UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

** *******************

W. IASIMONE JR.

his father and next

JOHN IASIMONE

THERESA DiPIPPO

her father and next

ALBERT DiPIPPO

GIRARD by his father and next friend,

GIRARD LeCOUNT

his sister and next friend

LACOURSE vvn.u~.~~ POOLE
POOLE

his mother and next friend

WAITE by his mother and WAITE II r<'l":'l'nlmr.n'""'""'

friend,

QUINN by her mother and next

friend, GLORIA QUINN NOLAN

LeVASSEUR, friend EILEEN

her mother and next

GERTRUDE VERRY

friend DOROTHY BARBARA PELLETIER by her father and next
friend, JOSEPH PELLETIER

in behalf of themselves and all

all others

situated

RHODE ISLAND ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED

LADD SCHOOL PARENTS ASSOCIATION

PLAINTIFFS,

vs

J. JOSEPH GARRAHY Governor State of Rhode Island

ROBERT LIQUORI Director

of Administrations

JOSEPH J. BEVILACQUA, Ph.D. Director Department of Mental Health
and

~~
* *
*
* *
*
* * * * * * * * * * *
""
* * * * *

M. CONE Ph D., Assistant Director, Division of Retardation
EDMOND Assistant

JOHN G.
GEORGE W. GUNTHER, Associate Ladd School

NEDO

Ladd School

***** ***

*

, Joseph H. Ladd

*

*

H. *

*

H

*

*

Services

H. *

*

DEFENDANTS

*

***** *** *

la

Plaintiffs follows:

this action against Defendants and

1. This is a class action suit brought up on behalf of all residents of the Joseph H. Ladd School (hereinafter "Ladd School 11 ) to secure a right to care, treatment and habilitation which meets minimal constitutional
2. This action arises under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and under the of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Jurisdiction is granted to this Court
s 28 u.s.c. 1343, § 1651, § 2201 and 9 2202.

3 Plaintiff John

Iasimone, Jr., age 18, resides at Ladd

School in Greene II. He has been

a social

age of two (2) years. He was admitted to Ladd School on

9 1968 and his abilities and activities have

since that date. He resides on the second floor in a group

He is

of independant

in

case of emergency.

- 2-

4. Plaintiff, Mary Theresa DiPippo, age 26, resides at Ladd

in Newport II. She has been assigned a social quotient age of

three (3) years and one month. She was admitted to Ladd

School on October 8, 1958. She has not received a medical

gynecological examination while at Ladd School. She is in

need of special modified shoes to com.pensate for a left foot

abnormality.

5. Plaintiff, Wilfred Girard, age 36, resides at Ladd School in

Riverfield. He has been assigned a social quotient age of

and 59/100 years He was admitted to the Ladd School on

December 5, 1964. He suffers from

loss,

for this condition have not been provided He

shoes because of a tendon condition, but such shoes have not

been provided.

6. Plaintiff,

LeCount, age 61 resides at Ladd School in

Riverfield. He has been assigned a'social quotient age of two

(2) years and is presently blind. He was admitted to Ladd

School on December 13, 1924. He has been injured while at

Ladd School. He is in need of speech therapy but no program

is being provided to him presently

7. Plaintiff, Walter Poole, age 24, resides at Ladd School in

Wickford Cottage. He has been assigned a social

age

of six and one half years. He was admitted to Ladd School on

- 3-

8 1957 His feet have been

infected due to

lack of proper

He is a member of the Roman Catholic

Church but is unable to attend services due to discontinua-

tion of services at Ladd School

8 Plaintiff, Norman Waite, age 56, resides at Ladd School in

He has been

a social

age of five and one

years. He was admitted to Ladd School on December 11 1940.

He is in acute need of dental care. He

a corrective

speech program, but none is

provided at present.

9 Plaintiff, Kathleen Quinn age 25 resides at Ladd School in

Fogarty III She has been

a social

age of

one and

years She was admitted to Ladd School on

May 13, 1959. She has

care since admission

due to

and self-abuse Until her

in

Fogarty III in May of 1977 her needs were not fulfilled.

10 Plaintiff, Marion LeVasseur, age 38, resides at Ladd School in

Greene I. She has been assigned a social quotient age of four

and one half years. She was admitted to Ladd School on Novem-

ber 4 1954 She

uses a wheel chair, but could be

if

with a walker and

and

Since 1973, the social age quotient

to

her has

two years

- 4-

11. Plaintiff, Gertrude Verry, age 60, resides at Ladd School in

Mann. She has been assigned a social quotient age of 15 years

and 3 months. She was admitted to Ladd School on November 18,

1943 She has been judged capable of

Her record indicates that she is inappropriately placed at

Ladd School, but has not been placed in a less restrictive

environment because of the Defendants' failure to

the

same.

