My name is Lex Wells.

I represent VOR, a national advocacy organization for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and their families.

For 27 years, VOR has consistently supported the rights of individuals and their families to choose from a full array of residential options, including family home, own home, community-based options, and facility-based care. 

VOR stands steadfast behind the residents of Lanterman and their families who OPPOSE the proposal to close this fine facility.

ICFs/MR Provide Life Sustaining Quality of Life to Residents.

As a Medicaid licensed Intermediate Care Facility for Persons with Mental Retardation (an ICF/MR), Lanterman is uniquely qualified to meet the complex needs of its residents – many who have called Lanterman home for years, even decades.

Like ICF/MR residents from across the country, Lanterman residents have profound cognitive and physical disabilities, extreme functional limitations, chronic medical conditions and behavioral challenges.

Because Lanterman is a federally licensed ICFs/MR, unlike community programs, residents benefit from annual federal assurances that more than 378 federal quality of care standards are met, including access to health care, appropriate staffing ratios, and attention to therapeutic needs.  This level of care and assurance to consistent quality brings great comfort to the families of Lanterman residents and is simply not available in community settings.

Choice: It’s the law.

In its landmark Olmstead decision, the U.S Supreme Court expressly required residential choice and cautioned against “imposing [community-based treatment] on patients who do not desire it.” As recently as this past December, a federal district court judge cited Olmstead when supporting the improvement, not closure, of a facility:

"Thus, the argument made [in support of closing the facility] fails to account for a key principle in the Olmstead decision: personal choice."

Like California’s Lanterman Act, Medicaid also guarantees choice, providing that eligible beneficiaries must be “informed of any feasible alternative” and provided the choice of either an ICF/MR or home and community based waiver services.

Will closing Lanterman save the California money?

Families of individuals with profound intellectual disabilities find services like Lanterman priceless. We recognize, however, that the decision to close Lanterman is financially driven.

But will California really save money?

There is a long-held myth that community services can always be provided for less money. Peer-reviewed research and common-sense soundly rebut any hoped for cost savings. Lanterman residents will need intensive supports regardless of where they live.  Providing all necessary supports “under one roof” at Lanterman is obviously more cost effective than providing them in scattered locations across California.

Only by depriving individuals of life-sustaining care, will money be saved, a “solution” feared by families and totally unacceptable.

Lanterman is a good financial investment for California.

Has California studied the economic impact of Lanterman to the City of Pomona?  Any time a facility closes, there is also lost revenue.

By way of example, consider Topeka, Kansas, which faced recently recommendation to close a state ICFs/MR, called KNI. In response, the Topeka Chamber of Commerce prepared an “Economic Impact” report, which found that –

“KNI will have a significant impact on the state’s economy during fiscal year 2010. KNI’s revenues and expenditures and its employees and their salaries provide direct economic activity. In addition, this activity will ripple through the area’s economy supporting indirect benefits including sales in local businesses and organizations, and as well as indirect jobs and salaries . . .  In total, the economic impact of KNI in fiscal year 2010 will be $66 million.”

Likewise, Lanterman Developmental Center, with 450 residents, is a major employer in Pomona. In addition to the direct economic activity by Lanterman employees in Pomona, the center itself generates revenue, including significant federal funding, which will be lost if Lanterman closes.

A human and financial solution: Reinvent Lanterman as a Community Resource Center.

Individuals with developmental disabilities who reside at home or in community-based services face great difficulty accessing needed services, such as health care, dental care, OT/PT, wheelchair adjustments, and more. Lack of access to these services can result in a deterioration of individual health and abilities and even death.

Yet, these services are readily available at Lanterman.

Rather than close Lanterman lose its specialized services forever, California should endeavor to reinvent Lanterman as a Community Resource Center. Residents who choose Lanterman as their home can remain, but the specialized services at Lanterman, which are already in place, can also be made available to nonresidents as outpatients.

This is a cost effective model that is in place and working well in other states. Needed services could be delivered TODAY.

Do NOT close Lanterman -There are too many questions and too much at stake.

Will California actually save money by closing Lanterman?

Will significant revenue be lost if Lanterman closes?

Are there community-based providers willing and able to provide equal or better care?

With so many needs already, is it wise to close Lanterman and lose forever its specialized, irreplaceable resources?

Lanterman is home, in every sense of that word, to its residents, staff and families.

Please do NOT close Lanterman.