Translate this Page

About NSLS Legal Services Self-Help and Info Newsletter Contact NSLS Job Opportunities Legal Links Donations Home

Law Services News - December, 2004

Message from the Executive Director

Law Services opened its doors in 1966, thirty-eight years later we are providing support to many thousands of men, women and children annually, preventing evictions from their homes, protecting against domestic abuse, accessing health care - and, in general, helping them vindicate their rights under law. Each day hundreds of Long Islanders turn to us for assistance. I’d like to take this opportunity to thank all the wonderful individuals that work with us all year long. As we work together we can only achieve more. Each and everyone of you truly make a difference in the lives of our clients. We will face new and difficult challenges in 2005 and my one hope is for us is to continue our dedication in helping those less fortunate than ourselves so that all may receive equal justice under law.
Happy Holidays

Final Settlement Victory in Medicaid Nursing Cases

 In the cases, Scholtz v. Novello et al., CV-02-4245 (E.D.N.Y.) and Bacon v. Novello et al., CV-02-4244 (E.D.N.Y.), in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, presiding Justice Thomas C. Platt has ordered a Stipulation of Settlement in related cases challenging New York State Department of Health (DOH) policies and practices regarding the Medicaid home nursing service program.

In an earlier newsletter we reported that Law Services’ PAIR Project (Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights) had filed lawsuits on behalf of two disabled plaintiffs; plaintiff Scholtz who is disabled with Spina Bifida and quadriplegia and resides in Suffolk County, and plaintiff Bacon who is also quadriplegic and resides in Nassau County. Both plaintiffs are entitled to Medicaid private duty nursing services from the DOH and the Suffolk County Department of Social Services (SCDSS) and Nassau County Department of Social Services (NCDSS), respectively. The plaintiffs were chronically without the home nursing services authorized by SCDSS and NCDSS on their care plans. Both suffered from the deprivation of services and were only able to avoid institutionalization because of unreimbursed outside assistance from relatives.

The cases challenged the failure of the defendants to provide authorized Medicaid home nursing services consistent with federal Medicaid law and the provision of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requiring government programs to provide services in the most integrated setting appropriate to the person’s needs. Plaintiffs alleged that the failure was wide-spread and a result of inadequate DOH reimbursement rates and policies, and the failure of home care agencies to abide by current DOH policies to ensure that adequate and appropriate Medicaid nursing services are provided.

In resolving the case, the parties agreed to continue a preliminary agreement providing the plaintiffs with an enhanced rate for nursing services. Additionally, a previous agreement permitting plaintiff Scholtz to participate in the Medicaid Consumer Directed Personal Assistance Program (CDPAP) in conjunction with receipt of Medicaid nursing services, continues under the Stipulation of Settlement and is made a permanent part of DOH policy.

Under CDPAP, recipients select, train, and direct their own home care providers. The program allows CDPAP providers to provide care without Medicaid licensing requirements and the rate of reimbursement is significantly below the cost of a Medicaid nurse. Prior to the litigation, DOH prohibited the provision of CDPAP in conjunction with receipt of other home care services, such as home nursing in a combined care plan- it was one or the other. By a memo, dated September, 2002, to all social service districts, DOH changed its policy which now also permits recipients of home health services (HHS) provided by a Certified Home Health Agency (CHHA) to combine CDPAP with receipt of HHS.

A state-wide policy directive is to be issued specifying DOH regulations to be followed so that Medicaid nursing services are provided consistent with the recipients’ care plans. Included are:

provisions to ensure better case management by the nursing agencies through appropriate supervision,

requirements to advise recipients of procedures to file complaints to the agency and DOH when care is inadequate,

provisions directing home care agencies to develop written emergency care plans,

provisions directing agencies to accept and retain only those patients that can be cared for safely and, appropriately and to contract with sufficient staff to meet its responsibilities.

In addition to these directives, the Stipulation of Settlement contains provisions for an additional safeguard to ensure adequate nursing services are provided. Licensed home care agencies are advised that they may contact DOH’s Office of Medicaid Management for guidance when, despite diligent efforts, the agency is unable to provide authorized services.

