This Paper is on The ABEL Act: Refer to and investigate how Massachusetts is interpreting ABEL Act policy, and Look at any disability-related state legislation, executive orders or judicial decisions about the ABEL Act for disability. Every state has to implement the ABLE Act, and determine how to do that individually, so it may look very differently in different states. When the Federal government creates and codifies a policy through legislation, executive action or judicial decision, those policies are then implemented by the states. As you saw in the Birkland video, in some cases, the only control the federal government has on policy is through funding. This is true of education, since the Constitution does not give the Federal government control over education; states have control over the education they provide their residents. However, the Federal government holds the big purse strings, so they can tie funding to mandates that states follow certain rules in their policies. The IDEA is one example of this. If states want $ from the US Department of Education to help pay for special education, they have to provide special education in compliance with the rules set out in the IDEA. The same thing is true of the impact of the Olmstead decision. When the US Supreme Court determined that segregated, institutionalized care violated individuals rights to access their communities, it was up to the states to determine how to implement the mandated changes. Please reflect on the ABEL Act paper you wrote last week in some way. For example: the CMS final rule is being partly addressed in Massachusetts through passage of the Real Lives Act: https://www.mass.gov/eohhs/consumer/disability-services/services-by-type/intellectual-disability/newsroom/real-lives-staff-training.pdf . This powerpoint provides a good overview of the ways the CMS Final Rule is being implemented in Massachusetts. This is the policy statement of the MA Dept. of Developmental Services: https://www.mass.gov/eohhs/gov/laws-regs/dds/policies/hcbs-policy-2014-1.pdf . You will look at Massachusetts states interpretation of the Final Rule, and any laws or policies they implemented in response to the Federal mandate. Here are a few other Examples Olmstead became the standard for housing of people with disabilities in 1999. Massachusetts, which led the way in closing institutions in the early 1990s (Belchertown State School was the first to close), fell behind when successive state administrations and legislatures failed to pursue alternatives. When Deval Patrick became Governor in 2006, he signed an executive order to close most of the states institutions for people with I/DD. https://www.wbur.org/news/2008/12/13/mass-closing-4-institutions-for-mentally-disabled. Interestingly, here is an opposing view of this policy, by another advocacy organization: https://cofarblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/22/dds-policy-will-disperse-people-and-care/ The paper needs to include: Purpose or intention of the policy and what, if any, federal law it relates to Specific main points (sections, chapters, focus areas) The focus population (all people with disabilities or specific disability group) Examples of the policy in practice (programs of government or non-profits) Effectiveness to date of the policy (your perceptions). Papers should be: 5 full pages, Times New Roman font, double spaced, 1-inch margins Include weblinks or citations for any sources used ( Minimum 8 )
The post investigate how Massachusetts is interpreting ABEL appeared first on My Assignment Online.
