Wednesday, April 07, 2010

The pettiest post on this site

This is a very small point, but the conversation around caseload ratios for service coordinators has become too funny to leave be. What I keep hearing is that for HCBS waiver clients, the caseload ratio remains limited to 62:1 but that the cap has been lifted entirely for non-waiver clients. It makes sense that people would say this because neither CMS nor DDS nor anyone else want California to twit the federal government in a way that requires a response.

But, the assertion keeps getting made without irony or humor or apparent self-awareness so let's just us, we few who discuss here, set the record straight. If the non-waiver caseload is uncapped, then the waiver caseload is also uncapped. The reason I think so: I don't know of a regional center that has waiver and non-waiver caseloads. As far as I know, all service coordinators have mixed caseloads.

This means that that to say "we have a 75:1 caseload ratio" means the same distribution as to say "we have a 62:1 caseload ratio for HCBS clients and a 101:1 ratio for non-waiver clients (assuming 2/3 of clients are on the waiver and I did my math right.) Really, this is a very unimportant point, but I do hope you will join me in smirking whenever you hear someone claim that the caseloads are fixed for waiver clients.

49 comments:

stanley said...

doug, there are not 12 days of April Fool...it’s over.

However if this not another april fool...it strengthens paul belief your april fool post [paul say] Could be, in the end.

Is this caseload ratio thing a joke of the DDS, or ARCA, or individual act of each RC director...

the 62:1 ratio is joke enough...it does nothing to improve life quality, positive outcomes...no way a 62:1 ratio does anything but generate paperwork...

the 101:1 is hilarious...in the sick humor genre.

stanley seigler

Andrew said...

Absolutely completely totally fundamentally primarily broken.

Andrew said...

... because a new comment was sorely needed.

paul said...

"I don't know"..."As far as I know"

There are A LOT of things that I do not know. Fortunately, the ignorance does not effect the quality or reality of those things (minus one person's view do doubt - BRB I see a baby with candy)

We need to KNOW, one way or another, whether or not case loads are 'mixed' - or not.

Otherwise are we 'just noisy ones'

No?

Andrew said...

Edgardo ... well put, but don't think you're the first to obliterate Stanley's house of cards ... it reassembles by the next post!

I can’t imagine anyone, other than Stanley, of course, arguing with the insight you bring to one of your opening points: 本站後, 為了您的隱私權,不得公布 ... however, I wouldn’t go so far as to refer to Stan’s positions as “lockstep”, but rather something more like he playing Clarence Thomas to Paul’s Scalia. Paul hasn’t yet supplanted MLK, RFK, Marty O. or A. Lincoln from Stanley’s personal Mt. Rushmore, but there’s no doubt he’s become the modern Eleanor Roosevelt for SS … and it’s more than just Paul’s style of dress and physical resemblance.

全露蕩婦情色自拍貼圖成人漫畫成人漫畫 … Nice sentiment, but convincing Mr. S. that it’s not about personalities, but about issues of great pertinence … well, you might as well be talking to a dead horse.

成人漫 and cheers,

Andy

Andrew said...

You know, the longer I look at this post, the less pretty it gets.

Or maybe it's just me ... and the longer I look at it, the less pretty I get.

AP

Doug said...

It's petty. The pettiest post. And needs replacing. I'll think of something later.

Andrew said...

Aarrrrr, matey.

Andrew said...

"R" is for "reading glasses".

Now, now, don't replace the pettiest post on my account. You owe me nothing ... even less! I disappear for months at a time, and then waltz back into your blog and hijack it with a rash of new, more incoherent than ever, one-liners ... (if only they were but one line!)

One day, many, many years from now, Stanley goes the way of all flesh and finds himself at the Pearly Gates, in the back of a very short line. As he waits his turn, he cranes his neck to catch a glimpse of the souls inside. He sees a lot of people he once knew .... Several directors of DDS, regional center directors, brainless, platitude-spouting agency execs, among other hapless campers. The band is loud, the booze is flowing, and everyone seems to be having a ball at the best Chamber of Commerce mixer ever!

By the time Stan gets to the front of the line, he's seething.

"Hey you! Saint Peter! What the hell is that in there?"

"That's Heaven."

"Not in my spiritual consciousness, it's not! Where's MLK, RFK ... Eleanor?"

"Oh, they're in there too. But they're all staying up in the Omoto Suites."

"Awright … that's more like it! I know where I'll be hanging out. Oh hey, one more thing: Seems like you allow just about any greaseball through the gate … So how come the line’s so short?"

"Well, Stanley, that's because we’re not at the main gate. This is the back entrance. And, by the way, I'm not Saint Peter ... he’s up front. I'm Saint PAUL ... you know, from Santa Barbara? I'll be sure to tell Martin, Eleanor and Marty you said, 'hi' ... Careful on your way down, it’s pretty steep. You can’t miss it, though. It’s the red joint, with the heat cranked all the way up ... and there’s absolutely no one there who is responsible for turning it down ... Have a nice trip, and be sure to write. Meus opus est finis."

Andrew said...

Whoa ... DD System Reform with links to Asian sex sites? Now, there is truly no need to bother with any other web site! I'm delighted to have DD System Reform as my new homepage. A very pretty post, indeed.

AP

paul said...

