“…(S)ome Katrina survivors with
psychiatric disabilities reported that the Federal
Emergency Management Agency excluded them from its
trailers because of concerns that their psychiatric disabilities
made them dangerous—despite assurances
from mental health professionals that they were not. FEMA
gave rental assistance to individual families but rejected
requests to reimburse church groups that provided housing
to former residents of group homes for people with
psychiatric disabilities. In addition, some American Red
Cross shelters excluded the psychiatrically disabled.” (Emphasis added).
From http://southernstudies.org/gulfwatch/reports/One_Year_After.pdf
Friday, August 24, 2007
Early response key in caring for disabled during disasters
Dipali Pathak713-798-4710
pathak@bcm.tmc.edu
Early response key in caring for disabled during disasters
HOUSTON -- (August 21, 2007) -- Essential lessons learned during the response to Hurricane Katrina included the need for physical medicine and rehabilitation professionals as early responders and the importance of promoting patient advocacy, say experts at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston in a report that appears in the American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.
"Physicians have had the feeling that rehabilitation services aren't needed until two to three weeks after a disaster hits, but we should be one of the first specialties on the scene," says Dr. Faye Chou Tan, associate professor of physical medicine and rehabilitation at BCM and lead author of the study. "We found that more people than previously thought needed rehabilitative care within the first week of arriving at the Astrodome."
The physically disabled are at a further disadvantage during disasters because of the underestimation of disability-specific supplies, medications and medical equipment such as wheelchairs.
The majority of the evacuees from the New Orleans area who were treated for rehabilitative conditions at the Astrodome were middle-aged and suffered most frequently from swollen feet and legs, leg pain and cramps, headaches and neck and back pain.
The study helped physicians identify which conditions were the most common and what supplies could be collected in advance in preparation for future disasters.
Preparing disabled patients to advocate for themselves during a disaster is also crucial, said Dr. Donna Bloodworth, associate professor of physical medicine and rehabilitation at BCM and co-author of the study.
"Patients should be aware of their diagnoses, what medications they are taking and how to contact their doctor," she said.
Those with special health care needs can dial 2-1-1 if they are in an evacuation zone during a disaster and need transportation to a shelter.
Bloodworth said physicians should speak to disabled patients each year about their medications. Patients should ask their doctors about early prescription refills if they are anticipating a disaster, and have a week's worth of supplies when evacuating.
Both study authors were able to apply lessons learned at the Astrodome within weeks when Hurricane Rita was set to hit Houston. They ensured that their patients evacuated with refills and all necessary information and now have a call schedule ready for the future.
Tan and Bloodworth recommend that healthcare providers be ready to hit the ground running during a disaster. "All physicians' skills are invaluable during a disaster," says Bloodworth.
pathak@bcm.tmc.edu
Early response key in caring for disabled during disasters
HOUSTON -- (August 21, 2007) -- Essential lessons learned during the response to Hurricane Katrina included the need for physical medicine and rehabilitation professionals as early responders and the importance of promoting patient advocacy, say experts at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston in a report that appears in the American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.
"Physicians have had the feeling that rehabilitation services aren't needed until two to three weeks after a disaster hits, but we should be one of the first specialties on the scene," says Dr. Faye Chou Tan, associate professor of physical medicine and rehabilitation at BCM and lead author of the study. "We found that more people than previously thought needed rehabilitative care within the first week of arriving at the Astrodome."
The physically disabled are at a further disadvantage during disasters because of the underestimation of disability-specific supplies, medications and medical equipment such as wheelchairs.
The majority of the evacuees from the New Orleans area who were treated for rehabilitative conditions at the Astrodome were middle-aged and suffered most frequently from swollen feet and legs, leg pain and cramps, headaches and neck and back pain.
The study helped physicians identify which conditions were the most common and what supplies could be collected in advance in preparation for future disasters.
Preparing disabled patients to advocate for themselves during a disaster is also crucial, said Dr. Donna Bloodworth, associate professor of physical medicine and rehabilitation at BCM and co-author of the study.
"Patients should be aware of their diagnoses, what medications they are taking and how to contact their doctor," she said.
Those with special health care needs can dial 2-1-1 if they are in an evacuation zone during a disaster and need transportation to a shelter.
Bloodworth said physicians should speak to disabled patients each year about their medications. Patients should ask their doctors about early prescription refills if they are anticipating a disaster, and have a week's worth of supplies when evacuating.
Both study authors were able to apply lessons learned at the Astrodome within weeks when Hurricane Rita was set to hit Houston. They ensured that their patients evacuated with refills and all necessary information and now have a call schedule ready for the future.
Tan and Bloodworth recommend that healthcare providers be ready to hit the ground running during a disaster. "All physicians' skills are invaluable during a disaster," says Bloodworth.
National Council on Disability
National Council on DisabilityPublic Consultation
May 31, 2007 Homeland Security, Emergency Preparedness, Disaster Relief and Recovery
NCD is using a public consultation process to identify local best practices in the areas of homeland security, emergency preparedness, and disaster relief and recovery. The expectation is that the local communities can offer workable solutions and advice to help the Federal Government (and its state and private partners) establish policies, disseminate information, and support best practices for those most immediately affected by natural and man-made disasters. This public consultation is specifically designed to identify proven examples of community efforts that successfully address programs and practices which successfully take into account the needs of people with disabilities in the areas of homeland security, emergency preparation, and disaster relief and recovery.
Why are we using a public consultation process? Running a consultation is not simply about more open-government. We want to make our national policies more effective by listening and taking onboard the views of the public and interested groups. Listening to the public has a number of specific benefits for us; it allows us to tap the widest source of information possible and thus improves the quality of the information it receives, and the advice it provides to Federal Government leaders; it alerts us to any concerns and issues and data not picked up through existing evidence or research; and, it helps to us to monitor existing policy and determine whether changes are potentially needed.
How can you participate in our public consultation process? Below we will briefly outline the background, key issues, relevant research and best-practices themes around the topic of interest - i.e., homeland security, emergency preparedness, and disaster relief and recovery. If you have been affected by a disaster or emergency, and are interested in participating in this public consultation, you may want to respond or react to any of the “best practice themes.” If you do want to react or respond, please follow these basic guidelines:
Be brief - Use one short sentence to explain each point you want to make, this will help us understand your opinion. You can always add more detail afterwards if necessary.
Focus on what is really important to you -Put the theme(s) you care most about first. If you want to make more detailed comments, put them in an appendix to your response or in a separate document.
Provide evidence - Your comments will be more convincing if they're supported by evidence or information. If you're responding by regular mail or email, send in copies of supporting documents rather than information about where to find them.
Send your response as soon as possible - The earlier you send in your views, the longer we have to consider them. This is particularly important if you are providing new information or evidence.
Say who you are - Say whether you're commenting as a private citizen, representing other citizens, or on behalf of an organization.
Let us know if you want your response kept confidential - NCD may publish your views as part of the results of the consultation. If you do not want them to do this, state clearly in your response.
If possible, please react or respond by email. You can insert your comment(s) or reaction(s) directly on this document beginning on page five (5). If you are not able to respond by email, please share your written comments with us in a format that you choose, but please identify the “Best Practice Theme” at the beginning of your response.
Background to NCD’s Homeland Security Public Consultation
NCD’s first evaluation findings were issued in April 2005 in the report, Saving Lives: Including People with Disabilities in Emergency Planning.
