|
Service Coordinators (HUD Financially-Assisted Projects)
The US Department of Housing and Urban development (HUD) has found service coordinators necessary for organizing supportive services for the elderly residing in housing projects. [01] They function as links between residents and supportive services that help them to live independently in their own apartments. HUD approves rent increases and use of residual receipts to fund service coordinators in eligible projects.
Elderly people living in assisted housing have social needs that administrators find difficult to resolve effectively. Moreover, unmet needs have a devastating impact on residents and directly impact upon project management. In principle, the service coordinator fills this need and acts as part of the management team, This should make the administrator’s job easier and improve the lives of the residents.
Intelligent problem solving by qualified professionals promotes active communication between residents and the management team. Employing unqualified people has the opposite affect and occasionally causes trauma that did not previously exist. Therefore, federal and state government strictly regulates service coordinators and social workers employed in HUD financially-assisted properties.
Project owners must first apply for special grant funds designated for service coordinators before requesting approval for a rent increase to cover the cost. If HUD has exhausted grant funds then owners may apply for approval to use residual receipts, budget-based rent increases, or special adjustments to fund service coordinators. They must exhaust funds in any residual receipt account before HUD will approve a rent increase. Moreover, the owners must segregate the residual receipts from other funds when preparing their accounts. Statutory authority for service coordinators within projects only exists for the elderly or disabled families.
Qualifications and Functions
Service coordinators normally report to an administrator and must consult with the lawfully elected officers of resident associations. They link residents to supportive or medical services provided by public agencies or private practitioners within the general community after assessing service needs and determining eligibility. They must provide neither support services directly (except in emergency situations) nor assist with administrative work or accounting. Moreover, they must not act as recreational or activity directors,
Service coordinators must possess these qualifications:
1. A Bachelor of Social Work or degree in Gerontology, Psychology or Counseling is preferable; a college degree is fully acceptable. However, individuals without a degree, but with appropriate work experience may be hired.
2. Training in the aging process, elder services, disability services, eligibility for and procedures of Federal and applicable State entitlement programs, legal liability issues relating to providing service coordination, drug and alcohol use and abuse by the elderly, and mental health issues. [02]
3. Two to three years experience in social service delivery with senior citizens and non-elderly disabled. Some supervisory or management experience may be desirable.
4. Demonstrated working knowledge of supportive services and other resources for senior citizens and non-elderly disabled in the area served by the project.
5. Demonstrated ability to advocate, organize, problem-solve and provide results for the elderly and disabled served.
A service coordinator performs these major functions:
1. Provides general case management (including intake) and referral services to all residents needing such assistance.
2. Establishes linkages with all agencies and service providers in the community; shops around to determine/develop the best "deals" in service pricing to assure individualized, flexible and creative services for the involved residents).
3. Sets up a directory of providers for use by both project staff and residents.
4. Refers and links the residents of the project to service providers in the general community; these are, for example, case management, personal assistance, homemaker, meals-on-wheels, transportation, counseling, occasional visiting nurse, preventive health screening/wellness and legal advocacy.
5. Educates residents on service availability, application procedures, client rights, etc., providing advocacy as appropriate.
6. May develop case plans in coordination with assessment services in the community or with a PAC.
7. Monitors the ongoing provision of services from community agencies and keeps the case management and provider agency current with the progress of the individual. Manages the provision of supportive services where appropriate.
8. May set up volunteer support programs with service organizations in the community.
9. Helps the residents build informal support networks with other residents, family and friends.
10. May provide training to project residents in the obligations of tenancy or coordinate such training.
11. May educate other staff on the management team on issues related to aging in place and service coordination, to help them to better work with and assist the residents.
Nmesis.
|
Judge James A. Doerty, Superior Court, State of Washington, issued two anti-harassment orders and contempt citations to censor this forum by prior restraint at the behest of Council House directors and their administrator. Mary Kay Becker, Washington Court of Appeals affirmed them. Washington Supreme Court reversed most of those decisions (30 Mar 06).
[Washington Supreme Court - Decision] [Background Information]
Using their financial power, the directors obtained SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) court orders and contempt citations using perjured testimony against the author of valid exposé. They then had him jailed in solitary confinement.
In this case, SLAPP consists of frivolous charges designed to bankrupt an opponent and create a prior restraint. The landlords have used this tactic on several occasions to try to cover up issues that affect all their tenants.
Doerty thwarted an appeal of his findings for more than five years by withholding court documents and other manipulation. The author/publisher claims judicial bias and arbitrary censorship that deny him his rights under the First Amendment to the US Constitution and Washington State Constitution. Doerty has challenged a principle journalism ethic - seek truth and report it - by denying a reporter’s First Amendment rights. Doerty then wrote biased decisions all without due process of law.
His findings enabled Council House directors to cover up crimes that they and their administrators allegedly committed. A Washington Supreme Court review has allowed the public to know the names of people involved in elder abuse. It will also give an ethical prosecutor an opportunity to consider felony charges of homicide by abuse against Council House directors and their staff. [Homicide by Abuse]
Homicide ranks as a class A felony punishable by a maximum sentence of life imprisonment in a state correctional institution or by a fine of fifty thousand dollars or both. Both the victim’s family and a Council House administrator benefitted financially by allegedly defrauding federal and state agencies prior to death of a resident. [Who Killed Jackie Nations?]
Doerty’s order precluded naming the people involved which forced redaction of copy pending review. Washington Supreme Court reversed the trial court decision which relieves restrictions on publishing details regarding resident deaths and other abuse.
Washington Supreme Court
Council House, Seattle - Summary
Supreme Court Decision #1
Supreme Court Decision #2
Civil Issues
Appellant [Trummel]
Respondents [Mitchell and Council House Inc.]
Appellant Reply [Trummel]
Contempt Issues
Appellant [Trummel]
Respondents [Mitchell and Council House Inc.]
Appellant Reply [Trummel]
Amicus Curiae
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
American Society of Journalists and Authors (ASJA)
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
National Union of Journalists/London Freelance Branch (NUJ)
Seattle Weekly
|
|
|