“… I think there are some excellent suggestions in the posts and comments on this blog which would, reasonably well implemented, provide real benefits for both Californians with developmental disabilities and taxpayers.”

With all due respect to System Reform and its commentators – I disagree.

Most suggestions on this blog and elsewhere are in the form of an end-game. You have suggested more “person centered services” and “proper outcome measurement”. Stanley suggests “follow Lanterman” and that DDS take “all necessary action”. Marty et al mention “political will” a lot, and the need for more of it.

A Plan to reach a goal or objective can be implemented (and evaluated along the way..); a goal or objective, standing alone, cannot be implemented. A good architect does more than declare “We should build a beautiful, strong, and useful building right here!!!!”

To pile on the work – any plan must contain full consideration and respect for the limits of the building blocks. If all we have is mud and clay, then a plan to build a 30 story building is probably mere window dressing

Of course – I have no doubt that when you say “reasonably well implemented” you mean a plan that takes into consideration the reality on the ground. But – you must admit that “excellent suggestions” are cheap and easy, and that any chance of success, or failure, of any “excellent suggestion” depends on a plan that is “reasonably well implemented.” I have found that Both plans and a methods of implementation are scarce everywhere, including this blog.

This reality is not a surprise. Declarations of what we “ought to do” are easy, and such declarations likely increase the promulgators standing amongst his or her peers (likely fellow promulgators), which, more likely than not, is the primary motivation behind most “suggestions”. On the other hand, plans (along with a method of implementation) are dressed in overalls and look like work, and will eventually make most unhappy with the architect, hence the reason true plans are harder to find than a will-o-the-wisp.

Doug said...

Paul, I'm not hungry to edit the site where tomorrow's bright dawn rose this morning. I think working out some features of the system that might make it work better is enough for some old blog to do.

Not that I have anything in mind to post, by the way.

paul said...

“Paul, I'm not hungry to edit the site where tomorrow's bright dawn rose this morning.”

I am not sure what this means*; Regardless, I am willing to bet it is a wise policy.

There is only so much a blog can do. I do not think a personal chronological of thoughts published on the Internet, with a few commentators added, is tool enough for the job. This is no reflection on the authorship, or interlocutors! I think that if you locked Doug, Andy, கருுவி,and Stanley (well maybe DDS as his proxy, or maybe Stan Lee) in a room for 9 months something interesting would spawn. I promise to bring food and water.

* “tomorrow's bright dawn” – Really? That much confidence?

Andrew said...

Paul, I've noticed that the older you get, the more frequently you are turning the perfect phrase, and finding the perfect word.

"Spawn" is the perfect word.

Andy

pau said...

"is tool enough for the job"

Sorry

"is not tool enough for the job"

"we‘re so proud of you!"

Stop - you are too kind!

Doug said...

Paul, maybe I'm reading you wrong but I kind of get the idea that 1) you would like to see more action and less talk and 2) that you think better talk would be valuable in and of itself.

Since I haven't posted in two months, my complaint is this: Yes, the five of us kicking around ideas is not likely to make things better for taxpayers with disabilities or for taxpayers generally. This is what I can do, though. Go ye out and lead and I will gladly follow. After I write a new post.

stanley said...

[doug say]...I think there are some excellent suggestions in the posts and comments on this blog which would, reasonably well implemented, provide real benefits for both Californians with developmental disabilities and taxpayers...

[paul say] I disagree. Most suggestions on this blog and elsewhere are in the form of an end-game.


oh my, here I go again...none so blind as those who will not see, THE PLAN called Lanterman...guess it’s a forest (Lanterman); tree (semantic bureaucratic bs) thing...lastest, eg,

Assembly Bill 2702, introduced by Assembly Member Wesley Chesbro and sponsored by The Arc, will it make it clear that the Lanterman Act hasn't changed. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DDRIGHTS/message/5853

seemed clear from day one:

KISS 123: 1) interdisciplinary team (IDT) determines needs. 2) RC provides quality, cost effective, programs to meet needs. 3) legs fund programs or tells those with special needs to “eat cake”.

oh/and, DDS takes all necessary action to insure KISS 123 implemented.

sigh...

stanley seigler

Doug said...

Stanley, here's my problem with what you say, friend. My experience of the advocacy around this system is that if Regional Centers offered high-quality, cost-effective supports, a lot of the community would complain the RCs were trying to save money on the backs of people with disabilities.

stanley said...

[doug say] my problem with what you say, friend. My experience of th advocacy around this system is that if Regional Centers offered high-quality, cost-effective supports, a lot of the community would complain the RCs were trying to save money on the backs of people with disabilities

not sure i understand...this what RCs does now...eg/ie, determine doug has a quality, cost effective, program and hopefully legs funds doug's programs...

but neither understand what i say...ie;

[stanley say] KISS 123: 1) interdisciplinary team (IDT) determines needs. 2) RC provides quality, cost effective, programs to meet needs. 3) legs fund programs or tells those with special needs to “eat cake”.

actually this is done now...at least, we create the illusion of it being done with mts of paper and bs.

wonder if the energy spent creating the illusion is any less than that required to make the illusion a reality...

stanley seigler

paul said...

“…that you think better talk would be valuable in and of itself.”

