noncompliance will diminish with recent changes to state law that allow
for a new level of enforcement of existing A.D.A. law, said Michael
Hellmann, a Westchester lawyer specializing in disability law.
“Westchester businesses are filled with A.D.A. violations,” he said. “Now
that it’s part of New York law, they run a much greater risk of having
legal action taken against them.”
Federal law prohibits discrimination against anyone with a disability,
which it defines as a physical or mental impairment that substantially
limits a major life activity. There are 50 million Americans with a
disability, according to the United States Department of Justice based on
the 2000 census. About 147,000 live in Westchester, based on figures
compiled at the same time by the county.
Until now, legal recourse for anyone encountering a violation of the
Americans With Disabilities Act was limited to filing a complaint with the
federal Justice Department, which had a backlog of cases, or pursuing a
federal lawsuit, Mr. Hellmann said.
In January, the New York State Division of Human Rights incorporated a
section of the federal A.D.A. covering businesses or places of public
accommodation. That allows state enforcement of the part of the A.D.A.
requiring “places of public accommodation to make reasonable modifications
in policies, practices and procedures when providing access for a person
with a disability,” said John P. Herrion, director of disability rights
for the State Division of Human Rights.
The law not only provides an additional resource for bringing a complaint,
but also provides a broader definition of a disability, protecting
individuals who were previously excluded from the federal definition, he
said.
Mr. Herrion stressed that the division is sensitive to the costs to
businesses and pointed to considerations within the Americans With
Disabilities Act that are intended to prevent “undue burden” or
“fundamentally alter the nature of the public accommodation,” he said.
But determining that discretion can be difficult, particularly as
misinformation and confusion over A.D.A. compliance are commonplace — even
among lawmakers and business advocates.
James Lorr, a co-owner of the Peekskill Coffee House where Ms. Tarricone
occasionally ventures for coffee, said his operation complied with the
A.D.A, pointing to remodeling the bathroom as one change. He also pointed
to the wooden ramp that sits inside the cafe for use whenever wheelchair
accessibility is needed, calling it a reasonable accommodation given the
building’s historic status.
BUT Mr. Hellmann dismissed the use of a temporary ramp by any business,
pointing to requirements in the A.D.A. about the pitch and stability of
access ramps. He said that businesses often fail to go far enough in
adhering to A.D.A., part of what he described as the myths of complying
with the law. The biggest myth, by far, he said regards the so-called
grandfather clause.
“Unlike building codes, the A.D.A. does not have a grandfather clause,”
Mr. Hellmann said. “No matter how old a building, it is not totally
excused from complying with the A.D.A.”
Some of the education for businesses is being provided on the county
level. Westchester’s Office for the Disabled regularly dispatches staff
members to investigate businesses that may not be complying with the
A.D.A. The purpose, said Evan Latainer, the director of the office, is to
help businesses understand what they must do to avoid a next step of
possible litigation.
On a recent weekday morning, Anna M. Masopust and Andrea Sadowski of the
county’s Office for the Disabled spoke with staff members at a local gym
about the use of an elevator designated for people with a disability.
Frank Sessa, 84, a Yonkers retiree who frequents the club, paused from
exercising in the pool to describe his aggravation when gym employees
continuously misplaced the elevator key. He said he relies on the key for
access to the pool and locker room, adding, “The custodian finally
duplicated the key for me.”
Having his own key has brought only partial satisfaction, he said, because
the elevator is regularly used to transport freight. “It’s illegal to use
this lift for anything other than a person with a disability,” Ms.
Masopust said, pointing to a plaque on the adjoining wall that states what
she was saying.
Besides changes in state law, changes by the county have added resources
for disability claims. Last month, the county Human Rights Commission used
county government support to achieve countywide jurisdiction over its
human rights law, said Delores Scott Brathwaite, director of the division.
Previously, the commission jurisdiction was excluded from municipalities
like White Plains, Yonkers, Mount Vernon, Mamaroneck, Larchmont, New
Rochelle and Peekskill.
Advocates for the disabled say the recent changes in state and county law
are important in educating the public on what is guaranteed under the
federal law. Ms. Tarricone and others stressed how changes in law address
not only the logistical rights of access, but also help transform
society’s views about a segment of the population they say has been
historically overlooked.
“There are millions of physically or mentally disabled people who deserve
something better,” said Howard W. Rasher, a retired lawyer and disability
advocate from Briarcliff Manor. “Now, we can put meaningful teeth into the
existing laws.”
[ add comment ] | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink |
( 3.2 / 28 )
Calendar