In 2003 NCD committed itself to evaluating government’s developing role and work in the areas of homeland security, emergency preparation and disaster relief. This commitment occurred, in large measure, as a result of the man-made homeland security terrorist event of September 11, 2001, and the creation of a new Executive Branch agency - i.e., the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. NCD’s first evaluation findings were issued in April 2005 in the report, Saving Lives: Including People with Disabilities in Emergency Planning.
As the letter of transmittal accompanying the NCD Saving Lives report to the President states: “All too often in emergency situations the legitimate concerns of people with disabilities are overlooked or swept aside. In areas ranging from the accessibility of emergency information to the evacuation plans for high-rise buildings, great urgency surrounds the need for responding to these people’s concerns in all planning, preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation activities.”
Saving Lives was eerily prophetic. At a Congressional Briefing on November 10, 2005, according to Representative Jim Ramstad, Co-Chair of the Congressional Bipartisan Disability Caucus, “Certainly, the disaster in the Gulf Coast region exposed the enormous gaps in the emergency planning preparedness and management for people with disabilities. ...In a truly remarkable show of foresight, the National Council on Disability (NCD) released a report last April outlining steps that the federal government should take to include people with disabilities in emergency preparedness, disaster relief, and homeland security.”
Saving Lives provided examples of emergency preparation and disaster relief efforts that work. It provided an overview of steps the Federal Government must take to include people with disabilities in America’s emergency preparedness, disaster relief, and homeland security programs. These steps involve access to technology, physical plants, programs, and communications, procurement and emergency programs and services.
Subsequent events have also contributed to NCD’s ongoing interest and concern, including: the recent energy blackouts in the U.S. Northeast and Midwest, the Asian tsunami of December 26, 2004, and the recent hurricane disasters of 2005 in the Gulf Coast. Also of note, in April 2004, the California SILC delivered a report to Gov. Schwarzenegger detailing the treatment of people with disabilities during the 2003 firestorms. That report indicated that many of CA’s 19.6% of persons with disabilities were unable to evacuate themselves because of poor notification methods. In March 2005, newspapers in Virginia and Maryland reported on concerns raised by parents and students about public school systems’ use of strategies to evacuate or not evacuate students during fire emergency situations. A March 2005 Fire Chief article describes a survey of 30 cities/counties where natural or man-made disasters occurred between 1999 and 2004.
The survey revealed that emergency managers still don’t have a good handle on where persons with disabilities are, and how do they find ways to rescue.
All of these natural and man-made disasters underscore the need to maintain a critical focus on improving the quality of our nation’s homeland security, emergency preparedness and disaster relief systems and efforts, at all levels, and for all people.
Key Issues
Based on NCD’s own research over the past 3 years in the area of homeland security, as well as Congressional and Executive Branch investigations, a number of key issues are identified as critical and related to people with disabilities. The key issue are as follows.
People with disabilities frequently encounter barriers to physical plants, communications, and programs in shelters and recovery centers and in other facilities or devices used in connection with disaster operations such as first aid stations, mass feeding areas, portable payphone stations, portable toilets, and temporary housing.
Many of these barriers are not new. Information and lessons learned are not shared across agency lines, and thus experience does not enlighten the development of new practices.
Many accessibility lessons learned during previous disasters are not incorporated in subsequent planning, preparedness, response, and recovery activities.
People with disabilities are too often left out of preparedness and planning activities. These activities include analyzing and documenting the possibility of an emergency or disaster and the potential consequences or impacts on life and/or property.
Disaster preparedness and response systems are usually designed for people without disabilities, for whom escape or rescue involves walking, running, driving, seeing, hearing, and quickly responding to instructions and evacuation announcements.
Access to emergency public warnings, as well as preparedness and mitigation information and materials, does not adequately include people who cannot depend on sight and hearing to receive their information.
The strengths and skills of community based organizations (CBOs) serving people with disabilities are not well integrated into the emergency service plans and strategies of local government. Emergency managers need to strengthen their relationships with these organizations by recruiting, encouraging, and providing funding and incentives to CBOs so that they can participate and assist in disaster preparedness and relief.
How Have We Responded, As A Nation, to These Key Issues?
Over the past several years, there has been much work that government at all levels - as well as private sector entities - has undertaken: such as attempting to strengthen the nation’s emergency preparedness system, emergency communications infrastructure (e.g., the emergency alert system and all-hazard warnings), and public safety communications networks, to name just a few examples.
Not surprisingly, over the past three years, federal policymakers have used NCD’s research and input and lessons learned to design promising solutions. In addition, and as a result of Congressional hearings and Executive Branch evaluations of the America’s response to Katrina and Rita, a specific set of legislated federal policy and organizational changes that will affect Americans with disabilities have been made.
For example, a number of critical changes were enumerated in the Homeland Security Appropriations bill (H.R. 5441) signed by President Bush on October 4, 2006.
Some of the more notable changes targeted to Americans with disabilities are that the Administrator of FEMA:
Will appoint a Disability Coordinator who will assess the coordination of emergency management policies and practices;
Will interact with stakeholders regarding emergency planning requirements and relief efforts in case of disaster;
Will revise and update guidelines for government disaster emergency preparedness;
Will carry out and will test or evaluate, a national training program to implement the national preparedness goal, National Incident Management System, and National Response Plan:
Will assess the Nation's prevention capabilities and overall preparedness, including operational readiness;
Will identify and share best practices, after action reports to participants, and conduct long-term trend analysis;
Will coordinate and maintain a National Disaster Housing Strategy;
Will develop accessibility guidelines for communications and programs in, shelters, and recovery centers;
Will set up evacuations standards and requirements, and help all levels of government in the planning of evacuation facilities that house people with disabilities.
A few critical changes were also recently introduced as a result of the Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act of 2006 (PETS Act). The PETS Act requires FEMA to ensure that state and local emergency preparedness operational and evacuation plans take into account the needs of individuals with household pets and service animals before, during, and after a major disaster or emergency.
Best Practice Themes
The following themes can be used as guidance in your reaction and response to this call for best practices information.
1. How people with disabilities were provided with information about the severity of the emergency caused by the disaster or emergency, how to prepare for it, and how to evacuate.
2. Individual assistance (such as personal attendants, sign language interpreters, readers, and service animals) that was made available to people with disabilities during and after the emergency.
3. Assistive devices (such as wheelchairs, walkers, canes, crutches, speech enabled or Braille note takers, pagers, closed captioning, TTYs, hearing aids, and batteries) that people with disabilities were able to keep with them during or after the disaster or emergency; assistive devices people were not able to keep; and, assistive devices that were replaced.
4. Whether accessible temporary housing or shelter was offered to people with disabilities.
5. Whether accessible transportation was provided to people with disabilities when evacuating during the disaster or emergency, receiving food and water, and reaching temporary shelters or housing. Whether people who use assistive devices were able to keep them during such transport.
6. Medical and mental health treatment, such as emergency care, counseling or medication, that were offered to people with disabilities. The types of accessibility problems that arose.
7. Schools that offered accommodations to students with disabilities affected or dislocated as a result of the disaster or emergency.
8. Types of temporary or permanent employment opportunities that were offered to people with disabilities.
9. Government services (such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, subsidized housing, food vouchers, or any other government assistance) that were, and continue to be, made available to people with disabilities.