I do not think that I require a ‘better’ conversation, but rather ‘different’ talk and/or ‘more’ talk. But – I do not think that conversation is certainly not going to happen on the Internet. The Internet has become the predominate tool for Information or Commentary, but NOT problem solving.

Life is complicated, and does not lend itself to easy answers. ‘Advocates’ prefer to discuss tips of icebergs and love to avoid the mass below the water, which may pop just pop all the rivets a couple of days into the voyage. While we cannot begin the journey without broad concepts and perhaps even shibboleths - we cannot go beyond the mere academic without more. We cannot chart new waters, or even cover familiar waters efficiently, without a healthy recognition, and conversation, about the ocean currents, weather, seaworthiness of our fleet of 21 and its command/crew, and the how and why decisions are made.

If anyone begins to make this query, or one that smells like it, the wagons are circled, and at best you get in response chameleon-hued terms of convenience and seductive obscurity, more shibboleths, or charges of condoning the mass destruction of the human race because one inquires about the ‘obvious’.

paul said...

Put differently: I do not believe that there has been an open, honest, objective evaluation of any portion of our services system. Such a review(s) is/are necessary to ensure and support any effective system reform.
IF any stakeholder group truly wants improved services for the entire class of persons known as consumers , then open, honest, and objective evaluation of service provision would be high on it’s/her/his list of priorities.
I do not believe that open, honest, objective evaluation of service delivery is a priority for anyone; in fact, I would argue that there is little and perhaps no motivation for such evaluation. This fact may indicate that true objectives, for most, do not include improved services for an entire class.
Regardless, I do not believe that any systemic system reform can take place without a radical change in the culture.

Andrew said...

The Prodigal Yachtsman Sez: We cannot chart new waters, or even cover familiar waters efficiently, without a healthy recognition, and conversation, about the ocean currents, weather, seaworthiness of our fleet of 21 and its command/crew, and the how and why decisions are made.

Are you sure we’ve got a fleet? What if our Armada is not docked in Oakland or Long Beach, but is floating in Walden Pond? On an idyll? A fantasy? Bumping into each other … "Pardon me.” “Sorry.” “Excuse me.” “Is this the way to the Ocean?” ... expressed in an endless blur of Semaphore. More to the point, with whom does this "conversation" take place?

- With DDS?

- The 21 Gilligans?

- The Famous and Fabulous Stakeholders? “Holding stakes for a dozen narrow interest groups since 1990,”

- And what about those other “stakeholders”? … The old guard; the less progressive ones, shall we say. The ones with “old money” and a lot of bricks and mortar. The Less Famous, Once Fabulous Stakeholders, “Driving stakes through the heart of change since 1974”…. (Are they still around?)

- Providers? Which providers? Big ones? Little ones? The Mega-Church Nonprofits? (give generously or your kids will burn in Hell) The Residentials? The side-walk integrators? The wanderers and mall rats? Supported … Employment? Living? Bowling? Just how many providers are too many? (Answer: One’s too many and a thousand’s not enough)

- Did you forget families? Dismiss families? We must talk with families! It’s all about families! But which ones? Loud ones? Quiet ones? Crazy ones? … Squeaky ones? Easy ones? …. Rich ones? Poor ones? Good ones? Bad ones? ...The ones who call their kids, “epidemics”? The ones who speak in Voices of the Retarded? The ones who speak in Autism Speaks?

- PAI? or is it DRC? CRA? or is it CDSA? CSLN? CAIC? CAPT? CAL-TASH? CSH-PCR? SCDD?

UCP? OAB? …
Eye of newt, toe of frog
Wool of bat, tongue of dog,
ARCA? OCRA? SEIU?
Who can stop this witches brew?

- There can be no conversations without our elected leaders! ( … but didn’t they retire in the ‘60’s?) Oh, the new ones? Do we have to? The Bastard Progeny of Term Limits? … The new litter of kittens every couple of years … and nary a pale of water (kitten analogy borrowed from our blog host). Our elected organ grinders, grinding for prison guards and tired, tenured teachers? Who's your monkey? And then there’s the Governor, of course. Incoming! Get under the tables! Get Fetal! Is it a new one with old ideas? Or an old one with bad ideas? Sorry Jerry, you’ve been outbid. Other items you may like, still up for auction … State Insurance Commissioner; Baseball Commissioner; L.A. Alderman; Placerville City Councilman …

- Marty Omoto? Stanley and Doug? Me and you?

Put us all together in a big room and we become The California Developmental Disabilities Service System. Or Monty Python’s Mr. Creosote … and we all know what happened to him! One little, wafer-thin dinner mint and we’ll be scraping our beloved System off of the Sierras.

Did we forget anyone?

The victims? But there’s no more room at the table. Mr. Creosote has taken up all the seats. There’s not even a folding chair for one smallish self-advocate. Do they really need to be here? … We know what they want. We are the System that cares. We know their needs. We know their deepest desire. They want Community Integration. And Institutionalization. Sheltered workshops and real jobs. Sub minimum wage and nothing less than 20 bucks an hour. A home of their own. A home of six or less of their own. To live with their families. To live with their Family Teaching Models. The dignity of risk. Risking dignity with eligibility. Self-Determination. System-Determined marginalization. Entitlement to a system of failure. Freedom. Protection. The Status Quo.