Notice of the above described policies are to be conveyed in a Medicaid Update article which will be published by DOH and distributed State-wide.

With respect to Medicaid nursing care recipients in Nassau and Suffolk Counties, the Stipulation of Settlement provides for new procedures regarding an enhanced rate for services. The higher rate may be provided when necessary: because of the severity and complexity of a patient’s medical condition; in cases when the recipient will be left alone in the community in a potentially life threatening situation if authorized services are not provided; when the recipient has a severe mental or physical diagnosis making the patient hard to serve; when the recipient resides in a problematic environment making the case difficult to serve; when the agency, despite diligent efforts, has been unable to consistently provide authorized services; and when the recipient is awaiting discharge from a hospital and no other home care services are available at the time of discharge.

The settlement also orders DOH to give notice to home nursing recipients in Nassau and Suffolk Counties regarding the use of CDPAP in conjunction with nursing services. Additionally, NCDSS and SCDSS have agreed to consider the benefits of optional Medicaid case management to nursing care recipients.

Finally, plaintiff Scholtz has been compensated by Defendants DOH and SCDSS in the amount of $7,000.00 for the failure of the defendants to ensure that authorized nursing services were provided. Full implementation of the court-ordered settlement is anticipated shortly.

Written by Robert Briglio, Staff Attorney, PAIR Unit.

To top of page

Settlement In Lawsuit Will Ensure Homeless Children Get To School

The lawsuit that was filed against New York State, Suffolk County DSS and 14 school districts for not providing educational services mandated by law to homeless children (NLCHP* v. State of New York), is close to a settlement.

As was reported in previous newsletters, the 14 school districts have already agreed to honor the extensive rights of homeless children that are outlined in the federal McKinney-Vento Act, including enrolling and educating any homeless child even when there is a dispute over the child’s status, until the issue is resolved. The consent order has been signed by all school district defendants and has been “so ordered” by the Honorable Arthur D. Spatt, the federal district court judge who is presiding over the case. At one point it looked as though the state and county defendants were going to continue to fight the lawsuit. Then, about 72 hours before the case was about to go to trial, the remaining defendants also agreed to sign a consent order. The terms of the settlement are still being discussed but the parties have already agreed that the goal is to minimize the number of days that a homeless child misses school, especially when the child’s family is already in the SCDSS homeless system and is simply being moved from one emergency housing placement to another. The biggest obstacle seems to have been the lack of coordination between the various school districts, Suffolk DSS, State OTADA and the State Education Department. Hopefully these consent orders will help ensure that all of the parties are working together to make sure homeless children are able to go to school and stay in school.

Jeffrey Simes, an attorney for the law firm of Goodwin and Proctor, led the pro bono litigation team that represented eight homeless families in this lawsuit. Deborah Berger, an attorney with Long Island Advocacy Center which specializes in education law, also worked closely with Goodwin Proctor on the case. The National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, based in Washington, D.C., is a named plaintiff in the case and provided invaluable assistance in prosecuting this action.

When all of the orders are signed by Judge Spatt we will have complete information on the very specific protections that homeless school children in Suffolk County and around New York State, have won through this lawsuit.

Written by Kathleen Whelan, Senior Staff Attorney, Islandia Welfare Unit

*National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty

To top of page

Together Everyone Achieves More

Recently, Law Services’ Legal Support Center for Advocates received a phone call from James Zoufal, an advocate of St. Peters’ Parish Social Ministry in Islip Terrace. His call was regarding a woman who was a victim of domestic violence. She had an order of protection but apparently the abuser was considered so dangerous that the Suffolk District Attorney’s office issued a written recommendation that she leave the area immediately, since her abuser was about to be released on bail. She had been moving each night from one home to another for safety reasons and did not even feel safe in the domestic violence shelter because the abuser had, in the past, tracked her down in the shelter. The woman, unfortunately, was not aware that she could have a domestic violence liaison from the Department of Social Services (DSS) work with her on this very dangerous situation.