10. The immediate, short-term, and long-term aid provided by private, civic, faith-based, advocacy organizations or other groups to people with disabilities.
Please send your information to NCD in one of three ways: email (ncd@ncd.gov), U.S. mail (National Council on Disability, ATTN: Homeland Security Committee, 1331 F Street NW, Suite 850, Washington, DC 20004) or fax (202-272-2022) by September 16, 2007. Please indicate whether you would like to make your response anonymous.
NCD believes the results of this public consultation will contribute to America’s understanding of, and commitment to, building a critical infrastructure that incorporates access to emergency programs and services and includes physical, program, communication, and technological access for people with disabilities.
Thank you very much.
May 31, 2007 Homeland Security, Emergency Preparedness, Disaster Relief and Recovery
NCD is using a public consultation process to identify local best practices in the areas of homeland security, emergency preparedness, and disaster relief and recovery. The expectation is that the local communities can offer workable solutions and advice to help the Federal Government (and its state and private partners) establish policies, disseminate information, and support best practices for those most immediately affected by natural and man-made disasters. This public consultation is specifically designed to identify proven examples of community efforts that successfully address programs and practices which successfully take into account the needs of people with disabilities in the areas of homeland security, emergency preparation, and disaster relief and recovery.
Why are we using a public consultation process? Running a consultation is not simply about more open-government. We want to make our national policies more effective by listening and taking onboard the views of the public and interested groups. Listening to the public has a number of specific benefits for us; it allows us to tap the widest source of information possible and thus improves the quality of the information it receives, and the advice it provides to Federal Government leaders; it alerts us to any concerns and issues and data not picked up through existing evidence or research; and, it helps to us to monitor existing policy and determine whether changes are potentially needed.
How can you participate in our public consultation process? Below we will briefly outline the background, key issues, relevant research and best-practices themes around the topic of interest - i.e., homeland security, emergency preparedness, and disaster relief and recovery. If you have been affected by a disaster or emergency, and are interested in participating in this public consultation, you may want to respond or react to any of the “best practice themes.” If you do want to react or respond, please follow these basic guidelines:
Be brief - Use one short sentence to explain each point you want to make, this will help us understand your opinion. You can always add more detail afterwards if necessary.
Focus on what is really important to you -Put the theme(s) you care most about first. If you want to make more detailed comments, put them in an appendix to your response or in a separate document.
Provide evidence - Your comments will be more convincing if they're supported by evidence or information. If you're responding by regular mail or email, send in copies of supporting documents rather than information about where to find them.
Send your response as soon as possible - The earlier you send in your views, the longer we have to consider them. This is particularly important if you are providing new information or evidence.
Say who you are - Say whether you're commenting as a private citizen, representing other citizens, or on behalf of an organization.
Let us know if you want your response kept confidential - NCD may publish your views as part of the results of the consultation. If you do not want them to do this, state clearly in your response.
If possible, please react or respond by email. You can insert your comment(s) or reaction(s) directly on this document beginning on page five (5). If you are not able to respond by email, please share your written comments with us in a format that you choose, but please identify the “Best Practice Theme” at the beginning of your response.
Background to NCD’s Homeland Security Public Consultation
NCD’s first evaluation findings were issued in April 2005 in the report, Saving Lives: Including People with Disabilities in Emergency Planning.
In 2003 NCD committed itself to evaluating government’s developing role and work in the areas of homeland security, emergency preparation and disaster relief. This commitment occurred, in large measure, as a result of the man-made homeland security terrorist event of September 11, 2001, and the creation of a new Executive Branch agency - i.e., the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. NCD’s first evaluation findings were issued in April 2005 in the report, Saving Lives: Including People with Disabilities in Emergency Planning.
As the letter of transmittal accompanying the NCD Saving Lives report to the President states: “All too often in emergency situations the legitimate concerns of people with disabilities are overlooked or swept aside. In areas ranging from the accessibility of emergency information to the evacuation plans for high-rise buildings, great urgency surrounds the need for responding to these people’s concerns in all planning, preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation activities.”
Saving Lives was eerily prophetic. At a Congressional Briefing on November 10, 2005, according to Representative Jim Ramstad, Co-Chair of the Congressional Bipartisan Disability Caucus, “Certainly, the disaster in the Gulf Coast region exposed the enormous gaps in the emergency planning preparedness and management for people with disabilities. ...In a truly remarkable show of foresight, the National Council on Disability (NCD) released a report last April outlining steps that the federal government should take to include people with disabilities in emergency preparedness, disaster relief, and homeland security.”
Saving Lives provided examples of emergency preparation and disaster relief efforts that work. It provided an overview of steps the Federal Government must take to include people with disabilities in America’s emergency preparedness, disaster relief, and homeland security programs. These steps involve access to technology, physical plants, programs, and communications, procurement and emergency programs and services.
Subsequent events have also contributed to NCD’s ongoing interest and concern, including: the recent energy blackouts in the U.S. Northeast and Midwest, the Asian tsunami of December 26, 2004, and the recent hurricane disasters of 2005 in the Gulf Coast. Also of note, in April 2004, the California SILC delivered a report to Gov. Schwarzenegger detailing the treatment of people with disabilities during the 2003 firestorms. That report indicated that many of CA’s 19.6% of persons with disabilities were unable to evacuate themselves because of poor notification methods. In March 2005, newspapers in Virginia and Maryland reported on concerns raised by parents and students about public school systems’ use of strategies to evacuate or not evacuate students during fire emergency situations. A March 2005 Fire Chief article describes a survey of 30 cities/counties where natural or man-made disasters occurred between 1999 and 2004.
The survey revealed that emergency managers still don’t have a good handle on where persons with disabilities are, and how do they find ways to rescue.
All of these natural and man-made disasters underscore the need to maintain a critical focus on improving the quality of our nation’s homeland security, emergency preparedness and disaster relief systems and efforts, at all levels, and for all people.
Key Issues
Based on NCD’s own research over the past 3 years in the area of homeland security, as well as Congressional and Executive Branch investigations, a number of key issues are identified as critical and related to people with disabilities. The key issue are as follows.
People with disabilities frequently encounter barriers to physical plants, communications, and programs in shelters and recovery centers and in other facilities or devices used in connection with disaster operations such as first aid stations, mass feeding areas, portable payphone stations, portable toilets, and temporary housing.
Many of these barriers are not new. Information and lessons learned are not shared across agency lines, and thus experience does not enlighten the development of new practices.
Many accessibility lessons learned during previous disasters are not incorporated in subsequent planning, preparedness, response, and recovery activities.
People with disabilities are too often left out of preparedness and planning activities. These activities include analyzing and documenting the possibility of an emergency or disaster and the potential consequences or impacts on life and/or property.
Disaster preparedness and response systems are usually designed for people without disabilities, for whom escape or rescue involves walking, running, driving, seeing, hearing, and quickly responding to instructions and evacuation announcements.
Access to emergency public warnings, as well as preparedness and mitigation information and materials, does not adequately include people who cannot depend on sight and hearing to receive their information.
The strengths and skills of community based organizations (CBOs) serving people with disabilities are not well integrated into the emergency service plans and strategies of local government. Emergency managers need to strengthen their relationships with these organizations by recruiting, encouraging, and providing funding and incentives to CBOs so that they can participate and assist in disaster preparedness and relief.
