Most people start gearing down and shift into holiday mode for Christmas. The people working and cared for in the developmental disability sector of our social safety net are suiting up and shifing into a higher gear. They are organizing to protect themselves from more shortsighted, meanspirited and frankly unnecessary budget cuts by the government of Alberta. I am advising these people now on a pro bono and volunteer basis.
I have done a lot of professional work with this sector recently, including help negotiate new contract templates so the GOA could meet their goal of a "more business-like relationship" with the sector. Well that was accomplished and contracts, not grants are the way the sector is not funded. But the government seems to think they can merely intimidate community-based volunteer agencies into funding cuts now and going forward regardless of the "business-like" relationship.
Service providers are facing intimidation, innuendos and pressures to comply with this so-called "voluntary" request for "in-year adjustments." The Regional PDD Boards knew they were going ot be short of funds last April 1 based on the government funding. Why have they ignored that reality until now and why are they squeezing the service providers and caregivers as a "solution?"
Well the Minister in charge can do exactly that. She can unilaterally cut budgets and change the contracts. It is a term the government insisted stay in the agreements called Ministerial Directives. If the Minister wants to claw back more money and put vulnerable people at risk then that is her prerogative under the contracts. But that is a political decision not a management decision. Such matters of budget cuts are always political and not management, as the government is trying to finesse the facts these days.
The Alberta Council of Disability Services, a provincial body representing most PDD sector service providers in the province sent a letter to the Premier and the Minister on Monday. There has been some media references to it but I thought the readers of this blog would like to read the letter in its entirety. It will show you what the high road looks like. I have been advised there is a error in the letter on page 3. The Edmonton PDD asked for changesby December 31, the 18th.
Honourable Ed Stelmach
Premier of Alberta
Office of the Premier
Room 307, Legislature Building
10800 - 97 Avenue
Edmonton, Alberta T5K 2B6
Dear Premier Stelmach:
Re: PDD 2009-10 Third Quarter Budget Announcements
Subject: Proposal for a Joint Solution
A collaborative partnership is essential to enable improved outcomes and sustainable solutions for individuals and families that we are contracted to support on the Ministry’s behalf. We support a partnership that honours mutual unique strengths and contributions while respecting each other’s autonomy. We support a business relationship that also has inherent rights, responsibilities and commitments. We have a common vision and goals to ensure that individuals supported through the Persons with Developmental Disabilities (PDD) Program are able to live with dignity and safety in their communities.
Principles of a Partnership
Accountability – Recognizing that while the Ministry Seniors and Community Support, PDD Division and the Community Disability Service Providers each have separate accountabilities, collectively, they are accountable for maintaining the trust and confidence of individuals with developmental disabilities, guardians, families and all Albertans by ensuring transparency, high standards of conduct, and sound management in their work together, and by monitoring and reporting the results of this work. Independence – Respect the autonomy of the Ministry and Service Providers, recognizing that each has unique strengths, expertise and separate accountabilities. This is not an employee–employer relationship. Our mutual independence supports and promotes many different solutions and policy actions. Interdependence – The actions by either the Ministry or Service Provider directly or indirectly affect the other; a collaborative relationship is important with us and with individuals, families and community. Co-ordination and collaboration
- Page 2 of 5-
are required with all Government of Alberta Ministries that impact individuals and their families. Dialogue – We believe that the sharing of ideas, perspectives, expertise and experiences contributes to better understanding, improved identification of priorities and sound public policy. Communication, cooperation, transparency, respect and collaboration are essential to addressing areas of mutual concern and to achieve our common vision.
A Collaborative Partner
Government is facing difficult choices now – how those choices are implemented in the community, both in the short- and long-term is critical for the health of communities and vulnerable Albertans. Community Disability Service Providers are part of a valuable and essential Non-profit/Voluntary Sector in Alberta and have a long history of partnership with the Government of Alberta delivering PDD mandated services. We have made long-term commitments in our communities to support individuals with developmental disabilities and have delivered services to them for over 50 years. Many of our Service Providers were founded by families who wanted to ensure that supports were in place to meet long-term needs, many are faith based organizations committed to supporting this common mission. Our volunteer boards are connected and committed to their communities. A collaborative framework provides the opportunity for government to participate and invest in a long-term inclusive engagement with the sector on funding discussions. The far-reaching implications of the current fiscal challenge make it imperative that we work together to minimize the impact and ensure sustainable services to vulnerable Albertans.