The advocate from the Parish Ministry requested a fair hearing for her because DSS was very slow in processing her application for EAF assistance to move out of the area. DSS initially denied her application due to the moving company she chose, and then was processing this subsequent urgent application very slowly. In the meantime, the client was warned by family members that the abuser was out and looking for her. The Legal Support Center referred the case to Antonia Ezechi, staff attorney of the Welfare unit who immediately got involved by making phone calls to the Center and preparing for the hearing.

The attorney went to the fair hearing on a late Friday afternoon and upon learning about the compelling facts in the case, Debbie Alloncius, the supervisor of the Suffolk Fair Hearing Unit, adjourned the hearing and began to take charge of the situation. She walked the application for EAF from one section to another in the Center to personally insure that the woman got the emergency assistance she so desperately needed. Furthermore, because she believed that the approved EAF funds would not be sufficient to help the family to successfully relocate, she contributed her own money along with the personal contributions from the St. Peter’s Parish Social Ministry.

Though the bureaucracies may have failed this family, it was the collaboration, caring and teamwork of the individuals from three separate agencies, that assisted this woman and her family to escape to safety. They went over and above the call of duty and stand as a reminder to all of us that the real “Safety Net” is the help offered by good people that can make the difference.

P.S. Unfortunately this client’s nightmare is not over. This case recently appeared on Channel 12 News as the abuser is attempting to petition for custody of the children and the court is summoning her to appear in Suffolk County!

To top of page

Project Jumpstart Will Get You Moving

Project Jumpstart, a program of EAC (Education and Assistance Corporation) provides low income working individuals with an automobile in order to help them maintain and improve their employment.

To be eligible an applicant must:
Be a resident of Nassau* or Suffolk County:
Be responsible for a minor child;
Have a family income less than 200% of the federal poverty level;
Have been working full time for the past six months;
Have a valid drivers license and be insurable.
All recipients are required to pay $50 per month for 2 years for the vehicles they receive with a no-interest loan arranged through Astoria Federal Savings. Jumpstart recipients also receive help with the cost of car insurance and repairs up to limits set by their County’s employment program guidelines. A limited number of vehicles will be distributed to eligible applicants and a Certification Committee associated with Project Jumpstart will select recipients based on predetermined criteria, including transportation, child care, employment and/or special needs of applicants.

For more information call (516) 571-4879 in Nassau, and (631) 853-3867 in Suffolk.

*Note: Nassau County is currently out of cars , but names are being placed on a waiting list.

To top of page

The Home Energy Assistance Program

What is HEAP?
The Home Energy Assistance Program (HEAP) is a federally funded program that provides financial assistance with heating costs to households that are income eligible. The receipt of HEAP can also have a significant impact on food stamps budgets, resulting in a larger food stamp grant.

Who is Eligible for HEAP?
Eligibility is based on income and the housing situation. Higher benefits are provided to those households that: have larger percentages of their income spent on energy costs; contain a vulnerable individual*; and have the lowest income. The total gross monthly income for the household size must be at or below the following:

For those who reside in subsidized housing (e.g. Section 8), they must pay for heat costs separately from the rent. Individual applicants must be U.S citizens or qualified aliens.
What are Regular Benefits?
New York State provides regular HEAP benefits
to households that pay directly for heat as the tenant and customer of record, or who have heat costs included in their rent. The household benefits are calculated using a point system. The points are based on income, percent of income spent on energy, and the presence of a vulnerable individual in the household. The point value for the 2004-2005 program has been set at $50 per point. Eligible households that pay directly for heat receive a benefit ranging from $150 to $400. Eligible households that do not pay directly for heat but whose landlord states that heat is included in the rent, receive a standard statewide benefit of either $40 or $50. Regular benefits are available starting November 3, 2004.

