Illinois Judge Orders Group Home To Move Disabled Residents To State, Finds Risk of 'Injury'

CHICAGO - Dec. 13, 2016 - Associated Press -- A Cook County judge ordered a group home owner Tuesday to turn over 18 residents with developmental and intellectual disabilities because they were in danger of "irreparable injury."

The Chicago Tribune reports that Judge Kathleen Pantle ordered Disability Services of Illinois to turn the residents over to the Illinois Department of Human Services.

DHS officials complained the company had obstructed efforts to claim the residents after the agency revoked the company's license following a Tribune investigation that found injuries and deaths linked to group homes.

Disability Services CEO Reuben Goodwin Sr. said Tuesday he would abide by the order. His network includes seven homes on Chicago's South Side and south suburbs. An eighth home closed last month.

Lawmakers in a joint House-Senate hearing questioned DHS officials in a hearing in Chicago on Tuesday about the Tribune's findings. They include hundreds of cases in which abuse and neglect charges were investigated and cleared by group home employees. Inspector general's reports are routinely sealed.

"Let's not pretend that the solutions to this very serious problem lie in the past," Sen. Daniel Biss, an Evanston Democrat, said in a statement following the hearing. "The solutions can only be found in partnership with the current governor and his administration — one that went to great lengths to conceal important information about group home abuse and neglect from the public, from the victims' families and from the media."

2016’s Neediest Cities in USA – WalletHub Study

With the giving season reminding us to be selfless and tens of millions of our fellow Americans suffering from poverty, homelessness and hunger, the personal-finance website WalletHub followed up on its report on the Most Charitable States with an in-depth look at 2016's Neediest Cities.

Hoping to inspire goodwill toward the less fortunate, WalletHub’s analysts compared the 150 most populated U.S. cities across 21 key metrics to determine where Americans are most economically disadvantaged. The data set ranges from “child poverty rate” to “food-insecurity rate” to “uninsured rate.”
 

	Neediest Cities
	1	Detroit, MI		11	Baltimore, MD
	2	Brownsville, TX		12	Indianapolis, IN
	3	Memphis, TN		13	Augusta, GA
	4	Atlanta, GA		14	Newark, NJ
	5	Cleveland, OH		15	Little Rock, AK
	6	Philadelphia, PA		16	Columbus, GA
	7	Jackson, MS		17	Toledo, OH
	8	Birmingham, AL		18	Buffalo, NY
	9	New Orleans, LA		19	Richmond, VA
	10	Fresno, CA		20	St. Louis, MO

Key Stats

• Fremont, Calif., has the lowest child-poverty rate, 3.5 percent, which is 16.5 times lower than in Detroit, the city with the highest at 57.6 percent.
   
• Pembroke Pines, Fla., has the lowest adult-poverty rate, 4.8 percent, which is 7 times lower than in Detroit, the city with the highest at 33.9 percent.
   
• Overland Park, Kan., has the fewest homeless persons per 1,000 residents, 0.26, which is 53 times fewer than in Honolulu, the city with the most at 14.00.
   
• Sioux Falls, S.D., the city with the lowest unemployment rate, 2.0 percent, which is 5.6 times lower than in Detroit, the city with the highest at 11.1 percent.
   
• Fremont, Calif., the city with the lowest percentage of residents lacking health insurance, 2.5 percent, which is 11.8 times lower than in Brownsville, Texas, the city with the highest at 29.4 percent.
   
• Irvine, Calif., has the lowest violent-crime rate per 1,000 residents, 0.56, which is 33 times lower than in St. Louis, the city with the highest at 18.17.

To view the full report and your city’s rank, please visit: https://wallethub.com/edu/cities-with-the-highest-and-lowest-population-in-need/8795/

SOURCE: WalletHub

Walmart, Amazon Removes "R'- Word Mug Online After Social Media Complaints

Online shoppers noticed a mug with an offensive phrase scrawled on it for sale on both Amazon and Walmart. It spelled out: "Got retard?" on one side. 