How Have We Responded, As A Nation, to These Key Issues?
Over the past several years, there has been much work that government at all levels - as well as private sector entities - has undertaken: such as attempting to strengthen the nation’s emergency preparedness system, emergency communications infrastructure (e.g., the emergency alert system and all-hazard warnings), and public safety communications networks, to name just a few examples.
Not surprisingly, over the past three years, federal policymakers have used NCD’s research and input and lessons learned to design promising solutions. In addition, and as a result of Congressional hearings and Executive Branch evaluations of the America’s response to Katrina and Rita, a specific set of legislated federal policy and organizational changes that will affect Americans with disabilities have been made.
For example, a number of critical changes were enumerated in the Homeland Security Appropriations bill (H.R. 5441) signed by President Bush on October 4, 2006.
Some of the more notable changes targeted to Americans with disabilities are that the Administrator of FEMA:
Will appoint a Disability Coordinator who will assess the coordination of emergency management policies and practices;
Will interact with stakeholders regarding emergency planning requirements and relief efforts in case of disaster;
Will revise and update guidelines for government disaster emergency preparedness;
Will carry out and will test or evaluate, a national training program to implement the national preparedness goal, National Incident Management System, and National Response Plan:
Will assess the Nation's prevention capabilities and overall preparedness, including operational readiness;
Will identify and share best practices, after action reports to participants, and conduct long-term trend analysis;
Will coordinate and maintain a National Disaster Housing Strategy;
Will develop accessibility guidelines for communications and programs in, shelters, and recovery centers;
Will set up evacuations standards and requirements, and help all levels of government in the planning of evacuation facilities that house people with disabilities.
A few critical changes were also recently introduced as a result of the Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act of 2006 (PETS Act). The PETS Act requires FEMA to ensure that state and local emergency preparedness operational and evacuation plans take into account the needs of individuals with household pets and service animals before, during, and after a major disaster or emergency.
Best Practice Themes
The following themes can be used as guidance in your reaction and response to this call for best practices information.
1. How people with disabilities were provided with information about the severity of the emergency caused by the disaster or emergency, how to prepare for it, and how to evacuate.
2. Individual assistance (such as personal attendants, sign language interpreters, readers, and service animals) that was made available to people with disabilities during and after the emergency.
3. Assistive devices (such as wheelchairs, walkers, canes, crutches, speech enabled or Braille note takers, pagers, closed captioning, TTYs, hearing aids, and batteries) that people with disabilities were able to keep with them during or after the disaster or emergency; assistive devices people were not able to keep; and, assistive devices that were replaced.
4. Whether accessible temporary housing or shelter was offered to people with disabilities.
5. Whether accessible transportation was provided to people with disabilities when evacuating during the disaster or emergency, receiving food and water, and reaching temporary shelters or housing. Whether people who use assistive devices were able to keep them during such transport.
6. Medical and mental health treatment, such as emergency care, counseling or medication, that were offered to people with disabilities. The types of accessibility problems that arose.
7. Schools that offered accommodations to students with disabilities affected or dislocated as a result of the disaster or emergency.
8. Types of temporary or permanent employment opportunities that were offered to people with disabilities.
9. Government services (such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, subsidized housing, food vouchers, or any other government assistance) that were, and continue to be, made available to people with disabilities.
10. The immediate, short-term, and long-term aid provided by private, civic, faith-based, advocacy organizations or other groups to people with disabilities.
Please send your information to NCD in one of three ways: email (ncd@ncd.gov), U.S. mail (National Council on Disability, ATTN: Homeland Security Committee, 1331 F Street NW, Suite 850, Washington, DC 20004) or fax (202-272-2022) by September 16, 2007. Please indicate whether you would like to make your response anonymous.
NCD believes the results of this public consultation will contribute to America’s understanding of, and commitment to, building a critical infrastructure that incorporates access to emergency programs and services and includes physical, program, communication, and technological access for people with disabilities.
Thank you very much.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Report - A New Agenda for the Gulf -
"Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch has released A New Agenda for the Gulf (pdf), a 14-page report documenting the scope of the crisis in the Gulf. The report also reveals that -- while state and local leadership is important -- many of the most impressing issues go straight to Washington, and that federal action is needed to jump-start the recovery.The report gives over 30 action steps Congress and the President can take now to help turn things around...."
Saturday, August 18, 2007
DOJ Issues New Guidance Regarding Disasters and People With Disabilities
On July 26th, 2007, the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice issued new technical assistance concerning the responsibilities of Offices of Emergency Management and of the Red Cross.
The technical assistance is located at:
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmt.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmtadd1.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterchk.htm
The technical assistance is located at:
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmt.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmtadd1.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterchk.htm
Why I Won't Donate to the Red Cross - Because I Care About People with Disabilities, and Respect Their Civil Rights
By Marc Dubin, Esq.
Former Chair, Disability Advisory Council, American Red Cross, Miami-Dade/Keys Chapter
I used to advocate that one should support the Red Cross. I used to believe in the Red Cross. I used to Chair the Disability Advisory Council of the Miami-Dade/Keys Chapter of the Red Cross. Those days are over.
I told the Red Cross that as a former Senior Trial Attorney for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, I believed that they needed to change their policies to come into compliance with the mandates of the ADA. I’m still waiting.
I asked the Red Cross to provide support services in their shelters, provide accessible beds to people with spinal cord injuries, and assist with transfers and other activities of daily living. After all, the Justice Department says:
“Shelter operators should provide support services in mass care shelters to accommodate people with disabilities who are not medically fragile but need some assistance with daily living activities unless doing so would impose an undue financial and administrative burden. Such assistance can be provided by medical personnel or trained volunteers….Modify sleeping arrangements to meet disability-related needs….To maximize efficiency, shelter operators typically provide one standard type of cot or mat for use by shelter residents. However, some people have disability-related needs for cots to be modified or may need to sleep on cots or beds instead of on mats placed on the floor.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
They said no. They said they don’t interpret the ADA the same way as the Justice Department and I do. I prosecuted violations of the ADA for over 12 years for the Justice Department, from 1992-2005. The Justice Department, on the 17th Anniversary of the passage of the ADA, issued technical assistance materials that tracked my analysis perfectly, and yet, the Red Cross continues to disagree. Look at the Justice Department Guidance and see what you think. Look at these links:
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmt.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmtadd1.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterchk.htm
On emails from the Red Cross, I observe the following tag line: “The Red Cross is not a government agency; it relies on donations of time, money, and blood to do its work.” I wonder why they fail to understand that when they provide sheltering services on behalf of a County, they are obligated to seek funding and support from the County, and need not rely on donations. I find myself wondering why the Red Cross asks for donations, and diverts donations, when the legal obligation to provide shelter in a non-discriminatory manner remains the obligation of the County as well as the obligation of the Red Cross. I want the taxes I pay to pay for the sheltering services, not my donations to the Red Cross. Let them use the donations to serve others – why is the County not paying, and why is the Red Cross not demanding that they do so?
I’m still waiting.
I want the County and the Red Cross to commit to paying for sign language interpreters when necessary to ensure effective communication, as mandated by the ADA. The Justice Department technical assistance says:
“In emergency shelters, most information is conveyed through oral announcements. Shelter operators must ensure that people who are deaf or hard of hearing have access to this information in a timely and accurate manner. In some circumstances, qualified sign language or oral interpreters may be required by the ADA.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
I’m still waiting.