12. Plaintiff, Barbara Pelletier, age 33, resides at Ladd School

Cottage. She has been

a social

age

of eight (8) years. She was admitted to Ladd School on

February 26, 1963. Her records indicate that she has not re-

ceived a

examination while at Ladd School. Her

cognotive abilities have regressed despite a record indication

that she was classified as "high educable" in 1963. Prior to

her recent transfer to Kingston Cot~age as of September 12,

1977, she was not participating in programs due to "injuries

and

in stairs."

13. Plaintiff, Rhode Island Association for Retarded Citizens, Inc

(hereinafter referred to as"RIARC") is a corporatio~ duly

incorporated under the laws of Rhode Island. RIARC is

affiliated with local organizations within the State of

Rhode Island and has members who are parents, relatives or

guardians of residents of the Ladd School.

- 5-

• Plaintiff Ladd School Parents Association, is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of Rhode Island. The Association has members who are parents, relatives or guardians of residents of the Ladd School .
• Defendant, J. Joseph Garrahy, is the Governor of the State of Rhode Island, and, as such, exercises overall responsibility for the operation of all public institutions .
• Defendant, Robert Liquori is the Director of the Department of Administrations and, as such, acts as the executive officer of the Governor in all matters pertaining to the financial administrative, planning and policy coordinating functions and affairs of departments and agencies within the executive of the government of the State.
17. Defendant, Joseph J. Bevilacqua, Ph.D is the Director of the Department of Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals and, as such is responsible for the supeYvision and control of all public facilities for mentally ill or mentally retarded and of all persons received into any of the said facilities.
18. Defendant, Donna M. Cone, Ph.D., is the Assistant Director, Division of Retardation in the Department of Mental~ealth, Retardation and Hospitals and, as such, is responsible for the operation of mental retardation programs as assigned the Director.
- 6-

. Defendant, Edmond R. Coletta, is the Assistant Director of

Planning and Budgets in the Department of Mental Health,

Retardation and

and, as such, is

for

and other administrative duties as assigned by

the Director •

. Defendant, John G. Smith, is the Superintendant of the Joseph

H. Ladd School and, as such, is charged with the responsiblity

of the overall operation of the institution and the appoint-

ment and removal of subordinate personnel, contingent upon

the approval of the Director.

Defendant, George W. Gunther, is the Associate

and, as such is

with the overall

of the

institution and the appointment and removal of subordinate

personnel, contingent upon the approval of the

when

and acts with the approval of the Director.

22. Defendant William H. Woodcock, Jr.,' is the presently acting

Superintendant of the Joseph H. Ladd School, and, as such, is

charged with the overall operation of the institution and the

appointment and removal of subordinate personnel and acts with

the approval of the Director.

23. Defendant, Nedo Nora, M. D. is the Chief of Medical Services

at the Joseph H. Ladd School and, as such, is charged with the

responsibility of providing medical services to all residents

in accord with good medical

under the direction and

supervision of the

- 7-

24. This is a class action brought pursuant to Rule 23(b) (1) and

(2), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on behalf of all men-

tally retarded or mentally ill persons now residents at

Ladd School. The class consists of about seven hundred

(750) members and is so numerous that joinder of all members

is

25. The claims, age, sex, diagnosis, legal status, length and

of residence, degree of retardation,

limita-

tion, assigned social age quotients, attributed intelligence,

and capacity to benefit from habilitation, including suitable

care, treatment, education and training of the named

individual

, are typical and representative of the

claims and characteristics of the other residents at Ladd

School. In addition, among the members of RIARC, there are

parents or relatives of the Ladd Scbool residents who are

representative of each sub-class. Accordingly, the

will

and adequately protect the interests of the class.

26. Pr6secution of separate actions by individual members of the

class would create a risk of inconsistent adjudicat~ons with

respect to

standards of conduct for defendants

and would as a practical matter be dispositive of the

of the other members not party to the adjudication or sub-

interests

or impede their ability to protect their

8 -

27. Defendants have acted, refused to act, or been unable to

act, on grounds

to the class, thereby

final

relief with respect to the

class as a whole.

28.

Plaintiffs and the class on whose behalf this action is

brought have no

and adequate remedy for these constitu-

tional

except court order

the

Defendants to take all necessary action to correct these

abuses.