Article By Darla Guillen for the Houston Chronicle | Dec. 13, 2016                

Hallie Levine, who's written for New York-based Daily News about Down syndrome, took to Facebook to express her disgust. She wrote: "This is unbelievable. I just called and gave them an earful. And I am never shopping at Walmart again. Instead, I'm giving my money to companies that support progressive causes -- like Target."

Levine's 8-year-old daughter was diagnosed with Down syndrome. She told the Daily News that it's made her sensitive to the word "retard."

"I think that in our culture it's still somewhat acceptable to use the word retard as a joke," she said. "It's horrible."

Levine's not the only shopper who's upset with both major retailers. Several others have posted comments on Walmart's site.

"This is sickening. I am very upset that this is a thing. I thought that people were finally starting to realize how hurtful this word was towards so many people. Please reconsider buying/selling this product. Think about it from another perspective," one comment reads.

As of late Monday night, Walmart stopped selling the item, and edited the live image to no longer reflect the slur.

A Walmart spokesperson reportedly told the Daily News that the item was being featured by a third party seller, and that it violated the store's policy.

Amazon has also removed the mug from its site.

http://www.chron.com/business/article/Walmart-Amazon-in-hot-water-after-selling-10793001.php

Unlicensed Michigan Physician Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy for Role in $6.3 Million Detroit-Based Medicare Fraud Scheme

Dec. 9, 2016 - A Michigan man pleaded guilty to fraud charges for his role in a scheme to defraud Medicare out of approximately $6.3 million while he acted as an unlicensed physician at a Detroit in-home physician services company.

Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Barbara L. McQuade of the Eastern District of Michigan, Special Agent in Charge David P. Gelios of the FBI’s Detroit Division and Special Agent in Charge Lamont Pugh III of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General’s (HHS-OIG) Chicago Regional Office made the announcement.

Renald Dasine, 54, of Ypsilanti, Michigan, pleaded guilty yesterday to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud before U.S. District Judge John Corbett O’Meara of the Eastern District of Michigan.  Sentencing has been scheduled for March 8, 2017. 

As part of his guilty plea, Dasine admitted that in connection with his employment at B&M Visiting Doctors PLC, he submitted fraudulent claims to Medicare as part of a fraud scheme that took place from 2005 to 2013.  Dasine saw patients and falsified related patient records, including medical documents, prescriptions for controlled substances and billing documents, all under the name of a licensed medical doctor.   

Cecil Alexander Kent, Charles McRae and Alvin Williams, all unlicensed physicians, previously pleaded guilty for their involvement in the B&M Visiting Doctors PLC scheme.

The FBI’s Detroit Division and HHS-OIG investigated this case, which was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, under the supervision of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan.  Fraud Section Trial Attorneys Melissa Aoyagi and Kyle Maurer prosecuted the case.

The Fraud Section leads the Medicare Fraud Strike Force.  Since its inception in March 2007, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, now operating in nine cities across the country, has charged nearly 3,000 defendants who have collectively billed the Medicare program for more than $11 billion.  In addition, the HHS Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with the HHS-OIG, are taking steps to increase accountability and decrease the presence of fraudulent providers.

SOURCE: U.S. Justice Department Press Release

EEOC Issues Publication on the Rights of Job Applicants and Employees with Mental Health Conditions

User-Friendly Document Explains Workplace Protections Under the Americans with Disabilities Act

WASHINGTON - Dec. 12, 2016 - The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today issued a resource document that explains workplace rights for individuals with mental health conditions under the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).

Depression, PTSD, & Other Mental Health Conditions in the Workplace: Your Legal Rights explains that job applicants and employees with mental health conditions are protected from employment discrimination and harassment based on their conditions. They may also have a right to reasonable accommodations at work. Reasonable accommodations are work adjustments that can help individuals to perform their jobs and remain employed. The resource document also answers questions about how to get an accommodation, describes some types of accommodations, and addresses restrictions on employer access to medical information, confidentiality, and the role of the EEOC in enforcing the rights of people with disabilities.

EEOC charge data shows that charges of discrimination based on mental health conditions are on the rise. During fiscal year 2016, preliminary data shows that EEOC resolved almost 5,000 charges of discrimination based on mental health conditions, obtaining approximately $20 million for individuals with mental health conditions who were unlawfully denied employment and reasonable accommodations.