What are Emergency Benefits?
New York State provides emergency benefits to households who are the customer and tenant of record. The applicant must also reside in the dwelling and have insufficient liquid resources to meet the emergency. Eligible households receive emergency benefits based on the type of emergency. Emergency benefits are available as of November 3, 2004. In the 2004-2005 program basic emergency benefits have been set as follows:

Heat related domestic only  - $100

Natural Gas-Heat Only - $235

Natural gas heat and electric to
operate heating equipment - $335

PSC/Village of Greenport Electric Heat - $485

Municipal Electric heat  - $235

Non-utility heating fuel (oil, kerosene, propane, wood)  - $400

How Do I Apply for Benefits?
Applicants can apply by mail if they are 60 or older, in receipt of Temporary Assistance to Families (TANF), Food Stamps or Supplemental Security Income (SSI) or those under 60 who received benefits in the prior year.

Those households not permitted mail-in access must apply in person for benefits. Applications are taken at all the local DSS centers. For information on where to apply, call 1(800)342-3009.

Households may download a printable version of the HEAP application for submission to local districts offices. The website address is http://www.otda.state.ny.us/otda/heap/. In addition these households must make the necessary appointment for a face-to-face interview.

How Are Payments Made?
There is the Automatic Payment Component to the 2004-2005 HEAP Program for households in receipt of TANF or Foods Stamps with HEAP- eligible living arrangements. These households are on the statewide computer system and are issued payments directly through the computer system. No application is required.

Payments to households that pay for heat separate from their rent are sent directly to the household’s vendor. Payments to households that have their heat included in their rent are paid directly to the household.

Advocacy Hints
:#1 Being a HEAP recipient can give the family a Food Stamps budgeting advantage. The advantage is significant and worth filing a HEAP application, even if just for a $50 grant.

#2 HEAP IS NOT A REPAYABLE GRANT, therefore, during the HEAP season, make sure the application is made for HEAP (not EAF or 131-s. )

#3 The distribution of HEAP funds has become mired in delays and incorrect denials. DENIALS and DELAYS ARE APPEALABLE! (See below)

*Vulnerable individuals are defined as children under the age of 8, adults aged 60 or older, or disabled individuals.

To top of page

Good News About Food Stamps

As of October 1, 2004 more people may be eligible for food stamps. The new income guidelines are as follows:

Household Maximum Maximum

There are also new eligibility guidelines for people that are 60 or older and/or disabled. Please call the Nutrition Outreach and Education Program of Catholic Charities of Rockville Centre at (631) 789-9546 for more information.

Also, for those who get food stamps and have the new Medicare Drug Discount Card they may get more in food stamps effective October 1, 2004 as a result of a new Administrative Directive (04-ADM-07). This ADM requires DSS to get information from households with Medicare recipients, at the time of the initial certification and at recertifications, regarding enrollment in a Medicare-Approved prescription Drug discount card program. If DSS is informed of enrollment in one of these Medicare discount card programs, an additional $73.00 in medical expense deduction will be budgeted in the food stamps grant.

There is a form that food stamp recipients can use to inform their worker at DSS that they are enrolled in the Medicare-Approved Drug discount card program. Please contact Law Services and ask to speak to Cathy Lucidi for a copy of this form. You can also call The Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance at 1-800-342-3009 for the address and number of your local food stamp office.

To top of page

Lawsuit Seeking Accessible Bus Transportation for Disabled

Nassau/Suffolk Law Services has filed a federal court complaint on behalf of eight persons with disabilities against Suffolk County and its Department of Public Works, Transportation Division (DOT) for the failure of the County and DOT to provide handicapped accessible bus transportation as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

In the case of Collins et.al., v. Suffolk County, CV-04 3384 (E.D.N.Y.) the plaintiffs allege that the fixed route bus service in Suffolk has been non-compliant with ADA regulations requiring that buses have operational lifts and that bus stops, major intersections, and destination points be announced for visually impaired passengers. Violations of these requirements have persisted for years, notwithstanding continuous complaints by riders and advocacy groups such as the Suffolk Independent Living Organization (SILO). For example, SILO conducted random testing of Suffolk County Transportation’s (SCT) fixed route buses in 2002, which revealed that of the more than 75% of County bus routes tested, more than half of the tested routes revealed no stops announcements and less than 30% of the tested routes complied with the rules for announcing stops. These results were conveyed to SCT, but no meaningful steps were taken to correct the problems.