29. The

H. Ladd School, located outside of Exeter, Rhode

Island, is a

residential treatment

maintained

by the State of Rhode Island, for mentally retarded and other

handicapped persons. The facility consists of fourteen

resident

and a number of program, staff and support

30. The present resident population at Ladd School is

seven hundred

(750),

of males and females

between the ages of six (6) and

(96). R~sidents

and programs are described by levels of functions:

retarded

retarded;

handi-

capped,

severely retarded, nonambulatory

and chronocally ill. The residents function at different

- 9-

levels and have

and

Many

are

to seizures. Some residents are blind and some

of these have other

Many residents are non-

verbal or have speech defects. A number of residents are non-

ambulatory. Some residents have

degrees of

Some residents are deaf or suffer severe hearing difficulties.

Many residents are bed-ridden and

total support

services. Many residents have

difficulties

difficulties of

and

31. At all relevant times, the Defendants have acted under color

the state law and

under Title 23 of the General

Laws of Rhode Island in

and carrying out the

which have led to a denial of fundamental constitu-

tional

to the residents of the Ladd School

32 All of the residents of Ladd School have been admitted without

alternatives or voluntary choice under non-

criminal

for the purpose of habilitation,

care treatment, education and

in order to.~,-~,...~

each resident to lead a life as close to normal as may be

Under the due process of law of the Fourteenth

Amendment such

of

can be

, if

at all

if each resident in fact is

with

- 10 -

suitable habilitation services in the least restrictive

environment.

33

under color of state law the Defendants, have created,

fostered, condoned and

that have denied

each resident the minimal constitutional

to habilita-

tion because of a failure;

A. To furnish each resident with an individualized

habilitation program which is

and

updated, and where such program has been

the Defend-

ants have failed to

facilities and staff necessary

to fulfill such program;

B. To construct and maintain an

a safe and humane environment for the

residents;

C. To maintain

at

levels

D. To

new facilities for t~e transfer of

residents into the

or the least restrictive

environment

E. To

necessary medical and dental treatment

and care thus

the health and safety of

residents

11 -

34. Defendants have instituted a program to provide individual

habilitation plans in order to meet the requirements of the

Amendments to Title XIX of the Social

Act. Such

plans are incomplete for many residents. Such plans must

include a frequent and comprehensive review of each resident's

mental and

condition including evaluation and

ment of the resident s habilitation plan Such

review does not take place at

intervals upon a compre-

hensive basis at Ladd School.

35 Programs

under individual habilitation plans are not

provided to residents in many instances. Clothing is stored

in over-crowded closets and little or no effort is made to

instruct or permit residents to select, match or care for

their own

Residents are not instructed or

to wash their own clothing. Residen~s with severe

are often excluded from programs necessary to their ongoing

development whether therapeutic or educational. Many adult

residents are provided with no programs other than

television soap operas or listening to high-volume

stereo music.

handicapped residents are often

by age and sex with chronological ages of ten {10)

to

(35) "lumped together". Age

with residents ranging from one to three years apart are not

available.

- 12 -

36 Behavior modification programs do not include functional

individualized

to teach alternatives to destructive or

rehabilitation unit

with eleven to twelve

has little program and none

on a full day basis.

37 Most residents have

to do which is functional,

educational or recreational "Plans of Care" are

in

black

binders at the unit office and in each build-

, but review for

and

is

and

lacks

of a

educator on behalf of

the resident

reviewed Staff often are faced with the

conflict of

records or providing direct service and

the conflict is resolved by the failure to read records.

THE PHYSICAL FACILITIES ARE INADEQUATE AND DO NOT PROVIDE A SAFE AND WARM ENVIRONMENT FOR

38 The environment at Ladd School is

one of

and

This environment is

of

residents the habilitation necessary to enable

them to reach the maximum level of

of wltich

are

The

conditions at Ladd School, includ-

used to house, feed and care for residents, are

conducive

to deterioration and debilitation of residents,

who are

of even elemental

and human

13 -

conditions are present and some residents have

been injured directly as a consequence of such conditions.

inadequacy of the facilities creates an inhumane environment

which deprives residents of opportunities for

. The residence buildings are

and inadequate, to

wit;

A. Bathrooms lack partitions affording

to residents.

Paper or cloth towels are usually not provided and hot air

hand

are

Showers are group or

type

no personal privacy. Toothbrushes are often "locked"

from the residents and stored in common containers in which

each brush is directly in contact with others. Female

supplies are locked in closets. Toilet paper is not

to residents in some buildings and many toilets lack seats.