Respect? Ya think? Really? Maybe we should ask … Does anyone here know how that's done?

paul said...

“‘Advocates’ prefer to discuss tips of icebergs and love to avoid the mass below the [surface of the] water...”
-prodigal yachtsmen-

“are you sure we’ve got a fleet?...with whom does this "conversation" take place?...Providers? Which providers? Big ones? Little ones? The Mega-Church Nonprofits?”

Andy,

You make Jacques Yvez look like a child diving for coins in the backyard pool!!

Gently return to the surface, breath into a brown paper bag, and start a ‘discussion group’, and - better get a bucket!!


--
"So numerous indeed and so powerful are the causes which serve to give a false bias to the judgment, that we, upon many occasions, see wise and good men on the wrong as well as on the right side of questions of the first magnitude to society."
“Publius” October 17, 1787.

stanley said...

[andrew/paul say] Prodigal Yachtsman Sez, chart new waters, got a fleet, docked in Oakland, the way to the Ocean, floating in Walden Pond, Eye of newt, toe of frog, diving for coins in the backyard pool, The victims, Mr. Creosote, better get a bucket, etcetcetc

not a yachtsman thus most whatsays out of my pay grade...Revelations and Finnegans Wake were too...butbut a rethought from a tugboatsman: in days of yore (when knights were bold), the ship's captain was responsible when his ship ran aground (whether on the bridge or not)...he was relieved of command...and in some cases court martialed.

the repeated point: leadership held responsible then...times they are a changing...

now, we praise/excuse leadership for maintaining an unacceptable status quo and broken homes...

past time to stop gundecking outcomes...gaming the system...

oh my, there I went again...sorry.

stanley seigler

stanley said...

Oh/and

[paul say] I do not believe that open, honest, objective evaluation of service delivery is a priority for anyone; in fact, I would argue that there is little and perhaps no motivation for such evaluation...Regardless, I do not believe that any systemic system reform can take place without a radical change in the culture.

Agree in spades...radical change including: accountable leadership, nomo gundecking and gaming the system.

stanley seigler

stanley said...

Oh/and

[paul say] I do not believe that open, honest, objective evaluation of service delivery is a priority for anyone; in fact, I would argue that there is little and perhaps no motivation for such evaluation...Regardless, I do not believe that any systemic system reform can take place without a radical change in the culture.

Agree in spades...radical change including: accountable leadership, nomo gundecking and gaming the system.

stanley seigler

paul said...

"the ship's captain was responsible when his ship ran aground (whether on the bridge or not)...he was relieved of command...and in some cases court martialed."

Who or What is responsible for relieving one of our 21 captains of his or her command?

paul said...

Who or What is responsible for relieving one of our 21 captains of his or her command, and who or What has the power to do so?

Andrew said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Andrew said...

Tugboat Annie Sez: the repeated point: leadership held responsible then...times they are a changing...

I will agree with you Old Salt (shaker) if you will broaden your view of the leadership you hold accountable. Leadership, or more pertinently, the lack thereof, is the infection that wracks the body ... the entire body ... from head to toe.

Failing leaders are everywhere ... more common (but less useful) than dirt. They hold positions of responsibility in every bitty group home, program, agency, regional center, state department, area board, advisory council, etc.

They sit as boards of regional centers, they sit as regional center executive directors, they sit as regional center management teams, and as office supervisors. They sit as as agency executives, board members, and program managers. They sit as parents. They sit as advocates. They sit in the better boxes of organizational charts. They sit in large, well-appointed corner offices, and they sit in cramped, ill-lit closet offices. They sit in the offices of developmental centers, and the offices in Sacramento, at (yes) DDS, DR, DSS and CCL.

They sit and talk, and talk and sit, ... They frighten for fund raising, finger point for finger painting, fudge the numbers to fake the faithful to take the sustenance of their success stories, their sainthood, and their necessity. They spin, but they don't lead.

They sit from 8 am to 5 pm, Monday to Friday, for 20, 30, or 40 years. They shape and replicate the asses to fill the contours of their chairs ... and then they retire to the serenity of seasides and stamp collections.

One leader, no matter where he or she sits, who stands up to lead, cannot change a System so huge and so deeply committed to sainthood and self-preservation.

Any leader, though, can stand up at any time to march, tiptoe or crawl in a new direction. The owner/operator of a six-bed group home in Likely, California, (18miles south of the Modoc County seat) who can listen, who can empower, who can let go, and who can follow and support, can bend a small part of the System and make it work well for the six clients living in her group home.

The System neither provides nor prevents quality services. It may create or impose obstacles, but rarely does it make doing the right thing impossible.

However, when the leadership on all levels of this System sees quality as impossible--whether by rates, regs, or rationale--that leadership lacks the knowledge, uderstanding, or vision-- not the money-- to lead ... And Stanley, you're right, it should either lead or get off the pot.

And'rueful

paul said...

"Failing leaders are everywhere ... more common (but less useful) than dirt. They hold positions of responsibility in every bitty group home, program, agency, regional center, state department, area board, advisory council, etc."

Indeed - and they have no regrets!! But - if they did it wouuld be that they have but 10 fingers to point at others

stanley said...

[andy say] broaden your view of the leadership you hold accountable.

andy broadened IT to include most everyone...ie, back to we all are resp premise...