The failure to announce stops and intersections and to have operational lifts has resulted in plaintiffs being stranded and left in dangerous circumstances on numerous occasions. Also, plaintiffs and other Suffolk residents with disabilities who might ride fixed route buses refuse to do so because of these violations of law.

Suffolk’s complementary paratransit program, “Suffolk County Accessible Transportation” (SCAT), which the ADA requires for persons with disabilities who cannot ride the fixed route system, is also plagued with violations of federal requirements. The result is a second class transportation system which deprives persons with disabilities equal access to Suffolk’s transportation system as required by the ADA.

Plaintiffs and other paratransit riders are routinely deprived of next day service (scheduling a ride 24 hours in advance), which is required by the ADA. Rather, since the inception of Suffolk’s paratransit program in approximately 1993, SCT has required one week’s notice to secure a ride. Various other capacity restrictions confront riders of Suffolk’s paratransit system, including substantial numbers of missed and untimely trips, trip denials, and excessively long trips. Additionally, for years SCAT riders have had to endure hours of waiting to get through to an operator to schedule a paratransit ride.

These violations of the ADA result in plaintiffs and other disabled residents of Suffolk County being deprived of an equal opportunity to engage in community functions, including work, obtaining medical care and other necessaries, recreation, and other social activities taken for granted by non-disabled persons with access to public bus transportation.

Plaintiffs are seeking an injunction from the Court ordering Suffolk County and SCT to provide bus and paratransit services as required by the ADA.

Written by Robert Briglio, Staff Attorney, PAIR Unit.

To top of page

The Truth About Emergency DSS Applications

Applications to DSS for rent arrears to prevent evictions, obtain Expedited Food Stamps, etc., should be met with the urgency and gravity that the situations deserve. We have been hearing reports from advocates and clients that DSS, especially the Suffolk Centers, have been routinely turning people away at the window before they are ever able to present their problem or be screened. The common reason given by the receptionist is that the emergency quota for the day has been already met (often this number is arbitrarily set at 10, similar to the call-in prize giveaways on the radio stations). These unfortunate individuals are told to try their luck by returning the next day. The kinder DSS receptionists offer advice that the person arrive earlier in the morning, at least 8:00 the next time, so they’ll get to be seen.

Also, with the colder season and changes in weather come the heating emergencies, utility shutoffs, and other heat-related needs. HEAP (Home Energy Assistance Program) season is now in full swing and it is important to understand and review the eligibility guidelines. (see article P.4 ) Of course, we see emergencies in all seasons but many of them become all the more urgent in the winter.

So we need to educate ourselves
and learn the law!

There are legal procedures and criteria that DSS must follow when a client presents an emergency need. Here are some of the more important points and the relevant legal authority:

EMERGENCY QUOTAS ARE ILLEGAL.

All identified emergencies trigger a same day interview and the issuance of a same day notice (18 NYCRR 350.3(c)). Mailing the notice out at a later date in response to an emergency application is unacceptable. The notice must clearly explain how the emergency will be met. 02 ADM-2

Social Services Law Section 133 requires that assistance be granted pending the completion of an application to any person in an immediate need situation.

18 NYCRR Section 351.8(c)(3) and 351.8 (c )(4) define emergency situations as including: no food, no shelter, no fuel for heating during cold weather, utility disconnect notice, lack of items necessary to meet health and safety needs of the household and no resources available to meet the emergency. Administrative Directive 02ADM-2 P.3¹ specifies other emergencies which include: threat of eviction and pending eviction. (Note that a 72 -hour notice is not required to demonstrate an “emergency”. A document threatening eviction or court papers are sufficient.)

Car insurance and repairs can be considered for emergency grants under EAF for recipients (02ADM-2 p.4,7) or as a diversion payment (pp. 6-7 ) for employed applicants.

¹02 ADM-2 can be found on our website. www.Nslawservices.org. Click on Self Help and Legal Information, then scroll down to “Other Help” at the bottom of the page and choose OTDA Policy Directives. On the left hand side of the page, select 2002 Policy Directives.