I want the County and the Red Cross to commit to providing people with autism a quiet place in the shelter. The Justice Department’s technical assistance says:
“Consider low-stimulation “stress-relief zones.” The stress from the noise and crowded conditions of a shelter – combined with the stress of the underlying emergency – may aggravate some disability-related conditions, such as autism, anxiety disorders, or migraine headaches. Without periodic access to a “quiet room” or quiet space within a larger room, some people with disabilities will be unable to function in a shelter environment. In locations where a school gym serves as the emergency shelter, a nearby classroom can provide the necessary relief from noise and interaction that some shelter residents and volunteers with disabilities will need. Other shelter residents and volunteers may want a break from the noise and crowds. But quiet spaces are limited, they should be made available on a priority basis to people whose disabilities are aggravated by stress or noise.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
I’m still waiting.
I want the County and the Red Cross to commit to providing people with power wheelchairs with a way to recharge their batteries, at a reasonable number of shelters, and to tell the disability community where these shelters are located. The Justice Department’s technical assistance says:
“Many people with disabilities depend on battery-powered wheelchairs and scooters for mobility. The batteries in these mobility aids must frequently be recharged, or they will stop functioning. Without these mobility aids, many people with disabilities will lose their ability to move about, they may be unable to participate in some services offered by the shelter, and they may need to depend more heavily on assistance from others. When possible, provide these individuals the opportunity to charge the batteries that power the equipment they use for mobility and independence.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
I’m still waiting.
I want the County and the Red Cross to commit to providing a way for people with disabilities who need to refrigerate their medications with a way to do so, by either providing refrigeration or ice chests. The Justice Department technical assistance says:
“Whenever possible, provide refrigeration for certain types of medication. Many people with disabilities need medication that must be refrigerated. Shelters need to have a safe and secure refrigerated location where medications can be stored and accessed when needed.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
I’m still waiting.
I want the County and the Red Cross to identify the most accessible shelters, and tell the disability community where they are located. If it is asserted that all of the Red Cross shelters are accessible, I want to know how they reached that determination. The Justice Department technical assistance says:
“Until all emergency shelters have accessible parking, exterior routes, entrances, interior routes to the shelter area, sleeping and recreational areas, dining facilities, and toilet/bathing rooms, identify and widely publicize to the public, including persons with disabilities and organizations with expertise on disability issues, the locations of the most accessible emergency shelters and the accessible features they provide.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmt.htm
I’m still waiting.
I want to know where all of the Special Needs shelters are located, and want that information disseminated to the disability community. I feel that the current policy of only informing those who register for a Special Needs shelter does not serve the interests of the disability community, as it deprives those who do not register of vital information. I want that policy changed.
I’m still waiting.
And, I want the Red Cross to commit to not discriminating on the basis of disability. Their statement of principle states that the Red Cross “makes no discrimination as to nationality, race, religious beliefs, class or political opinions”. Why not commit to not discriminating on the basis of disability as well?
Congress has given the Red Cross a special responsibility, and Americans, including Americans with disabilities, have given them millions of dollars. The Red Cross knows of the Justice Department’s guidance – when will it comply? When will it take action to reform itself? When will it force the County to do so, or refuse to collaborate? When will communities and community leaders demand that counties, and the Red Cross chapters that provide sheltering on their behalf, honor the civil rights of people with disabilities?
Is the disability community expected to patiently wait, yet again, as everyone else is served, but they are not? The disability community and its allies remember all too well what happened to people with disabilities in New Orleans. It is time to change, and time to comply with the law. Overlooking the needs of one group so that others can be served is not good policy.
Until the changes are forthcoming, I’m withholding my donation.
And I want my blood back.
Marc
Marc Dubin, Esq.
Director of Advocacy
Center for Independent Living of Broward
Director of Advocacy
Center for Independent Living of South Florida
Co-Chair, Florida Bar Disability Law Committee
Former Chair, Disability Advisory Council, American Red Cross, Miami-Dade/Keys Chapter
Former Senior Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability Rights Section 1992-2005
(In that capacity, I was responsible for nationwide enforcement of the ADA on behalf of the United States).
By Marc Dubin, Esq.
Former Chair, Disability Advisory Council, American Red Cross, Miami-Dade/Keys Chapter
I used to advocate that one should support the Red Cross. I used to believe in the Red Cross. I used to Chair the Disability Advisory Council of the Miami-Dade/Keys Chapter of the Red Cross. Those days are over.
I told the Red Cross that as a former Senior Trial Attorney for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, I believed that they needed to change their policies to come into compliance with the mandates of the ADA. I’m still waiting.
I asked the Red Cross to provide support services in their shelters, provide accessible beds to people with spinal cord injuries, and assist with transfers and other activities of daily living. After all, the Justice Department says:
“Shelter operators should provide support services in mass care shelters to accommodate people with disabilities who are not medically fragile but need some assistance with daily living activities unless doing so would impose an undue financial and administrative burden. Such assistance can be provided by medical personnel or trained volunteers….Modify sleeping arrangements to meet disability-related needs….To maximize efficiency, shelter operators typically provide one standard type of cot or mat for use by shelter residents. However, some people have disability-related needs for cots to be modified or may need to sleep on cots or beds instead of on mats placed on the floor.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
They said no. They said they don’t interpret the ADA the same way as the Justice Department and I do. I prosecuted violations of the ADA for over 12 years for the Justice Department, from 1992-2005. The Justice Department, on the 17th Anniversary of the passage of the ADA, issued technical assistance materials that tracked my analysis perfectly, and yet, the Red Cross continues to disagree. Look at the Justice Department Guidance and see what you think. Look at these links:
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmt.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmtadd1.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterchk.htm
On emails from the Red Cross, I observe the following tag line: “The Red Cross is not a government agency; it relies on donations of time, money, and blood to do its work.” I wonder why they fail to understand that when they provide sheltering services on behalf of a County, they are obligated to seek funding and support from the County, and need not rely on donations. I find myself wondering why the Red Cross asks for donations, and diverts donations, when the legal obligation to provide shelter in a non-discriminatory manner remains the obligation of the County as well as the obligation of the Red Cross. I want the taxes I pay to pay for the sheltering services, not my donations to the Red Cross. Let them use the donations to serve others – why is the County not paying, and why is the Red Cross not demanding that they do so?
I’m still waiting.
I want the County and the Red Cross to commit to paying for sign language interpreters when necessary to ensure effective communication, as mandated by the ADA. The Justice Department technical assistance says:
“In emergency shelters, most information is conveyed through oral announcements. Shelter operators must ensure that people who are deaf or hard of hearing have access to this information in a timely and accurate manner. In some circumstances, qualified sign language or oral interpreters may be required by the ADA.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
I’m still waiting.
I want the County and the Red Cross to commit to providing people with autism a quiet place in the shelter. The Justice Department’s technical assistance says:
“Consider low-stimulation “stress-relief zones.” The stress from the noise and crowded conditions of a shelter – combined with the stress of the underlying emergency – may aggravate some disability-related conditions, such as autism, anxiety disorders, or migraine headaches. Without periodic access to a “quiet room” or quiet space within a larger room, some people with disabilities will be unable to function in a shelter environment. In locations where a school gym serves as the emergency shelter, a nearby classroom can provide the necessary relief from noise and interaction that some shelter residents and volunteers with disabilities will need. Other shelter residents and volunteers may want a break from the noise and crowds. But quiet spaces are limited, they should be made available on a priority basis to people whose disabilities are aggravated by stress or noise.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
I’m still waiting.