[andy say] One leader, no matter where he or she sits, who stands up to lead, cannot change a System so huge and so deeply committed to sainthood and self-preservation

sigh, guess andy never heard of MLK, FDR, BO, or Hayzus (divided history, BC/AD) ... so there's MLK, govs, dept/org directors, corp CEOs, ship capts, teachers and the bitty group home mgr...

and what makes the difference in the quality/effectiveness of businesses, organizations, ships, classrooms, DDS, etal...you think THE LEADER.

ONE, not a political hack excused by suck up advocates, CAN/could change the system...possibly the only factor that can/will...but special needs children/folks will never get the ONE as long as advocates keep praising/excusing leaders who at best maintain the s-quo...

stanley seigler

stanley said...

[paul say] Who or What is responsible for relieving one of our 21 captains of his or her command, and who or What has the power to do so?

with a "culture change" RC board could relieve.

DDS could by voiding RC contract...see previous blog topic and Lanterman (If the department makes a decision to cancel or not renew its contract with the regional center, etc, 4635 a-f)...we're going around the bush again...

btw another culture change step: stop back scratching...

stanley seigler

housekeeping:

1. doug pls delete my duplicate post (6/20 5:28AM). or tell how i can. thanks. hope this will not be duplicated. posts dont show up so repost then both show up. Help.

2. how do i search the blog...eg, for post re Lanterman relieving RC director...cancelling RC contracts...

paul said...

“andy broadened IT to include most everyone...ie, back to we all are resp premise...”

Stating that everyone is responsible for those things for which they can make a substantive change IS NOT saying that all are responsible for everything.

Most are responsible for wiping their own noses. That does not mean that most are responsible for wiping yours (although at this point I am sure that Mr. Lee disagrees).

MLK, FDR, BO did not change the world single handed. Even Hayzus, with the help of 12 disciples, failed to convert the entire world to your beloved ways, or prevent Millions of dollars in legal fees for the Catholic church. Are the individual priests responsible for ANYTHING, or is it just a simple failure of leadership?

”special needs children/folks will never get the ONE as long as advocates keep praising/excusing leaders who at best maintain the s-quo...”

Are individual advocates responsible for their behavior in this regard, or do we need a MLK to tell the advocates to stop praising/excusing leaders?

stanley said...

[paul say] Stating that everyone is responsible for those things for which they can make a substantive change IS NOT saying that all are responsible for everything.

who say they are rep for everything...just for holding their leaders resp to obey the law...NOT excusing for NOT obeying.

[paul say] not mean that most are responsible for wiping yours (although at this point I am sure that Mr. Lee disagrees).

See above

[paul say] MLK, FDR, BO did not change the world single handed. Even Hayzus, with the help of 12 disciples, failed to convert the entire world to your beloved ways, or prevent Millions of dollars in legal fees for the Catholic church.

They did lead the change for the better...left it better than they found it...bush/chaney lead us down the road to perdition...it’s call leadership.

[paul say] Are the individual priests responsible for ANYTHING, or is it just a simple failure of leadership?

For sure, for sure, resp for "anything" (not being a pedophile, eg)...NOT for changing the system...it’s a failure of leadership to allow/maintain system failure...unacceptable s-quo

[paul say] Are individual advocates responsible for their behavior in this regard, or do we need a MLK to tell the advocates to stop praising/excusing leaders?

Do we need...guess so, as suck up advocates cant do it on their own...would rather excuse vice holding accountable...asking hard questions.

Individuals (provider A) can do right: cannot game the system. cannot gundeck outcomes.

Provider A cannot stop others (providers/parents B-Z) from doing it. Only leadership can make it system unacceptable.

seems painfully obvious...leadership makes the difference in successful organizations...it's not a big deal...does anyone really believe otherwise...

hard to tell from the discussion, but believe we do not disagree about who is resp for what...ie, DDS not resp for wiping my nose...

DDS is resp for an effective system nose wipe...an effective department and positive outcomes...broken homes...a system that has not changed from 1998 til 2006...(probably longer just not documented as well)

we can/did change life for our daughter (wiped my nose)...we cannot change the system for everyone (wipe the system's nose, DDS can)...

further we should not have had to fight the system for decades (a simple call from DDS to RC improved the situation)...and i should not have to worry what will happen when i am not here.

stanley seigler

paul said...

“who say they are rep for everything...”

Presuming that you did not, I think that we are in agreement. Mark the date and time in the ships log!!!

It is essential to have leaders and hold them accountable. It is also essential to have followers that are able to function, at some level, without leadership.

There are many parts of our system that should be capable of functioning, and function well, without an oligarchy. In spite of that capability, many parts choose to wallow in learned helplessness for want, not need, of leadership.

The fact that many of these parts fail to function at all, for lack of leadership, shows a great failure of our system, and the Lanterman act. The failure is in either the original design, the designed combined with “fixes” over the years, or the culture that the design and fixes” have fomented.

I guess you could argue that we need a leader to lift up our wallowing parts and slap those parts free of the learned helplessness. While this may possible it is not practical. Additionally, such a leader flies in the face of the Lanterman Act.