"Many people with common mental health conditions have important protections under the ADA," said EEOC Chair Jenny R. Yang. "Employers, job applicants, and employees should know that mental health conditions are no different than physical health conditions under the law. In our recent outreach to veterans who have returned home with service-connected disabilities, we have seen the need to raise awareness about these issues. This resource document aims to clarify the protections that the ADA affords employees."

The resource document is part of an ongoing series of publications providing individuals with medical conditions or work restrictions with user-friendly explanations of their rights, and with information that they can give to a health care provider to explain how to provide appropriate medical documentation, if required. Earlier this year EEOC published resource documents addressing the employment rights of individuals with HIV infection and individuals who are pregnant. The new publication's companion document, The Mental Health Provider's Role in a Client's Request for a Reasonable Accommodation at Work, can be found here.

EEOC advances opportunity in the workplace by enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. More information is available at www.eeoc.gov. Stay connected with the latest EEOC news by subscribing to our email updates.

SOURCE: EEOC Press Release

Wal-Mart to Pay $75,000 to Settle EEOC Disability Lawsuit, Unlawfully Harassed Cancer Survivor

Giant Retailer Unlawfully Denied Accommodations to and Harassed Cancer Survivor at Illinois Store, Federal Agency Charged

Dec. 12, 2016 - Wal-Mart Stores Inc. will pay a former employee $75,000 to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced today.

EEOC's lawsuit charged Wal-Mart with violating federal discrimination law when the giant retailer failed to accommodate Nancy Stack, a cancer survivor with physical limitations, and subjected her to harassment based on her disability. Stack worked at a Walmart store in Hodgkins, Ill.

As a workplace accommodation, Stack needed a chair and a modified schedule. EEOC alleged that while the store provided Stack with a modified schedule for a period of time, it revoked the accommodation for no stated reason. Further, according to EEOC, the store did not ensure that a chair was in Stack's work area, telling her that she had to haul a chair from the furniture department to her work area, a task that was difficult, given her disability. Making matters even worse, EEOC alleged that a co-worker harassed Stack by calling her "cripple" and "chemo brain."

Wal-Mart's alleged conduct violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, which can include denying reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities and subjecting them to a hostile work environment. EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.; Civil Action No. 15-cv-5796.)

Wal-Mart will pay $75,000 in monetary relief to Stack as part of a consent decree settling the suit, signed by U.S. District Judge Sharon Coleman on Dec. 6th. The two-year decree also provides additional, non-monetary relief intended to improve the Hodgkins store's workplace. Under the decree, the store will train employees on disability discrimination and requests for reasonable accommodations under the ADA. The Walmart store will also monitor requests for accommodation and complaints of disability discrimination and report those to EEOC.

"Wal-Mart refused to provide simple, effective and inexpensive accommodations in the form of a chair and modified schedule and failed to protect Stack from mocking because she had cancer," said John Hendrickson, regional attorney of EEOC's Chicago District Office. "Both the failure to provide accommodations and to stop the harassment violated federal law, and we are pleased with today's settlement. Ms. Stack will receive monetary recompense from Wal-Mart, and the company will be required to educate its workforce on employees' rights and on its own obligations under the law."

EEOC's Chicago District Office is responsible for processing charges of employment discrimination, administrative enforcement, and the conduct of agency litigation in Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and North and South Dakota, with Area Offices in Milwaukee and Minneapolis.

EEOC advances opportunity in the workplace by enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. More information is available at www.eeoc.gov. Stay connected with the latest EEOC news by subscribing to our email updates.

SOURCE: EEOC Press Release

CNN Hero of the Year 2016 Winner: Jeison Aristizábal, born with Cerebral Palsy

Jeison Aristizábal wasn't born destined for success.

Hailing from one of the poorest areas of Cali, Colombia, and waging a constant battle with cerebral palsy, the world seemed dead set against him.

"When I was a young boy, a doctor told my mom that I would amount to nothing," said Aristizábal, 33.

Family support and a dogged spirit helped Aristizábal gain independence, and he set out to ensure other disabled youth could do the same. Launching a disability-advocacy foundation out of his parents' garage was one of the first steps in a journey that's taken him to law school and across the world.