I want the County and the Red Cross to commit to providing people with power wheelchairs with a way to recharge their batteries, at a reasonable number of shelters, and to tell the disability community where these shelters are located. The Justice Department’s technical assistance says:
“Many people with disabilities depend on battery-powered wheelchairs and scooters for mobility. The batteries in these mobility aids must frequently be recharged, or they will stop functioning. Without these mobility aids, many people with disabilities will lose their ability to move about, they may be unable to participate in some services offered by the shelter, and they may need to depend more heavily on assistance from others. When possible, provide these individuals the opportunity to charge the batteries that power the equipment they use for mobility and independence.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
I’m still waiting.
I want the County and the Red Cross to commit to providing a way for people with disabilities who need to refrigerate their medications with a way to do so, by either providing refrigeration or ice chests. The Justice Department technical assistance says:
“Whenever possible, provide refrigeration for certain types of medication. Many people with disabilities need medication that must be refrigerated. Shelters need to have a safe and secure refrigerated location where medications can be stored and accessed when needed.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
I’m still waiting.
I want the County and the Red Cross to identify the most accessible shelters, and tell the disability community where they are located. If it is asserted that all of the Red Cross shelters are accessible, I want to know how they reached that determination. The Justice Department technical assistance says:
“Until all emergency shelters have accessible parking, exterior routes, entrances, interior routes to the shelter area, sleeping and recreational areas, dining facilities, and toilet/bathing rooms, identify and widely publicize to the public, including persons with disabilities and organizations with expertise on disability issues, the locations of the most accessible emergency shelters and the accessible features they provide.” http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmt.htm
I’m still waiting.
I want to know where all of the Special Needs shelters are located, and want that information disseminated to the disability community. I feel that the current policy of only informing those who register for a Special Needs shelter does not serve the interests of the disability community, as it deprives those who do not register of vital information. I want that policy changed.
I’m still waiting.
And, I want the Red Cross to commit to not discriminating on the basis of disability. Their statement of principle states that the Red Cross “makes no discrimination as to nationality, race, religious beliefs, class or political opinions”. Why not commit to not discriminating on the basis of disability as well?
Congress has given the Red Cross a special responsibility, and Americans, including Americans with disabilities, have given them millions of dollars. The Red Cross knows of the Justice Department’s guidance – when will it comply? When will it take action to reform itself? When will it force the County to do so, or refuse to collaborate? When will communities and community leaders demand that counties, and the Red Cross chapters that provide sheltering on their behalf, honor the civil rights of people with disabilities?
Is the disability community expected to patiently wait, yet again, as everyone else is served, but they are not? The disability community and its allies remember all too well what happened to people with disabilities in New Orleans. It is time to change, and time to comply with the law. Overlooking the needs of one group so that others can be served is not good policy.
Until the changes are forthcoming, I’m withholding my donation.
And I want my blood back.
Marc
Marc Dubin, Esq.
Director of Advocacy
Center for Independent Living of Broward
Director of Advocacy
Center for Independent Living of South Florida
Co-Chair, Florida Bar Disability Law Committee
Former Chair, Disability Advisory Council, American Red Cross, Miami-Dade/Keys Chapter
Former Senior Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability Rights Section 1992-2005
(In that capacity, I was responsible for nationwide enforcement of the ADA on behalf of the United States).
Friday, August 03, 2007
Opportunity To Enhance Services at Shelters
Are you a person with a disability or have a family member with a diability?
Do you live in Miami-Dade County or Broward County, Florida?
We are interested in hearing from you.
What are your concerns?
Accessibility?
Availability of beds?
Transfer assistance?
Services for people with vision disabilities?
Services for people with hearing impairments?
Services for people with autism?
Special Needs Shelters?
Transportation to shelter?
Other services?
Please email us at mdubin@pobox.com.
Do you live in Miami-Dade County or Broward County, Florida?
We are interested in hearing from you.
What are your concerns?
Accessibility?
Availability of beds?
Transfer assistance?
Services for people with vision disabilities?
Services for people with hearing impairments?
Services for people with autism?
Special Needs Shelters?
Transportation to shelter?
Other services?
Please email us at mdubin@pobox.com.
Thursday, August 02, 2007
When the Red Cross Provides Sheltering Services For the County, the County Must Provide Guidance and Support
On emails from the Red Cross, I observe the following tag line: “The Red Cross is not a government agency; it relies on donations of time, money, and blood to do its work.”
Not quite. Actually, when the Red Cross offers sheltering services on behalf of a title II entity like the Office of Emergency Management, it relies on the County to ensure that it offers its services in a nondiscriminatory manner, and acts in the role of a governmental agency.
In essence, it is an agent of the County, and need not rely on donations and volunteers to pay for the beds or obtain the assistance with transfers. It is not necessary to fundraise for the Red Cross in order to obtain the beds and assistance with transfer. Rather, since the sheltering services the Red Cross offers in disasters is an extension of the title II obligations of the County to provide these services, the Red Cross can (must) insist that it is given the funding and resources necessary to provide these services in a nondiscriminatory manner - from the County.
This funding, and the necessary staffing and resources, must be provided by the County, unless the County can show that doing so is an undue financial or administrative burden, based on the County’s Emergency Operations budget, not on the budget of the Red Cross. If the Red Cross fails in its obligations to people with disabilities, not only is there legal liability for the Red Cross, but also for the County. It relies on commitments from the County to all of the County’s citizens, to provide the sheltering services in a nondiscriminatory manner.
Marc Dubin, Esq.
Chair
Disability Advisory Council of the Red Cross, Miami-Dade/Keys Chapter
Not quite. Actually, when the Red Cross offers sheltering services on behalf of a title II entity like the Office of Emergency Management, it relies on the County to ensure that it offers its services in a nondiscriminatory manner, and acts in the role of a governmental agency.
In essence, it is an agent of the County, and need not rely on donations and volunteers to pay for the beds or obtain the assistance with transfers. It is not necessary to fundraise for the Red Cross in order to obtain the beds and assistance with transfer. Rather, since the sheltering services the Red Cross offers in disasters is an extension of the title II obligations of the County to provide these services, the Red Cross can (must) insist that it is given the funding and resources necessary to provide these services in a nondiscriminatory manner - from the County.
This funding, and the necessary staffing and resources, must be provided by the County, unless the County can show that doing so is an undue financial or administrative burden, based on the County’s Emergency Operations budget, not on the budget of the Red Cross. If the Red Cross fails in its obligations to people with disabilities, not only is there legal liability for the Red Cross, but also for the County. It relies on commitments from the County to all of the County’s citizens, to provide the sheltering services in a nondiscriminatory manner.
Marc Dubin, Esq.
Chair
Disability Advisory Council of the Red Cross, Miami-Dade/Keys Chapter
Monday, July 30, 2007
DOJ Issues New Guidance To Red Cross and to Emergency Managers
On July 26th, 2007, in response to concerns expressed across the country, the Department of Justice issued new guidance for the Red Cross and Offices of Emergency Operations concerning services to people with disabilities.