The Lanterman act was not designed to function top/down. While no single person authors legislation it is instructive to look at the man whose name is on our “Act”. Frank D. Lanternan preferred what he called the “home rule”. Mr. Lanterman was resistant to public policies that weakened local control. The “home rule” made it into the final design in the form of “Regional” centers, that were designed to function independently in regards to service delivery, and be under the control of a LOCAL board of manager to serve LOCAL needs.

The system that we have today differs greatly from the original. Each fix has moved us closer to a centralized system and a top down design. Each fix, and each move towards a more centralized system, was neccessitated by the failure of the design or its parts (regional centers). The need for each fix is also evidence of the failure of our service system as a whole, or at least, a failure of most of its parts.

One of the latest fixes, AB 2702, probably our best evidence to date. AB 2702 is designed to “ensure” that Regional Centers do what they are required to do, currently, under the Lanterman Act. Can we get anymore direct evidence of the complete failure of our Regional Centers.

Perhaps we have moved so far away from the design and intent of the Lanterman Act that today, “ONE […] CAN/could change the system...possibly the only factor that can/will...” However, if that is the case then it is also true that our system is all but completely borken. If that is true we cannot have a serious discussion about leadership without a serious discussion about a major overhall, or perhaps even the shredder.

Additionally, I think that what many want is not a leader, but a puppet master.

stanley seigler said...

[paul say] Mark the date and time in the ships log!!!

(Aside comment from my navy days, an entry in the ships log: passed seabouy 5 feet to port...ie, I almost ran over the sea buoy...but the capt would have been resp...)

back to DD system...

Well sh--, was ready to tell quartermaster to enter it in log...then read the rest of pauls comments.

[paul say] Mr. Lanterman was resistant to public policies that weakened local control. The “home rule” made it into the final design in the form of “Regional” centers, that were designed to function independently in regards to service delivery, and be under the control of a LOCAL board of manager to serve LOCAL needs.

no one denies failures of RCs...but doubt paul knows what lanterman was resistant to...au contra, 4434b (DDS take all action) is in direct opposition to pauls opine...ie,

lanterman does not hold RC responsible for the system...only to abide by its contract w/ DDS...DDS has the resp to ensure terms of contact are enforced in fact not just on paper.

difficult to believe no direction given/mandated to 21 RCs by DDS is what lanterman had in mind...or

that lanterman (anyone) believed one RC should be resp for the system...eg, broken homes in another catchment area...

serious doubts lanterman intent was a RC states rights approach...he probably didn't mean one RC could succeed from the system...


[paul say] many parts choose to wallow in learned helplessness for want, not need, of leadership.,

the point? not sure i know the diff between need and want of leadership...need equals want...wouldn't want if not needed...

[paul say] While this [slap system into shape] may possible it is not practical...such a leader flies in the face of the Lanterman Act.

weel why not...if possible certainly needed...thus partical...such a leader would insure lanterman is enforced...

[paul say] ...we cannot have a serious discussion about leadership without a serious discussion about a major overhall, or perhaps even the shredder.


YES WE CAN...an effective leader would lead the major overhaul...make the current lanterman illusion a reality...

the basic lanterman concept/intent is beautiful simplicity...KISS 123.

1) IDT determines needs; 2) RC find cost effective programs/support to meet needs; 3) legs fund program or tells special needs folks eat cake...

stanley seigler

Andrew said...

Dammit! You fellas seem to know when I'm buried neck deep in the sand (assume for yourselves if my head is above or below ground level) .... and I haven't the time to properly set Stanley straight (say that ten times fast!)

A bottom line reality is, that if DDS and regional centers and area boards and everyone disappeared tomorrow (and someone sent me a reimbursement check on time) the lives of the clients we serve, wouldn't change in any appreciable sense. So how does calling, or holding, any one of them accountable for our work, make them so?

Can they help? ... yeah. Can they hinder? ... yeah. Can they assure quality human services ... never in a million years.

Andy

Andrew said...

If lately it has seemed that the blog moderator/host has become conspicuously absent, it’s not forever, I’m told. Word is he joined the Peace Corps and has embarked to Mauritania to show villagers how to grow rice. I’m sure the Mauritanians are quite relieved …

“Does white brother know anything about rice? I mean, like … how to grow it? I think it’s obvious he knows what you do with a bowl of it … but why’s he giving us chopsticks?”

The Corps often assigns tasks with no apparent relation to a volunteer’s experience or skill set … Doug’s a bright guy, he’ll figure it out. It’s just a shame that Tonga will have to go yet another year without an Ambrose Bierce Museum.

In the mean time, it’s up to us to keep this blog fresh with our ever-changing views and insights. When Doug returns in 2012, with his world-weary, Mauritanian ways, it should seem like he never left.

Popeye said...

“ an entry in the ships log: passed seabouy 5 feet to port...ie, I almost ran over the sea buoy...but the capt would have been resp...”

Our boatswain's mates do a lot worse than run over buoys. They run over buoys AND girls… with disABILITIES. When presented with a reality absent a captain our boatswain's mates would drift as a derelict rather than rise to the occasion, take command, and provide something little better.

What sane captain, worth her weight, would try to lead such a crew of Mr. Lees? If our crew got lucky enough to get a captain I am certain that they – when order to swab the poop deck – would claim that it is the “leader's” job.