Tubs which

those found in standard American homes

are nonexistent. Tubs to convenien~y aid the physically

handicapped are not available in buildings housing such

residents and in some instances where such tubs are on hand

have not been taken out of the shipping cases and set up for

use Hand basins do not have water controls which aan be used

by persons with gross or small motor problems. Water controls

on showers are inadequate to ensure

of residents.

Broken toilet adapters for use

the physically handicapped

are stored in an area awaiting repairs. Only one undersized

- 14 -

mirror is located near hand basins. Many bathrooms are open

to day rooms

the user's

and privacy. Slab

tubs for the

are "used" for storage of

towels and

B. Bedrooms are dormitory style and many are overcrowded

with beds placed head to foot to other beds. There are no

clothes closets in most residence

There

are no tables or chests for

such as

combs brushes

or

radios. Personal

are kept locked from residents in corner offices

with

obtainable from attendants. Clothing is

in

clothing closets

residents little opportunity to

select, match or care for their own clothing. Washers and

dryers for

are not generally available. Chairs are

not available in

areas to afford independent or

relaxation to residents.

decorations in some

adult wards are children's dolls, inappropriate to this

population. Linen is institutional white not

residents the

to

use of color often

found in home

Recreational

is sometimes

stored in bedrooms prohibiting its access and use. Some

dormitories appear "

like" with raised observation

forms constructed in the center. Floors in these units are

tile as is commonly used in bathrooms and kitchens.

- 15 -

c. Day rooms or recreational areas are overcrowded often

furniture in good

Record

and tele-

visions are

with loud volume. Walls are

bleak and often decorated with

child like

effects for an adult

bedrooms

are used for

areas. In buildings

there are often no

for activities at

wheel chair

Bubbler fountains are inaccessible to the

Elevators in some

have

incidence of breakdown time

activities of the

Public

are not available

to residents for

calls to or from families or

friends.

D. Heat is poorly

in most

often

hot or cold temperatures within the

E. Fire exit doors are often

checked

and many

are

Three

trucks for use by a volunteer fire company on the

of Ladd School are

A fire exit from the

basement of one

is constructed of combusti~le wood

(2 X 4 s) There have been two fires in this

re-

evacuation of the residents A wooden ramp has been

constructed as an exit to a

residents but the ramp will not

the move-

- 16

• The number of staff is

to provide an effective pro-

gram or a safe environment for the residents of Ladd School

The overall ratios fail to meet the standards

for by

the Department of Health Education and Welfare, 45C.F.R.

s 249.13(b) (5) (iii) (A) and by the Joint Commission on

Accreditation of

Residents are

grouped

together with minimal number of staff providing only custodial

services. There are only two

the entire Ladd School population. Several

are unfilled. While some staff have

many positions are filled as many as three times each year.

education is provided thereafter. A grant of $7,500 from the

been

Disabilities Council to ,provide staff training
to support visits to other organizations and

facilities rather than

of direct care

new skills for work with residents There are

workers assigned to serve three hundred twenty residents

their families There is one

four hundred

adults in rehabilitation programs.

one other

pathologist to serve two hundred other adult

residents These individuals are often

other

such as the Qualified Mental Retardation Professional

18 -

ment of beds or some wheel chairs thus

these

residents Smoke detection systems are not present in some

wooden

There is no automatic fire call system.

F. Food is served in

halls

little program

related

Food is often set out for

of

time

to the residents'

in the

meal

an unsafe condition for residents The service

is custodial rather than

due to the

number

of persons

at the same location The

of

dining facilities is unrelated to the

of

residents. Heimlich charts are not

areas

although many residents in such areas have

which
G

result in

incidents.

II'
and linens in an area used as an infirmary are

washed in common washers with clothing and linens from other

floors of this

to a

risk of

infections among the residents

H. There is a

space for staff.

Often staff utilizes

rooms as a coffee room. Some

storage areas

toxic substances are left open and

unattended.

fluid is left

in many

location.

17

under Title XIX standards.

shifts in

assistance in emer-

are

understaffed

these resi-

dents. In

where

occur

there is no additional staff

to cover such increased

population. There is a serious shortage of all medical, dental

and record

staff. Six master's level

positions are unfilled As a direct consequence

of the

of staff, Plaintiff residents and members

of the Plaintiff class are denied programs of

, occupa-

tional and speech therapy and such denial results in

of the condition of the Plaintiff residents and other

of the Plaintiff class. As a result of the

care staff restrictions are

on residents and

are administered which are

and unnecessary

except for custodial purposes Resitients are given medica-

tion to enable staff to control behavior.