Now Aristizábal has been named the 2016 CNN Hero of the Year for his work providing educational and medical support for youth living with disabilities in Colombia. Aristizábal was recognized during Sunday's "CNN Heroes: An All-Star Tribute" alongside the other top 10 CNN Heroes for 2016.
The 10th annual show, hosted live by Anderson Cooper and Kelly Ripa, saluted everyday people doing extraordinary things to improve the world. Aristizábal was selected the 2016 CNN Hero of the Year after a six-week audience vote on CNN Digital and social media.

Aristizábal will receive $100,000 to continue working toward greater opportunities for disabled and non-disabled youth. All of the top 10 CNN Heroes for 2016 will receive a $10,000 cash award. Donations made to each of their designated nonprofit organizations are also being matched up to $50,000.

Article By Melonyce McAfee, CNN News | Dec. 12, 2016

FOR THE FULL CNN ARTICLE: 

CNN Hero of the Year winner: 'God chose me to help'

WATCH "CNN Heroes: An All-Star Tribute" and "CNN SuperHero: Above and Beyond" on CNNgo.

Boston Market, Ruby Tuesday Class Action Suits Say Websites Violate ADA, Lack Accessibility Features For The Blind

Nov. 30, 2016 -- A blind woman from New York says the websites for Boston Market and Ruby Tuesday fail to provide adequate accessibility features for blind persons.

SOURCE: Top Class Actions Newsletter, article By Paul Tassin | Nov. 30, 2016

In two separate ADA class action lawsuits, plaintiff Lucia Marett is respectively accusing chain restaurants Boston Market and Ruby Tuesday of failing to accommodate their retail websites to the needs of blind persons.

She alleges the defendants’ websites violate the Americans with Disabilities Act and the civil rights laws of New York State and New York City.

Marett herself is blind. According to her Boston Market and Ruby Tuesday class action lawsuits, persons like her meet the definition of legal blindness if their corrected visual acuity is less than or equal to 20 by 200. She says around 2 million persons in the U.S. are legally blind.

Marett says she cannot use a computer without the help of screen reader software, which reads aloud the information displayed on a computer screen. Websites must be designed in such a way that does not prevent this software from working properly, she claims.

The Web Accessibility Initiative publishes guidelines for web developers to promote accessibility for blind persons using this software. Elements like headings, appending alt-text to graphics, and ensuring all functions can be performed via keyboard as well as a mouse all contribute to accessibility for blind users, the class actions state.

These design elements are readily accessible and are employed on other retailers’ websites, Marett says.

However, Boston Market and Ruby Tuesday allegedly fail to employ the same accessible technology on their own websites. Both restaurants render their websites with an exclusively visual interface, she says. According to the lawsuits, blind individuals must therefore rely on help from sighted persons to use these websites.

Among other alleged failings, Marett says Boston Market’s website uses inaccessible pop-up windows and requires use of a mouse to complete transactions. The images on Ruby Tuesday’s website allegedly have no alt-text that would allow a screen reader to describe the image. The alleged barriers have prevented Marett from purchasing gift cards on both the defendants’ websites, she claims.

Marett’s Boston Market and Ruby Tuesday class action lawsuits come a little over a week after she filed similar claims against Red Lobster. She alleges her attempt to buy a $100 gift card through the Red Lobster website fell flat due to the site’s lack of accessibility features.

In her Boston Market and Ruby Tuesday actions, Marett seeks to represent plaintiff Classes consisting of all legally blind individuals in the U.S. who have unsuccessfully attempted to use the Boston Market and Ruby Tuesday websites during the relevant statute of limitations period.

She is asking the court to order Boston Market and Ruby Tuesday to revise their websites so that they can be used by blind persons. She also seeks an award of damages, court costs and attorneys’ fees, with interest.

Marett is represented by attorney C.K. Lee and Anne Seelig of Lee Litigation Group PLLC.