I agree with Mr. Lee’s embryonic bane – a fine captain with and impotent crew is flaccid. But – a fine crew absent a captain is something to reckon with.

“If lately it has seemed that the blog moderator/host has become conspicuously absent”

WHAT!!! Had I known that we lacked leadership I would have assumed the fetal position weeks ago!!

stanley said...

[andy say] I haven't the time to properly set Stanley straight

first, get the stick outta your eye...evidentially you neither have time to observe the painfully obvious: successful organizations have effective leaders...eg, andy’s.

[andy say] A bottom line reality is, that if DDS and regional centers and area boards and everyone disappeared tomorrow (and someone sent me a reimbursement check on time) the lives of the clients we serve, wouldn't change in any appreciable sense. So how does calling, or holding, any one of them accountable for our work, make them so?

DDS should be called/held resp for assuring all leaders approach andy’s level of competence as a leader...or does andy believe the directors of say broken homes exhibit Andy’s level of moral, effective, leadership...one andy/doug does not an effective system make...DDS has to set the tone...eg, no gaming, no gundecking allowed.

DDS has the resp for an efficient system...andy does not...can andy stop a provider from gaming the system...even the provider board smiled at the cleverness (eg, paid for 1:3, provided 1:6) of the director...

[andy say] Can they help? ... yeah. Can they hinder? ... yeah. Can they assure quality human services ... never in a million years.

Hayzus could never ASSURE quality human services in a million years (God’s lifetime)...but I would bet the farm on a DD system with an effective leader vice one without for improved quality vice an unacceptable s-quo...

[paul say] When presented with a reality absent a captain our boatswain's mates would drift as a derelict rather than rise to the occasion, take command, and provide something little better.

Is this a vote for leadership...

[paul say] I am certain that they – when order to swab the poop deck – would claim that it is the “leader's” job.

And you would be certainly wrong...but certainly your right to have a wrong opine...an effective leader would not allow such action...eg, an effective leader would not allow providers to game the system and gundeck outcomes.

[paul say] a fine captain with and impotent crew is flaccid. But – a fine crew absent a captain is something to reckon with.

difficult to prove opine which is best: a captainless crew or a crewless captain...little doubt tho a fine capt and a fine crew is really something with which to reckon (UCLA and the Wiz)...and

there are examples where a fine leader has taken a losing crew to unbelievable heights...especially in the field of education...welcome examples of success of a captainless crew...

stanley seigler

Andrew said...

Jimmy Olson Sez: there are examples where a fine leader has taken a losing crew to unbelievable heights...especially in the field of education...welcome examples of success of a captainless crew...

Examples of captainless, (autonomous, self-directed) crews? .... Toyota. Honda. Harley Davidson. Sony. Boeing. Motorola. Fed Ex et. al.

Those education leaders you speak of? ... I imagine their campus didn't stretch from Oregon to Mexico ... but test scores were up, no doubt.

How come, just because you like what I say on the Mauritanian’s blog (and on listserv's of Christmases past) you assume I'm effective at running an agency. One has nothing to do with the other ...If I spent more time leading and less time baiting (you) you might finally be right about something.

And by the way, Jimmy, that leader you speak of, Marlon Brando's son, became less effective around Kryptonite ... got cancelled in 1958 and ended up shooting himself after a night of drinking and attending wrestling matches. But he would have done wonders at DDS ... faster than a speeding SIR.

RIP George Reeve

p.s. Almost everything is better than this sharp stick in my eye!

p.p.s. I thought I was so familiar with the width and breadth of your nostalgia to know every iconic savior in the Seigler Pantheon ... MLK, RFK, JFK, HK, Doug, Gen. Geo. Patton (or was it only George C Scott?), Clark Kent, and the like ... but who the hell is B.O. ... I've wracked my pea brain on this one.

Bobby Orr? Bill O'Reilly? Billy O'Dell (pitched for the Giants in the early sixties ... was no Koufax, which explains a few things)

stanley said...

[andy say] I've wracked my pea brain on this one.

I rack my pea brain on most all of andy’s comments...sorry I misunderstood why andy’s organization is successful...not leadership...it’s because andy is too cute by a half...and revels in baiting old men...tho its not about old men.

[andy say] Examples of captainless, (autonomous, self-directed) crews? .... Toyota. Honda. Harley Davidson. Sony. Boeing. Motorola. Fed Ex et. al.

as said rack my pea brain on most all andy sez stuff...but if he implies the above companies are captainless...their stockholders and boards disagree...their CEOs have been reasonably well rewarded over the years...

sad their CEOs may have lead in a morally wrong direction...but they took a clue from the stockholders...make me money and they did.

[andy say] And by the way, Jimmy, that leader you speak of, Marlon Brando's son, became less effective around Kryptonite ... got cancelled in 1958 and ended up shooting himself after a night of drinking and attending wrestling matches. But he would have done wonders at DDS ... faster than a speeding SIR.

again racking my pea brain to know what andy sez that has any relevance...only thing I come up with is andy also spent a night drinking, attending wrestling matches and reveling in his cuteness.

[andy say] Those education leaders you speak of? ... I imagine their campus didn't stretch from Oregon to Mexico ... but test scores were up, no doubt.