The request for assistance can be made by the applicant or any person acting on the person’s behalf. The application may be submitted at any time during regular business hours 8:30-4:30, in person, by phone or by mail. If assistance is requested by phone, written notices must be mailed by DSS to notify the person of the acceptance or denial. 02 ADM-2 (p.10). Note that the administrative directive requires a written notice be generated in all cases.

DSS is required to assess the emergency situation and if an immediate need is determined to exist, meet the immediate need the same day the applicant comes into the office. 02 ADM-2 p.2

Though documentation is very important, DSS is supposed to help the applicant obtain verification through collateral contacts including neighbors, shelter providers, utility companies, landlords, and employers where the applicant has tried but could not get the information needed. 02 ADM-2 (p.3) and 18 NYCRR 351.5

A face to face interview is not required. 02 ADM-2 P. 4

Financial eligibility to meet emergency needs does not follow the same budgeting process as ongoing public assistance. Eligibility for emergency needs is based on available income so that the 200% poverty cap for families applies only after expenses for rent, medical, and transportation are deducted from income. 02 ADM-2 p.3 Example: 200% of the federal poverty level for a family of three is $2542 . Advocacy Hint: After deducting rent, medical, etc., from gross income most families will fall within this guideline.

For single adults and families without minor children (under 19), the cap is 125% of poverty and expenses are not deducted from income which makes it more difficult to be eligible.

Ability to meet ongoing expenses, especially in the case of rent arrears, is an important factor in determining whether the emergency need will be met by DSS.

Repayment agreements are often required, But Not For Expedited Food Stamps, HEAP, Emergency Assistance To Adults (EAA for SSI-eligibles)

Have you seen this notice displayed? LDSS-3814 “Temporary Assistance Additional Allowance and Other Help” is required to be posted in DSS client waiting areas and provided to any local community groups upon request.

All other non-emergency applications must be processed within 30/45 days! 18 NYCRR 351.8b,c. Interviews for regular applications usually required within 7 days! 18 NYCRR 350.3(a)

Problems and questions on these points can be discussed with the Legal Support Center at (631) 232-2400 Ext. 3369 (Advocates only). Clients can call the Welfare Unit in Suffolk at (631) 232-2400 and in Nassau at (516) 292-8100.

FAIR HEARINGS
FINALLY, REMEMBER TO REQUEST AN EXPEDITED FAIR HEARING WHENEVER A CLIENT IS DENIED OR TURNED AWAY FOR EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE WITHOUT BEING PROPERLY SCREENED. CALL LAW SERVICES FOR FURTHER GUIDANCE AND POSSIBLE REPRESENTATION.

The FAIR HEARING phone number is 1 800 342-3334.
Fax number 518 473-6735

Or request a FAIR HEARING online

For more information about DSS applications and operations try their websites:

Suffolk DSS website

Nassau DSS website

To top of page

Preventive and Other Services Can Offer Hope for Homeless Families

Families in emergency housing deal with the daily struggles and uncertainty of their tenuous and unstable situations. They are faced with the challenges of: locating housing in a rental market that is severely limited for people of low income, the daily anxieties over daycare, juggling transportation to jobs and/or their children’s school, physical and emotional disabilities in the family, etc. To add to the stresses, parents in Suffolk County are also expected to comply with DSS-mandated DOL/SWEP work assessments, interviews and meetings, often involving travel from distant shelters to a DSS Center. When a parent fails to attend one of these work appointments and then fails to call DSS right away to offer a “good cause” explanation for the infraction, they receive a sanction notice. The sanction imposed involves having their public assistance grant reduced. But for families in emergency housing it also means that DSS will usually threaten to discontinue temporary housing assistance for the entire family. If the parent has no “plan” for housing the children, DSS will then threaten to place them in foster care.