Please visit:
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmt.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmtadd1.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterchk.htm
DOJ: “An emergency management plan is the all-important first step in ensuring an effective response to emergencies and disasters. Public officials, specialists from organizations such as the American Red Cross, and community members should work together to develop a comprehensive plan to prepare for emergencies. One good way to test your emergency management plan is to enlist people with disabilities to role-play during emergency simulations. Seeking and using input from people with a variety of disabilities, and organizations with expertise on disability issues, will help ensure that your emergency planning and preparedness meet the access needs of people with disabilities in your community with respect to all phases of emergency management….”
DOJ:” One of the primary responsibilities of state and local governments is to protect residents and visitors from harm, including assistance in preparing for, responding to, and recovering from emergencies and disasters. State and local governments must comply with Title II of the ADA in the emergency- and disaster-related programs, services, and activities they provide. This requirement applies to programs, services, and activities provided directly by state and local governments as well as those provided through third parties, such as the American Red Cross, private nonprofit organizations, and religious entities...”
The positions they set forth are consistent with the positions I have been advocating. Perhaps it’s time to listen.
· DOJ: “House people with disabilities in mass care shelters. ...The ADA requires people with disabilities to be accommodated in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs, and the disability-related needs of people who are not medically fragile can typically be met in a mass care shelter…(They should )not be diverted to special needs or medical shelters.”
· It is unlawful to require a person with a disability to be accompanied by a family member or personal care attendant. The Red Cross and the Special Needs Shelters must provide assistance with activities of daily living, such as eating, dressing, routine health care, and personal hygiene needs. This includes assistance with transfers to toilets and beds.
· DOJ: “House people with disabilities in mass care shelters even if they are not accompanied by their personal care aides…Some people with disabilities use personal care assistance for activities of daily living, such as eating, dressing, routine health care, and personal hygiene needs.”
· DOJ: “One question that frequently arises is whether people with disabilities who use attendant care can be appropriately housed in mass care shelters. In most instances, they can.”
· DOJ: “…(S)ome shelter operators maintained policies that prevented people with disabilities who regularly use attendant care from entering mass care shelters unless they were accompanied by their own personal care attendants… Shelter operators should provide support services in mass care shelters to accommodate people with disabilities who are not medically fragile but need some assistance with daily living activities unless doing so would impose an undue financial and administrative burden.”
· DOJ: “Such assistance can be provided by medical personnel or trained volunteers.”
· DOJ: “Local governments and shelter operators may not make eligibility for mass care shelters dependent on a person’s ability to bring his or her own personal care attendant.”
· DOJ: “Adopt eligibility policies and procedures that ensure that people with disabilities are housed in “mass care” shelters unless they are medically fragile. The procedures should ensure that shelter staff and volunteers accept people with disabilities who need some assistance with activities of daily living even though their personal care aides may not be with them.”
· Accessible beds must be provided. Requiring people with disabilities to sleep on the floor is unlawful. DOJ: “Modify sleeping arrangements to meet disability-related needs….To maximize efficiency, shelter operators typically provide one standard type of cot or mat for use by shelter residents. However, some people have disability-related needs for cots to be modified or may need to sleep on cots or beds instead of on mats placed on the floor.
For example, a person with muscular dystrophy may require a cot with a very firm mattress to provide the physical support needed to facilitate breathing. Similarly, many people with mobility disabilities will be unable to use a sleeping mat placed on the floor.
For example, many people using wheelchairs or scooters will be unable to safely transfer on and off a cot or bed unless it is firmly anchored so it does not move and has a firm sleeping surface that is 17 - 19 inches above the floor. Shelter operators need to establish procedures that people with disabilities can use to request reasonable modifications to sleeping arrangements.”
· DOJ: “Establish policies and procedures and make advance resource arrangements so that people with disabilities can request cots and beds, modifications to cots and beds, securement of cots and beds, and specific placement of cots, beds, or sleeping mats when needed. In shelters where people will generally be expected to use sleeping mats placed on the floor, ensure that some cots and beds are available for people with disabilities…”
· For people who are deaf or hard of hearing, a reasonable number of TTYs must be provided at a reasonable number of shelters. DOJ: “Provide a TTY for the use of people who are deaf or hard of hearing.”
· The need to have medications refrigerated is not a basis for requiring a person with a disability to be in a Special Needs Shelter rather than a Red Cross Shelter. DOJ: “Whenever possible, provide refrigeration for certain types of medication. Many people with disabilities need medication that must be refrigerated. Shelters need to have a safe and secure refrigerated location where medications can be stored and accessed when needed.”
“Ensure that a reasonable number of shelters have back-up generators and a way to keep medications refrigerated (such as a refrigerator or a cooler with ice). Make these shelters available on a priority basis to people whose disabilities require access to electricity and refrigeration. Until all shelters have back-up generators and refrigeration capacity, routinely notify the public about the location of the shelters that have these features.”
· It is essential that people with disabilities and their advocates be an integral part of the planning and testing process.
DOJ: “Emergency managers and shelter operators must also ensure that eligibility criteria for mass care shelters do not unnecessarily screen out people with disabilities who are not medically fragile based on erroneous assumptions about the care and accommodations they require.”
“When you stage simulations or otherwise test the effectiveness of your emergency planning and preparedness, include people with a variety of disabilities in your testing. For example, enlist people with disabilities to role-play during simulation exercises and provide feedback.”
· Red Cross Shelters should train staff how to address the needs of people with disabilities, including people with autism. DOJ: “Consider low-stimulation “stress-relief zones.”…In locations where a school gym serves as the emergency shelter, a nearby classroom can provide the necessary relief from noise and interaction....”
· Red Cross staff, Special Needs Shelter staff, law enforcement, and hospital staff need to be trained about service animals.
DOJ: “How can a service animal be identified? Service animals come in all breeds and sizes. Many are easily identified because they wear special harnesses, capes, vests, scarves, or patches. Others can be identified by the functions they perform for people whose disabilities can be readily observed. When none of these identifiers are present, shelter staff may ask only two questions to determine if an animal is a service animal: (1) “Do you need this animal because of a disability?” and (2) “What tasks or work has the animal been trained to perform?”
If the answers to these questions reveal that the animal has been trained to work or perform tasks for a person with a disability, it qualifies as a service animal and must generally be allowed to accompany its owner anywhere other members of the public are allowed to go, including areas where food is served and most areas where medical care is provided.
Questions about the nature or severity of a person’s disability or ability to function may not be asked. It is also inappropriate to question a person’s need for a service animal or to exclude a service animal on the grounds that shelter staff or volunteers can provide the assistance normally provided by the service animal.”
· When the immediate crisis is over, it is important to allow people with disabilities more time in shelter, to find accessible housing.
DOJ: “Provide people with disabilities a reasonable amount of time and assistance to locate appropriate housing...Shelters provide temporary refuge during and after an emergency until people can return home or arrange an alternative place to live. In some instances, shelter operators have required individuals with disabilities to move to hospitals, nursing homes, or other institutions when these individuals could not locate accessible housing or the supportive services they needed to live in their own home as quickly as other individuals.
...Some people with disabilities who once lived independently in their own homes found themselves institutionalized soon after a disaster occurred...
Emergency managers and shelter operators may need to modify policies to give some people with disabilities the time and assistance they need to locate new homes.”