Principals Guiding Funding:
1. To ensure sustainability and effective services support for strong and resilient communities, allocation of funding should be transparent, evidence-based, and reflect local stakeholder expertise and community knowledge and context.
2. Community programs are most effectively delivered through sustained, predictable and coordinated funding. Contractual funding arrangements should reflect and support the long-term service we provide to individuals with permanent and often complex needs. We have a record of service to this government and measured standards of service and accountability. We require the flexibility to respond and be innovative. We require predictability of funding and honouring of funding commitments to plan effectively and efficiently.
3. Government should make a priority of open communication and meaningful consultation with individuals, guardians and families. Research, impact analysis
- Page 3 of 5-
and coordinated planning with these resources and the broader community are particularly significant when changes to policies, programs or services are being considered.
4. Outcomes for people and communities can be improved through better alignment of planning, program design and service delivery within and across both government and the Community Disability Services sector.
2009-10 Third Quarter Contract Budget Adjustments
Recent third quarter budget announcements by Regional PDD Community Boards of projected Regional Board deficits and Ministry budget reduction targets have placed Service Providers and family managed contracts in an untenable position.
Northeast Regional PDD Board announced on October 23, 2009 retroactive funding reductions of 4.34% of total Service Provider and family managed contract budgets. Calgary Regional PDD Board provided formal confirmation of in-year contracted and retroactive funding reductions of approximately 2.1 %.of annual agency contract budgets to address their Regional Board deficit and the provincial deficit. The notice was issued on December 9 and December 11, 2009 with expectation that agency plans for reductions be submitted by December 18, 2009. Edmonton Regional PDD Board confirmed retroactive budget adjustments of approximately 2.3% on December 16, 2009. Agencies have been asked to submit plans and revised change forms by December 18, 2009.
Key Messages
The impact of these reductions over the remaining few months of the contract term will have a significant impact on direct services to clients and the ability of agencies to operate under the new contracting model which pays for services after they have already been provided. Inadequate notice and time has been given to allow agencies to properly inform their Boards, give required notice to staff, and support families, guardians and clients to develop coordinated plans to ensure the safety and well-being of the individuals. This is not sound business practice, it is not good fiscal management, and does not live up to the principles, rights and obligations of a contractual business arrangement that should be expected from government. The Ministry (PDD) has ongoing responsibility to ensure and oversee the provision of statutory programs, resources and services to adults with developmental disabilities; and has the mandate to provide services to individuals through determination of eligibility and approval of units of service
- Page 4 of 5-
that they will provide and fund. The Service Provider contracts with the Ministry to deliver these services on behalf of the Government. Communication and direction about changes and or reductions in services should most appropriately be directly between government and the client. Individuals receiving or applying for services have the right to be consulted prior to any significant decisions affecting them; and are to be informed of decisions made by the Community Board that affect them and of their right to independently appeal such decisions. The individual may then access their right to appeal decisions of PDD Program Community Boards that impact them. Program supports, or applying to receive supports, can be appealed to the Minister through the PDD Appeal Panel. Decisions of a PDD Program Community Board to enter into, amend or terminate a contract with a Service Provider on the other hand cannot be appealed. The ACDS Board appreciates the difficulties that Regional PDD Community Boards face with unanticipated cost pressures and the complex and changing needs inherent in delivering mandated human services. Our members also face these same pressures, adjust accordingly within our yearly budget and contract, and are held accountable for a balanced budget. We also appreciate the challenges of the uncertain economic climate. Many agencies already reduced their budgets by up to 5% at the beginning of the contract year in response to Ministry anticipated budget pressures, and staff received only one half of the committed wage increase as a one-time bonus. As we have done each year, for many years, we have already demonstrated our willingness to collaborate and work toward a solution. The ACDS Board understands that under the current contract with Service Providers, any amendments or changes must be mutually agreed upon by both parties and further that Service Providers should consider carefully and ensure that they take the time and steps necessary to be fully informed before agreeing to voluntarily amend the contract by agreeing to reduce services or units of service. We understand and have been advised, that even a request to voluntarily agree to an in-year adjustment may be considered an Anticipatory Breach of the contract. We would expect PDD to honour the current contracts over the next quarter. The Ministry commitment to allocate $24 million in the 2009-2010 budget to address recruitment and retention of a skilled workforce is still outstanding. The delivery of quality services to individuals with often complex needs is dependent upon sustaining a qualified workforce. While government programs and staff received wage and benefit increases, and contracted programs and staff funded by other Ministries received their 5% wage increase on April 1, 2009, PDD funded contracts received only a partial allocation of $14 million this fall to be distributed as a one-time bonus. Some Service Providers have not had the April 1, 2009 minimum wage increase addressed in their funding.