The Boston Market ADA Class Action Lawsuit is Lucia Marett v. Boston Market Corp., Case No. 1:16-cv-09216, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The Ruby Tuesday ADA Class Action Lawsuit is Lucia Marett v. Ruby Tuesday Inc., Case No. 1:16-cv-09220, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

For More Information, or to follow: CLICK HERE

nTIDE Webinar Jan. 6, 2017 Addressing Employment and Disability

The next nTIDE Lunch & Learn Webinar will take place on Friday, January 6, 2017 at 12 noon EST. Learn more about the December Jobs Report and how it fits into longer term employment trends, hear about programs and research across the country addressing employment and disability, and listen to a guest speaker on current disability employment issues.

The nTIDE Lunch & Learn Webinar Series, featuring a presentation from retired Senator Tom Harkin, is now available online. You can view the Episode 10 webinar, download the audio and read the transcript of the webinar.

Action Alert: Anderson Cooper's ADA Attack on 60 Minutes was dismissive of the disability community

The National Council on Independent Living is alarmed and appalled by the December 4th segment on 60 Minutes addressing the Americans with Disabilities Act and "drive-by lawsuits." The segment, hosted by Anderson Cooper, was one-sided, rife with inaccuracies, and glaringly dismissive of the disability community. 

Take Action

Contact Anderson Cooper and 60 Minutes and ask that they air another segment that gives equal airtime to the struggle of the millions of Americans with disabilities who still lack basic access to our communities. 

• Contact 60 Minutes using their online contact form
• Contact 60 Minutes on Twitter: @60Minutes and @AndersonCooper
• Contact 60 Minutes on Facebook

Instead of addressing the fact that 26 years after the passage of the ADA there are still so many businesses not complying with the law, Anderson Cooper and 60 Minutes chose to focus on the largely overblown issue of "drive-by lawsuits." To be clear, NCIL condemns the actions of those attorneys who are abusing the ADA and making profits off of the civil rights of people with disabilities. While small in number, the actions of these attorneys are harmful to the nearly 57 million Americans with disabilities, and the repercussions of their actions risk increasing the access barriers that we already face. That is unacceptable, and we cannot stand for it.

That said, NCIL supports the right of people with disabilities who have faced discrimination to file complaints and lawsuits. Twenty-six years after the passage of the ADA, people with disabilities are still discriminated against by businesses that either don't take our needs into account or openly exclude us. With no oversight mechanism, we have seen businesses around the country wait to comply with the law until they receive a complaint, meaning that not only is the onus on the disability community to 'monitor' compliance, but also that until we complain we are excluded from their places of business. We are appalled that Anderson Cooper used his platform to shine a light on an undeniably small problem while paying no attention to the access issues millions of us face every day in our own communities.

On top of that, the segment was full of inaccuracies. First, Anderson Cooper stated that most states and the District of Columbia allow for monetary damages for accessibility violations under the ADA. This is false. The reality is that monetary damages are based on state laws in only a handful of states, and several of these states - including California where some examples in the segment were based - have recently passed legislation disallowing damages in addition to making it harder to file a claim under the ADA in the first place. Second, the segment presented compliance with the ADA as overly burdensome and bordering on unnecessary. In reality, the ADA is just one of a multitude of laws, requirements, and codes that businesses have to comply with, and implying that it is unnecessary is wrong and offensive. The segment implied that ADA compliance should only be necessary if people with disabilities patronize a business, while the fact of the matter is the people with disabilities often don't patronize businesses precisely because they aren't accessible to us! People with disabilities are full-fledged members of our communities, and the intent of the ADA was to ensure that all public spaces are accessible to all people.

Lastly, NCIL has grave concerns with the fact that Anderson Cooper did not include any disability activists in the segment. The only people with disabilities shown in the segment were portrayed as pawns being used by the unethical attorneys, and this is incredibly offensive. Twenty-six years ago, the ADA was passed because of the hard work and dedication of disabled activists all over the country. Now, 26 years later, we continue to fight for our civil and human rights to be recognized. The 60 Minutes segment's portrayal of people with disabilities was patronizing and inaccurate, and we demand better.

We strongly urge Anderson Cooper and 60 Minutes to air another segment that gives equal airtime to the struggle of the millions of Americans with disabilities who still lack basic access to our communities. 

SOURCE: National Council on Independent Living