Those stretching are NOT of whom spoken...speaking of the ones who have taken failing students, dropouts, to college.

but whateverf, too much racking for me.

stanley seigler

ps. in case youre not being facetious, BO...barack obama...btw how did you come up with digger odell...from SC my home state, went to clemson...played on conf championship team...

Andrew said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Andrew said...

...feeling foolish proving pea size of brain, by missing BO. surprised, but probably shouldn't be, that he's in your pantheon. I like the guy. I voted for him and usually I refuse to vote; seeing it as support for a completely corrupt system of greed and power, gussied up for the rubes as representative democracy. I still like BO ... but he's who you have in mind when you talk about visionary and effective leadership?

I'm not begrudging the man a little disconnect between the rhetoric and reality, but if you, SS, have a problem with going along, to get along, you may want take note of how unhappy insurance companies are with the final health care "reform" plan (hint: they're not).

won't keep beating dead horse with cute truncheons, but examples of Toyota and others, was not that they don't have CEO's or boards or shareholders ... it was that if they make a crappy car, they believe that everyone in the company bears some responsibiltiy for making it better. of course, if their cars aren't as good as they once were, it's pretty obvious the blame lies with the lazy, shiftless, crack-head american workers they had to employ in the plants they built here, to get around the import taxes.

but stanley, you know more than a little about business and management, and you know that when a company can establish a culture where all feel responsible for the product, or to the customer, the product, or the relationship, is immeasurably better off. (by the way, how's the Corvair been treating you ... but I digress, with uncontrollable cuteness). The same is true of families, communities and societies ... when all feel responsible for the welfare of each member, everyone is better off. There are no truer words than, "there but for the grace of God".

never knew O'Dell's provincial tag ... "digger", huh? didn't know he was from S. Carolina either. that particular configuration of those particular letters seems like a dangerously combustible nickname for south carolinians, of all people, to be fooling around with.

knew you were southern gent (away from keyboard and cuteness) but didn't know of the SC roots. you ... from there ... of all places! can't imagine you strolling around the parks of Charleston, tipping your hat and saying, "Happy Fort Sumter Day" to everyone you pass, every 12th of April ... or the tears welling when the band strikes "Dixie" ... or "while you breathe, you secede". Ever miss the iodine state?

and yes, it is about old men ... as long as the cat stays away. but I do not revel in baiting old men ... it's compulsive. and not something I'm proud to succumb to. i've tried baiters annonymous ... didn't help. could not get behind the "higher power" thing ... implies some kind leadership. and I'd hardly call it "baiting". that implies some thought, disguise and stealth in hope of getting the wary old man to bite. old man needs no bait to bite. mere thought of cuteness skipping in behind the four horsemen of the Apocalypse enough to "cry havoc, and let slip ..." take a bite out of cuteness, mcgruff.

old man is right that I'm my own favorite audience. that I enjoy myself too much, not in doubt ... no one enjoys an evening with me, more than me. is it productive? of course not! healthy? far from it. sad and creepy? not to me ... well, not as creepy as it might first seem, anyway!

good day, suh!

stanley said...

[andy say] I still like BO ... but he's who you have in mind when you talk about visionary and effective leadership? …I'm not begrudging the man a little disconnect between the rhetoric and reality, but if you, SS, have a problem with going along, to get along, you may want take note of how unhappy insurance companies are with the final health care "reform" plan (hint: they're not).

Yes he is...believe BO is the person for these times...even tho insurance companies won again...hope BOcare a step to hated socialized medicine...free markets great except for health care and social services…but the socialists need to work harder at making it efficient...perhaps calling leadership on its crap is a step in that direction.

[andy say] it was that if they make a crappy car, they believe that everyone in the company bears some responsibility for making it better.

As much as all the blog ink sez otherwise…as mentioned to paul, don't believe we really disagree who is resp for what…the point I try to make is advocates don't hold the leadership accountable for their area of responsibility…eg, DDS director before current one was praised for maintaining the unacceptable s-quo. (doug say not to mention names)


[andy say] when a company can establish a culture where all feel responsible for the product, or to the customer, the product, or the relationship, is immeasurably better off. The same is true of families, communities and societies ... when all feel responsible for the welfare of each member, everyone is better off. There are no truer words than, "there but for the grace of God".

see above…also it’s an effective leader who set the culture tone

[andy say] never knew O'Dell's provincial tag ... "digger", huh


not provincial...borrowed from digby odell, the friendly undertaker in radio/TV, “the life of riley”…riley called digby, digger.

[andy say] ever miss the iodine state?

bless yo heart child, I do miss my beloved South…but best I didn't stay...would have had horrible consequences…I might have become a GOPer and watched stock cars (not really stock) going around in circles for hours hoping for a wreck…cant talk to anyone in SC today unless I make believe I'm a R…they are good people tho who would give you the shirt off their back...

yall behave now, ya hear…

stanley seigler

于庭 said...

一個人的價值,應該看他貢獻了什麼,而不是他取得了什麼............................................................

Doug said...

I really do mean to read the last few comments. Soon as I finish The Castle, maybe.

Paul Smith said...

Maybe, you're right! This is a very unimportant point! However I'm ready to join you in smirking whenever I hear someone claim that the caseloads are fixed for waiver clients. I'll let know some of my friends as well. Best regards, the proof-reading.services high school and university writing scholarships