- Page 5 of 5-
Service Providers value our relationship with this Ministry. A strong collaborative relationship must be based on honouring commitments, integrity and mutual respect grounded in the fundamental principles and values that place the well-being of the individuals we support first.
Recommendation for a Joint Solution
That the Premier and Minister intervene and rescind the PDD Community Board requests for in-year budget adjustments and ensure that formal correspondence is issued clearly communicating to Service Providers and family managed contractors, that PDD fully intends to honour their contracts and that this is a voluntary request for budget reductions. That full contractual payment to Service Providers will continue and there will be no repercussions if Service Providers and family managed contractors do not voluntarily agree, or did not meet the deadline for submission of action plans and change forms for reductions in services. That Service Providers and family managed support contractors who have already submitted action plans or implemented changes be offered the opportunity to review and reconsider given this new and clear communication from the Ministry. That the Premier support the Minister to implement a full external program review and audit of the PDD Division Programs and Services. Stakeholders and families would be willing to participate in the development of the terms of reference and support this review. That PDD Community Boards be requested to communicate their intent to fully honour their contracts with families and Service Providers That PDD Community Boards be required to communicate directly to individuals and their guardians and families, any decisions that may impact services to ensure that they retain their right to appeal, and further that the timeline for filing the notice of appeal starts on the date of this communication from the PDD Boards.
Respectfully submitted,
Bob Greig
President
ACDS BOARD
cc. Honourable Mary Anne Jablonski
Too bad that Minister Liepert couldn't have had the same options in dealing with the contracts with the health board members. The cry there was that they had to honour the contracts. "Honour" such an odd word for them to use.
ReplyDeleteThis government thinks it can break any contract it wants. Remember it was this government that broke royalty contracts with Syncrude and Suncor that resulted in a stampede of investment out of Alberta and into BC, Saskatchewan and the US.
ReplyDeleteWe knew then that this government could not be trusted to honour its agreements so this is hardly a surprise.
This government does not understand that in a business oriented culture like Alberta, honouring a contract says a lot about who you are as a man or woman and I would venture, as an Albertan. It is a legal version of a handshake that mutually binds one's trust and portends mutual benefit, growth and respect.
This government broke that trust with Albertans long ago. And so now, nobody trusts this government in word, deed or even in legally binding contract.
My advice to everyone is never, EVER sign a contract with this imbecilic government. That includes the contract we issue to govern at the ballot box.
Their funding should be cut completely. Just like the salary increases - Stelmach should have rolled them all back just like he should roll PDD funding back. Time to bring in recall so we can deal with these politicians not just every four years. Only the Wildrose Alliance will do this.
ReplyDeleteHow very sad. The government's assertion that these are 'cuts to administration' that won't impact client services is so completely specious as to be insulting. This sector is already hurting because of inadequate operational funding; to pretend that squeezing these hard-working men and women, trying to do critical work the government won't do, is somehow being 'responsible' is utterly shameful. This is what happens when highly paid gov't. gunslingers are paid bonuses based on cutting dollars spent, rather than being bonused based on improved services for Albertans. What was that sound? That was the sound of my last minuscule shred of respect for the AB Tories flying out the window.
ReplyDeleteMore power to the agencies. Don't voluntarily give up a nickel! Let Eddie the Unready and his gang of cowardly punks come and get it!
ReplyDeleteThen we'll see if they have the courage of their convictions. Imagine targetting the most vulnerable among us to fund their unconscionable ANNUAL raises and the massive transfer of Alberta wealth to Big Oil headquarters in Beijing, Houston, Amsterdam and London disguised as carbon capture freebies. Shame on the unprogressive Conservatives. Why do they hate us?
Anonymous at 11:16 -- Don't count on the Wildrose Alliance. their philosophy is every man for himself and the devil take the hindmost. They are not a progressive party. They care only about cutting government spending, period, not forcing the government to spend wisely.
ReplyDeleteSince you've shown me the high road, I will reciprocate by showing you a dictionary. Ass.
ReplyDeleteGood and meaningful values that are established in childhood and held true as an adult are the keys to preventing the many social and political ills of society.