Under present law, if a family has no place else to go and fears that they are facing foster care placement for the children, they can consider applying for preventive services. Recent fair hearing decisions (e.g. 4105394Y F.H.) have upheld the state’s administrative directive (96 ADM 20) which directs DSS to continue emergency housing while Preventive Services is evaluating an application for services or a client already has an open services case of any type (preventive, child protective, adult protective). Of course parents with children should always be aware that a proper preventive services intake will involve a thorough investigation of the family’s circumstances. If the children are in any imminent danger, a neglect petition can be filed by Child Protective Services in family court. However, even if a petition is filed, the family should be able to stay together in emergency housing until the case is fully heard and a decision is rendered.

Thus, emergency housing residents who are sanctioned are advised to carefully consider the need for supports through Preventive Services or Adult Protective Services. Referrals to Preventive Services for an evaluation are especially important where preserving emergency housing in order to maintain the family unit is at stake. Because most parents are overwhelmed with the daunting stresses and DSS requirements, they can generally use the able assistance of a dedicated Services worker to assist with tasks such as:

Job search
Transportation to job/SWEP or DOL
Daycare problems
School issues
Family counseling
Disabilities
Children’s/parents’ emotional problems
Housing Search
Organizing paperwork( DSS/SSI, etc)

Community advocates who are familiar with a family’s circumstances and particular needs are advised to outline these specific suggestions to Preventive Services. A proper evaluation interview by the Preventive Services worker should demonstrate a comprehensive problem-solving strategy designed to effectively assist the parent who is overwhelmed and numbed by the trauma of homelessness.

The Legal Support Center for Advocates is available to assist community workers as they help their homeless clients facing these challenges. Call 631 232-2400 x 3369.

To top of page

2005 - A Year of Ups & Downs for Social Security Recipients

The upcoming new year brings some good news and some bad news for Social Security recipients. Below are the changes in Social Security Law and in Medicare premiums:

Social Security Disability Thresholds

Substantial Gainful - Blind $1,380/mo.
Activity (SGA) Non- Blind  - $ 830/mo.
Trial Work Period (TWP) month - $ 590/mo.

SSI Payment Standard

Living Alone  - $666/mo.
Couple  - $602/mo.

Medicare Premiums

Although Social Security benefits will increase 2.7 percent next year, high Medicare premiums will take nearly half of the increase for a typical beneficiary. The Bush Administration announced in September that the monthly Medicare premium for 2005 would rise by $11.60, or 17.4 percent, to $78.20, from the current $66.60. The increase in Medicare premiums will take 46 percent of the increase in the average Social Security benefit.

Most of Medicare’s 40 million beneficiaries choose the optional Part B coverage, which helps pay for physician services, hospital outpatient care, durable medical equipment and other services, including some home health care. The Medicare premium is deducted from their monthly Social Security checks.

Remember though that some disabled clients receive both Social Security and SSI and are, therefore, eligible for Medicaid without a spenddown as well as Medicare. Medicaid will pay the $78.20 premium, and so the Medicare premium would not be deducted from the Social Security Disability check. If this is not happening, the Department of Social Services Medicaid division should be contacted immediately. Even if the client is not eligible for regular Medicaid, The Medicare Savings Program can pay the premiums for them. Applications for Medicare Savings (QMB, SLMB, Q-1) are made at the Medicaid division of DSS. Call the Legal Support Center for more information or try the Medicare Rights Center website at: http://www.medicarerights.org/medicareq&aframeset.html

To top of page

Sixth Annual Commitment to Justice Dinner Was a Huge Success

The 6th Annual Commitment to Justice Dinner which was held on November 17 at Carlyle on the Green in Bethpage State Park was a great success. It was a spectacular event for many reasons, not the least of which was our amazing honorees. This year’s honorees were:

Howard Glickstein, Dean Emeritus, “Commitment to Justice” award
Touro College, Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Ctr.
Andrew J. Turro, Esq., “Partner in Justice” award
Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, PC
Scott M. Karson, Esq., “Partner in Justice” award
Lamb & Barnosky, LLP

In addition to the award from Law Services, each honoree received a special citation from Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi highlighting their contributions to the community and their dedication to the concept of equal justice for all Long Islanders.

