ANNOUNCER: Welcome council member Ted Stamp from Marshall, Minnesota.
TED STAMP: Hey, everybody. My name is Ted Stamp. I have salt and pepper hair and beard, and I’m wearing glasses and a turtleneck sweater. I’ve been an independent living advocate for the Southwestern Center for Independent Living in Marshall for 18 years now. And I’ve been a member of MCD representing district 8 for eight years.
I’ve greatly appreciated my time on the Council, mostly because it provides a unique opportunity to regularly collaborate with other talented advocates from across the state in order to improve the lives of people with disabilities. In addition to what I have to share today about transportation access,
I’m happy to introduce to you my longtime friend and colleague, Shelly Pflaum, mobility administrator from United Community Action Partnership in Marshall, who’s going to share with you how low special transportation service reimbursement rates are affecting the entire transportation landscape. You’ll hear from her in a minute.
My purpose today is to provide a brief update and followup regarding statute changes made to the Minnesota Personal Care Attendant, or PCA program, during the 2023 legislative session. More specifically, this update concerns the bill passed into law that session, which brought about these changes, titled, reinstating community access for the PCA program.
This bill passed into law in June, 2023 with bipartisan support amending certain statutes governing the Minnesota PCA program so as to allow the PCAs of home care agencies to drive their clients while on duty. This bill received its federal approval that November, and it officially became effective as Minnesota law the first week of February, 2024.
So after six hard fought years of work for these results, a lot of us advocates breathed what we felt was a well-deserved sigh of relief, as we eagerly anticipated the potential changes that might follow as a result at home care agencies statewide. Specifically, we imagined individuals formally resigned to sending their PCAs to the store to shop for them being newly enabled and, thereby, empowered, if they wish, to have their PCAs now drive them in their own vehicles to and from the store to join the experience, or to church, or work, or a family event, or medical appointment.
Not only that, this important change would thereby simultaneously relieve some of the burden on our congested statewide transportation system, especially more rural areas, where transportation options are already very limited, especially during evenings and on weekends. We had to dream big, and it appeared we had good reason to believe that critical, practical results were on the way.
Unfortunately, however, after nearly a year since this bill became effective as Minnesota law, the disheartening reality is that even this necessary change in statute language has not proven sufficient to enable the outcomes for which we all hoped and fought. Although it’s uncertain at this point to what extent this is true statewide, it’s already become clear from the limited feedback some of us have received that there is a general reluctance among homecare providers to implement policies allowing PCAs to drive their clients while on duty.
This isn’t because they disagree with the intention of this new change in law. From the little we know so far, their concerns are not unreasonable, some of which advocates anticipated well before the bill became law. The following are a few of the chief practical concerns that have been raised so far.
First and foremost, liability. Namely, how an accident involving PCAs driving clients on duty could affect, not just the individuals involved, but the very viability of the agency. Two, lack of sufficient staff to supervise and monitor the documentation necessary to monitor such a program for both PCAs and clients. For example, tracking the ongoing status of driver’s licenses, driving records, insurance, vehicle maintenance, et cetera.
Third, the additional responsibility of having to monitor multiple clients’ use of their allotted homecare hours to ensure individuals not use too many for driving, thereby leaving themselves without enough time to have their most critical needs met. Four, state-designated reimbursement for PCA services remains the lowest reimbursed service, further challenging providers to hire and retain valuable workers, while simultaneously having to implement all the added requirements of the program.
And finally, on top of everything else, five, the additional challenge agencies are now facing in being mandated to transition from the traditional PCA program to the Consumer First Services and Supports, or CFSS program, which, though a temporary phase, is already proving both formidable and time-consuming.
Whatever you may think about concerns like these, all of which require and deserve further scrutiny and discussion, the fact is, each one is a real and substantial obstacle currently standing in the way of on-duty PCAs being allowed to drive their clients, despite state law being on their side. Therefore, each of these issues needs to be addressed if change is going to happen in this respect.
Perhaps more importantly, I think it’s vital to our success moving forward to, once again, remind my fellow advocates of what they likely already know, that homecare agencies are not against us. They are, in fact, for us. In the face of unprecedented staffing shortages and a rapidly aging population needing care, they are battling the best they can just to keep their clients, including many of us, out of nursing homes.
So we mustn’t blame them or think of them as part of the problem, but must rather seek to dialogue with them as partners as we pursue viable solutions to these barriers. I wish I had better news, friends, but this is where things presently stand in this regard. So we need to regroup and rethink our strategy on this one.
And just like the first time around, widespread collaboration among a variety of resourceful partners will be essential for lasting success. Though your frustration, disappointment, and even disillusionment is justified and understandable, complaining that things aren’t the way they should be doesn’t get us anywhere.
On the contrary, our energies will be much more usefully channeled in resolving not to give up, but to, once again, redouble our efforts with a view to achieving, not just victory this time, but actual, practical, implementable results. Thank you for your time and attention.