ReplyDeleteTHE VALUE OF VALUES
Five-Time Author Teaches Us We Can Each Make a Difference – The Choice is Ours.
The Value of Values educates us on how to establish a culture that will ensure harmony for generations to come and diminish the aggressive ways of the powerful…just by teaching our children values.
Did you know that an individual’s values are established in childhood and serve as filters when determining right from wrong throughout the person’s life? In today’s society, this process of establishing values within our children is given little concern. How are our children supposed to grow up to be adults with values if we’re not teaching them values from the beginning?
The responsibilities of parenting have become a reactionary process whereby each parent is doing whatever he or she must do in order to just get through life. By default, we are teaching our children that values such as integrity, respect for life, courage of conviction, purposefulness and generosity are secondary to making a living. In truth, there is absolutely nothing stopping us from being true to good and meaningful values except ourselves.
The Value of Values teaches us the required actions and reasons this important transition is needed. This book identifies what it will take from each of us to sustain the drive to pass our values onto our children.
Publisher’s Web site: www.strategicpublishinggroup.com/title/TheValueOfValues.html
ISBN: 978-1-60860-381-7 / SKU: 1608603814
About the Author:
Ed Gagnon is a vice president at a manufacturing company in North Attleboro, Massachusetts. The Value of Values is his fifth published book, and he has more in the works.
For media inquiries, appearances, or other publicity — please contact:
Ellen Green — PressManager@aegpublishinggroup.com
Great Post Ken,
ReplyDeleteThe sector taking a stand will be huge also to ensure the government has to take it rather than making it look voluntary.(not that they don't break contracts)
We spend more on our criminals in prison than we do on Albertans that rely on PDD money to get by. Unreal the priorities the PC government has, that is why I back the WAP.
We disagree on the WAP AA but I appreciate you sensibilities when it comes to all of us helping vulnerable citizens. Have a wonderful Christmas and lets keep our conversation going in the new year.
ReplyDeleteWe should cut PDD funding by at least 50% as part of an overall cost cutting effort. Only the Wildrose will stand up for cuts like this - all other parties will keep up this wasteful funding.
ReplyDelete12:09 and above.
ReplyDeleteYou need to do a better job at disguising your posts. It is pretty obvious that you are nothing but a desparate troll out to discredit the WAP.
Danielle Smith had a lot to say about protecting Alberta's citizens most in need just yesterday.
See the danger of anonymous comments? Who knows who is speaking and from what perspective. Anonymous trolls and sock puppets are everywhere. They bore me for the most part.
ReplyDeleteThe content they provide usually does little to add to the dialogue. In fact it diminishes the discussion quality because of the suspicions they create because nobody can assertain how much credibility to give to them.
I am going to reflect hard over the holidays and consider if a NO ANONYMOUS comment policy sholud be put on this Blog.
Any help readers can give to explore this concern and if such step is a good idea or not would be appreciated.
Alberta Altruist, that's why I back the WAP too - they will eliminate funding to organizations like PDD completely so we don't have these people asking for money from the government purse.
ReplyDeleteIt is for reasons like this that we don't allow anonyous blog posts or comments at www.rebootalberta.org. YOu never know if the comment from 11:12 is a WAP member and speaking for or from or merely about the WAP.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with much of the WAP policies, thin as they are at present, but they don't deserve this kind of anonymous representation. Is this comment WAP policy or a member's POV or a troll making mischief about them?
Does this comment with no reasonoing as to why the position is taken help understnad them or the commenter's POV better. I can't see how.
Same basic question - should I publish anonymous comments on this blog? If so under what circumstances?
Anonymous @ 11:12 is clearly the same troll who has been going around thinking he or she can convince Wildrosers to adopt unpopular or unsound policies and/or making unpopular or unsound claims while self-describing as a supporter of the party.
ReplyDeleteI disagree. It is a "leftie" trying to discredit the WAP by making outrageous comments.
ReplyDeleteI never use my real name when I post. Ever. And the reason is that I do not want my name appearing on Google searches because I value my privacy. I do not want customers, vendors, neighbours snooping into what I say. Rather I am more interested in making a valid point so that it may be incorporated into the discussion.
Posting anonymously gives me the opportunity to express a view while retaining my privacy. I am not interested in selling or branding my name nor do I want to leave a trail of digital residue for who knows how long. What if I change my mind about an opinion? As we all mature in wisdom and our ideas evolve, we abandon some ideas and take up new ideas or modify old ideas into contemporary ones. Now I have all this apparently contradictory stuff on the net that anyone can use against me! So posting anonymously offers freedom of expression without the possibility of future irrelevant baggage.