Please visit:
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmt.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7emergencymgmtadd1.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterprog.htm
http://www.ada.gov/pcatoolkit/chap7shelterchk.htm
DOJ: “An emergency management plan is the all-important first step in ensuring an effective response to emergencies and disasters. Public officials, specialists from organizations such as the American Red Cross, and community members should work together to develop a comprehensive plan to prepare for emergencies. One good way to test your emergency management plan is to enlist people with disabilities to role-play during emergency simulations. Seeking and using input from people with a variety of disabilities, and organizations with expertise on disability issues, will help ensure that your emergency planning and preparedness meet the access needs of people with disabilities in your community with respect to all phases of emergency management….”
DOJ:” One of the primary responsibilities of state and local governments is to protect residents and visitors from harm, including assistance in preparing for, responding to, and recovering from emergencies and disasters. State and local governments must comply with Title II of the ADA in the emergency- and disaster-related programs, services, and activities they provide. This requirement applies to programs, services, and activities provided directly by state and local governments as well as those provided through third parties, such as the American Red Cross, private nonprofit organizations, and religious entities...”
The positions they set forth are consistent with the positions I have been advocating. Perhaps it’s time to listen.
· DOJ: “House people with disabilities in mass care shelters. ...The ADA requires people with disabilities to be accommodated in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs, and the disability-related needs of people who are not medically fragile can typically be met in a mass care shelter…(They should )not be diverted to special needs or medical shelters.”
· It is unlawful to require a person with a disability to be accompanied by a family member or personal care attendant. The Red Cross and the Special Needs Shelters must provide assistance with activities of daily living, such as eating, dressing, routine health care, and personal hygiene needs. This includes assistance with transfers to toilets and beds.
· DOJ: “House people with disabilities in mass care shelters even if they are not accompanied by their personal care aides…Some people with disabilities use personal care assistance for activities of daily living, such as eating, dressing, routine health care, and personal hygiene needs.”
· DOJ: “One question that frequently arises is whether people with disabilities who use attendant care can be appropriately housed in mass care shelters. In most instances, they can.”
· DOJ: “…(S)ome shelter operators maintained policies that prevented people with disabilities who regularly use attendant care from entering mass care shelters unless they were accompanied by their own personal care attendants… Shelter operators should provide support services in mass care shelters to accommodate people with disabilities who are not medically fragile but need some assistance with daily living activities unless doing so would impose an undue financial and administrative burden.”
· DOJ: “Such assistance can be provided by medical personnel or trained volunteers.”
· DOJ: “Local governments and shelter operators may not make eligibility for mass care shelters dependent on a person’s ability to bring his or her own personal care attendant.”
· DOJ: “Adopt eligibility policies and procedures that ensure that people with disabilities are housed in “mass care” shelters unless they are medically fragile. The procedures should ensure that shelter staff and volunteers accept people with disabilities who need some assistance with activities of daily living even though their personal care aides may not be with them.”
· Accessible beds must be provided. Requiring people with disabilities to sleep on the floor is unlawful. DOJ: “Modify sleeping arrangements to meet disability-related needs….To maximize efficiency, shelter operators typically provide one standard type of cot or mat for use by shelter residents. However, some people have disability-related needs for cots to be modified or may need to sleep on cots or beds instead of on mats placed on the floor.
For example, a person with muscular dystrophy may require a cot with a very firm mattress to provide the physical support needed to facilitate breathing. Similarly, many people with mobility disabilities will be unable to use a sleeping mat placed on the floor.
For example, many people using wheelchairs or scooters will be unable to safely transfer on and off a cot or bed unless it is firmly anchored so it does not move and has a firm sleeping surface that is 17 - 19 inches above the floor. Shelter operators need to establish procedures that people with disabilities can use to request reasonable modifications to sleeping arrangements.”
· DOJ: “Establish policies and procedures and make advance resource arrangements so that people with disabilities can request cots and beds, modifications to cots and beds, securement of cots and beds, and specific placement of cots, beds, or sleeping mats when needed. In shelters where people will generally be expected to use sleeping mats placed on the floor, ensure that some cots and beds are available for people with disabilities…”
· For people who are deaf or hard of hearing, a reasonable number of TTYs must be provided at a reasonable number of shelters. DOJ: “Provide a TTY for the use of people who are deaf or hard of hearing.”
· The need to have medications refrigerated is not a basis for requiring a person with a disability to be in a Special Needs Shelter rather than a Red Cross Shelter. DOJ: “Whenever possible, provide refrigeration for certain types of medication. Many people with disabilities need medication that must be refrigerated. Shelters need to have a safe and secure refrigerated location where medications can be stored and accessed when needed.”
“Ensure that a reasonable number of shelters have back-up generators and a way to keep medications refrigerated (such as a refrigerator or a cooler with ice). Make these shelters available on a priority basis to people whose disabilities require access to electricity and refrigeration. Until all shelters have back-up generators and refrigeration capacity, routinely notify the public about the location of the shelters that have these features.”
· It is essential that people with disabilities and their advocates be an integral part of the planning and testing process.
DOJ: “Emergency managers and shelter operators must also ensure that eligibility criteria for mass care shelters do not unnecessarily screen out people with disabilities who are not medically fragile based on erroneous assumptions about the care and accommodations they require.”
“When you stage simulations or otherwise test the effectiveness of your emergency planning and preparedness, include people with a variety of disabilities in your testing. For example, enlist people with disabilities to role-play during simulation exercises and provide feedback.”
· Red Cross Shelters should train staff how to address the needs of people with disabilities, including people with autism. DOJ: “Consider low-stimulation “stress-relief zones.”…In locations where a school gym serves as the emergency shelter, a nearby classroom can provide the necessary relief from noise and interaction....”
· Red Cross staff, Special Needs Shelter staff, law enforcement, and hospital staff need to be trained about service animals.
DOJ: “How can a service animal be identified? Service animals come in all breeds and sizes. Many are easily identified because they wear special harnesses, capes, vests, scarves, or patches. Others can be identified by the functions they perform for people whose disabilities can be readily observed. When none of these identifiers are present, shelter staff may ask only two questions to determine if an animal is a service animal: (1) “Do you need this animal because of a disability?” and (2) “What tasks or work has the animal been trained to perform?”
If the answers to these questions reveal that the animal has been trained to work or perform tasks for a person with a disability, it qualifies as a service animal and must generally be allowed to accompany its owner anywhere other members of the public are allowed to go, including areas where food is served and most areas where medical care is provided.
Questions about the nature or severity of a person’s disability or ability to function may not be asked. It is also inappropriate to question a person’s need for a service animal or to exclude a service animal on the grounds that shelter staff or volunteers can provide the assistance normally provided by the service animal.”
· When the immediate crisis is over, it is important to allow people with disabilities more time in shelter, to find accessible housing.
DOJ: “Provide people with disabilities a reasonable amount of time and assistance to locate appropriate housing...Shelters provide temporary refuge during and after an emergency until people can return home or arrange an alternative place to live. In some instances, shelter operators have required individuals with disabilities to move to hospitals, nursing homes, or other institutions when these individuals could not locate accessible housing or the supportive services they needed to live in their own home as quickly as other individuals.
...Some people with disabilities who once lived independently in their own homes found themselves institutionalized soon after a disaster occurred...
Emergency managers and shelter operators may need to modify policies to give some people with disabilities the time and assistance they need to locate new homes.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)