Each honoree paid special tribute to the attorneys and staff at NSLS. Scott Karson acknowledged that we do more than talk about equal justice, we live it. The career choices we have made reflect such a deep commitment that our work is a way of life. We could work elsewhere for more money but we don't.

Andy Turro said that his firm's commitment to pro bono sprang from a thought he had after attending one of our dinners. He went to the managing partner, his colleague and friend, Lois Carter Schlissel, and asked, "Can't we do something similar to Law Services"? And he got an enthusiastic response and became Pro Bono coordinator for the firm.

The highlight of the evening came when Dean Glickstein, whose life and career has been as a champion for equal rights, asked all the attorneys and staff of NSLS to stand and be acknowledged by the audience. It was a proud and stirring moment to see all the staff in attendance and we certainly got the biggest round of applause of the night.

Also our client speaker was a charming woman whose comments reminded everyone why we do what we do. She was lovely and very eloquent. And last but not least, Lea Tyrrell of NEWS 12 Long Island served as the evening’s emcee and was thoroughly engaging. Over 250 attorneys, judges and supporters attended the dinner.

To top of page

A Beautiful Day at the Vineyard

On Saturday, June 19, 2004 Nassau Suffolk Law Services Committee hosted a Vineyard Tour and Winetasting at Martha Clara Vineyards in Riverhead. The guests were treated to a tour of the property which boasts wedding facilities, a gazebo and horse drawn carriage rides. There are thoroughbred racehorses, Clydesdales and a small zoo on the property. Guests also enjoyed an exhibit of exotic African art collected by the Hemingway Foundation and on permanent display at the winery. We tasted eight wines and enjoyed light snacks. After the tour, guests were invited to visit a new art exhibit by North Shore artist Joann Von Zwehl and to relax on the patio and enjoy the music and the beautiful evening. Many thanks to the staff and members of the Advisory Council who attended and a special thanks to the group from Mental Hygiene Legal Services who joined us. A good time was had by all and we have already had requests to do it again next year.

Our Day at the Vineyard was a new type of fundraising event for Law Services in an attempt to encourage a different level of financial participation for our supporters. Look for announcements in our upcoming newsletter about similar fundraisers. We welcome the support of our readers, community advocates, and clients!

To top of page

We’re Sad to See You Go

Law Services will be losing two very special attorneys.

Margaret Schaefler, Senior Staff Attorney in the Domestic Violence Project, will be leaving us after 13 years of service. Her expertise and dedication in helping victims of domestic violence is widely recognized and Jeff Siegel, Executive Director, calls her a “feisty and fearless attorney”. We wish her luck in private practice.

Phil Easton of the Senior Citizen’s Unit in Hempstead will also be leaving Law Services after three years of service. He began his work with Law Services in the Hempstead Civil Unit and later moved on to working with seniors. His hard work was only surpassed by his reputation for being a caring advocate and congenial colleague. We wish them both much success in their future endeavors.

To top of page

Law Services Staff Gets a Break

On October 27th, Law Services staff were treated to a much needed respite - “Law Services Getaway Day”. In a rare day of relaxation and stress-free social gathering the 92 members of the staff had the opportunity to refresh and reconnect with one another under the guidance of Sue Federicks, the facilitator from On Purpose, and experience a wealth of alternative health news and information shared by Dr. Rick Linchitz. Thanks to them for their valuable contributions. Furthermore, the day would not have been possible without the hard work of our Labor Management Committee:

Support Staff: Ann Rosner, Maria Canteros, Inez Lopez, Cheryl Roach
Staff Attorneys: Darlene Rosch Kim Novak, Robert Halpern, Carolyn McQuade, Giovanna
Ferdenzi, Bill Bode (ad hoc member)
Management: Jeffrey Seigel, Lois Grossman, Beth Wickey,
Denise Weisbrod, Rita Linchitz (ad hoc member)

Finally, our appreciation to Frank Pelliccione, member of our Advisory Council for helping to secure the donation of Bank of America’s meeting space which made the day a true “Getaway”

Archives
March/April 2004
May 2004
September 2004
December 2004
March 2005
July 2005
September 2005
January/February 2006
March/April 2006
July/August 2006