Ken admitted that he does not read most anonymous comments so if I may put words in his mouth, he is also inferring that he does read some which means that they have some value.
That being said, I think Ken should not allow anonymous users to post because others are abusing this priviledge that he is providing.
I did check the Reboot site where anonymous comments are not allowed and noticed that the number of comments for most posts is low. It is likely that this is because that site is fairly new. It might also be because others feel the same as me and therefore do not post.
Why worry about changing your mind? That is a virtue. It shows capactiy to learn grow and adapt.
ReplyDeleteWhy worry about what customers etc. think unless you are presenting one face to them but another online. I can see that would cause problems of credibility and trustworthiness amongst those other real life audiences - and it should.
I read all the anonymous comments but don't post some. I do post most but the shallow and incipid ones I don't post. I don't want to waste other readers time...I have already wasted mine on them.
As for Reboot it is a community of about 100 people registered so far and will be a month old Dec 27. I think it is a rich assortment of posts and comments given those facts.
Ken, the anonymous poster earlier absolutely nailed it. I too value privacy and for exactly the same reasons that person described. And I am a little disappointed that you turned that argument around by making it look like the poster is being two-faced or untrustworthy. Like me this person is interested in the discussion and wants to be engaged but does not want the whole world listening in on a discussion among a few people.
ReplyDeleteIt is no different than someone recording a conversation among a group of friends and then putting it up on Youtube. That would completely change the nature of the discussion and impact peoples freedom to express themselves and their creativity.
If I had to post my real name, I simply would not bother reading or commenting on any of these blogs or comments anymore.
I hear you at 6:07 but I have to say if you don't have the courage of your convictions to tell the reat of us who you are in real life why do we hgave to accommodate your anxeties? The world is run by those who show up and anonymoous posters and comments is not showing up.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't Reboot and Wildrose get together? All of these splinter movements are just going to benefit the tories.
ReplyDeleteKen,
ReplyDeleteI vote for continuing to allow those who want to post anonymously. For whatever reason, they cannot bring themselves to sign posts.
However, I would rather read through ten "chicken-dung" posts in order to find a valid point made by someone who is nervous about speaking freely, that to miss such a point.
Anonymity is sometimes a cover for malevolent criticism... but it is sometimes something else.
I appreciate the high road you have taken thus far.
Will
Ken,
ReplyDeleteI am not asking you to accommodate my anxiety. I am asking you to accommodate my sensitivity. There is a big difference here. I am female and am just not comfortable with having my name out in public.
Do you understand this?
After reading most of the previous comments, I am wondering if they have lost sight of what they were commenting on in the first place. How many people writing have adult children living in the special needs community? Hmmm?
ReplyDeleteLet me be clearer. I know there are often good reasons to be anonymous. If there are good reasons, I think they could be shared so we can appreciate them and have some context.
ReplyDeleteI expect a raft of anonymous comments from parents and guardians and even government employees on the disability issue. I got them when I did the series Society's Child. Some of the anonymous commenters emailed me outside this blog to explain why they preferred to be anonymous. All of them had good reason. We have seen what our government has done to quell dissenting points of view with employees, managers and even volunteers.
The anonynous comments I am thinking of rejecting are those that offer a provocative statement or invective without any context, background or evidence to support the comment. They offer nothing of value to the conversation here or on other blogs. I am sure not every letter to the editor in the newspapers get published. I am thinking of following and continuing in that way.
In other words, censorship. Really open and democratic.
ReplyDeleteNope - not censorship at all. Blogs are about personal conversations in public. If I don't want to talk or listen to you to you why should I have to?
ReplyDeleteIf I find you boring or irrelevant why do I have to talk to you or even listen to you? It is a free country and I am free to ignore what I choose to ignore. I do it in real life and even on my blog. It's about personal choice not censorship.
Sounds like a virtual dictator to me.
ReplyDeleteOK readers, this ablve comment is the kind that I adding little value. No analysis, or reasoning or even argument to support an "opinion." In the context of the question should I ignore certain anonymous comments for these reasons, this is a good example.
ReplyDeleteThis anonymous comment has two saving graces in the current context. It is relevant and it is an example of what I would choose to ignore as a waste of time going forward.
Anyone else have any observations on this example?