Summary Class action about limits on payments for medical equipment to items on a Social Services list. It prompted HCFA (now CMS) to clarify policies on medical equipment coverage, requiring states to provide individuals "a meaningful opportunity for seeking modifications of or exceptions to a State's pre-approved list."¹⁵
Progress Settlement"

Summary Class action involving waiver recipients who are waitlisted/denied other services.
Progress Settlement. In late 2004 the parties arrived at a settlement agreement. The agreement provides the following: the class includes those individuals who applied and were found eligible plus individuals who would have been found eligible if they had the opportunity to apply; over a five-year period starting FY 2005-2009, the state agreed to expand its HCBS waiver programs to accommodate an additional 150 persons each year; the state agreed to create a new Individual and Family Support HCBS waiver; and the state agreed to revise its procedure to ensure potential applicants receive adequate information regarding the services and prompt determination of eligibility of those services.

Summary The elderly plaintiff had received HCBS & PAS under the state waiver but the provider agency repeatedly failed to provide the required amount of care. As a result the plaintiff experienced falls & some aides were injured. The agency withdrew services on the grounds that they could not provide safe care, leaving the plaintiff at risk of institutionalization.
Progress Ongoing

Summary Case claiming that in refusing to pay for medical equipment not covered by Medicare & operating an arbitrary list of approved devices, the State restricted access to equipment for independent living thereby increasing risk of institutionalization.
Progress Settlement. A revised list was formed, including rights for appealing decisions.

Summary Class action case sought to ensure reasonable care in the institutions and also to provide services to allow for transfer out of institutions.
Progress Consent agreement. In 2008, the court found that defendants were not in compliance and issued an injunction against the defendants.

Summary Plaintiffs alleged that more than 200 people with mental illnesses are 'needlessly segregated and inappropriately warehoused' in three Connecticut nursing homes.

To view the complaint:
[http://www.bazelon.org/issues/disabilityrights/incourt/opa-v-ct/complaint-opa-v-ct.pdf]

Summary Plaintiff is an elderly women suffering from dementia eligible for Medicaid who wished to move from a nursing home to an assisted living facility. She contends that Medicaid should pay for the cost of the assisted living facility.
Progress Case dismissed. Court found that although Olmstead required state to provide reasonable accommodation, payment for the assisted living facility would be special accommodation not required by Olmstead