THERE IS A FAILURE TO DEVELOP NEW FACILITIES FOR THE TRANSFER OF RESIDENTS INTO THE COMMUNITY OR

. To fulfill constitutional and statutory

the

Defendants must

all alternative treatment

or

facilities and

the Plaintiff residents in the

alternative treatment

their needs. Records

- 19 -

must be

of all consideration

at

reviews to

alternative

and the reason why any alternative was

Services must be established to

precare and after care treatment consistent with the treatment

needs of the residents including the resident Plaintiffs and

all members of the Plaintiff class The Defendants are con-

stitutionally

to provide as an alternative to the

School as

constructed, small more suitable

restrictive treatment

or facilities such as

clinics,

homes, rest homes, group

homes, day houses

houses and other

residen-

tial environments. To the extent that such least restrictive

alternative treatment settings do not presently exist the

Defendants have the duty to create new alternative facilities

or to

and restructure existing but inadequate facili-

ties so that all the resident Plain,iffs may be placed in al-

ternative facilities to their benefit. The named Plaintiffs

members of the Plaintiff class should no longer be confined

Ladd School, which provides little treatment, inadequate

services

rehabilitation pro~rams and

vocational training for the Plaintiffs and members

of their class The Plaintiffs should be placed in lesser

restrictive

where suitable treatment can be

- 20 -

and where there is

rights of

, association,

less abridgment of their ~~~cvHr travel and

42 The named resident Plaintiffs and the members of the Plaintiff

class have not been and cannot reasonably expect to be

in less restrictive alternative settings because the

Defendants do not maintain accurate records at Ladd School,

which

the determination of whether a resident should

be placed in a less restrictive setting and such records

include no documentation of the consideration

to

ment in a

or facility The Defendants

fail

and

less restrictive

alternative

The Defendants have not established

adequate placement

at Ladd School. The Defendants

have no procedures for

prospective residents to less

restrictive

prior to admiss~on. The Defendants have

failed to

deploy staff to affect proper

The quality of care

or approved by the Defendants in

the few

alternative facilities is so low that the

resident Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class would b~ harmed

and not benefited if

in such alternative facilities.

The Defendants have failed to establish or enforce minimum

standards for alternative facilities that will assure the

- 21 -

persons

in such facilities are benefited and not harmed.

The Defendants have failed to allocate the necessary resources

and to

the establishment of a continuum of less

restrictive alternatives that will provide suitable treatment

for a broad range of conditions. The Defendants have failed

to coordinate and

any comprehensive plan for the

establishment and maintenance of an adequate number of

less restrictive alternative

and have acted in the

practice of

their duty to

and establish

a continuum of less restrictive alternatives, all in violation

of the United States Constitution.

THE DEFENDANTS HAVE FAILED TO PROVIDE NECESSARY MEDICAL AND DENTAL TREATMENT AND CARE THUS ENDANGERING

43. The Defendants have failed to provide sufficient medical and

dental staff to meet the minimal needs of the Plaintiff

resident and members of the Plaintiff class. The Defendants

have failed to

regular gynecological services to

adolescent and adult females. Many female residents have

not received a gynecological physical examination f;r many

years. Pap tests, so called, are not given to female resi-

dents. There are a number of residents with

or

severe vision loss but the Defendants do not provide special

- 22 -

services or

for the blind. Many residents

are

but the Defendants

no

physiatrist or

consultation. Many residents suffer

but the Defendants provide

one

on the staff

making adequate treatment of

those with

Some residents for

whom medicines,

and narcotic drugs have been

have such medicines and

administered by untrained per-

sonnel. The procedure of

is unsuper-

vised and

Many residents

wheel chairs

which

to be

The Defendants

fail to take such minimal steps as are necessary to insure

that the Plaintiff residents and others of the Plaintiff class

who

such wheel chairs are suitably fitted. The

Defendants have failed to provide sufficient

staff for

the clinic area. The Defendants ha~e failed to

minimal dental care to the Plaintiff residents and members

of the Plaintiff class. Dental care is not available to

individuals for whom such care may offer the opportunity for

of

and/or communication skills. ~The

failure of the Defendants to

such minimal medical and

dental care endangers the life and safety of the Plaintiff

residents and others of the Plaintiff class. As a result of

- 23 -

the failure to

and necessary medical and

dental care many residents have suffered

harm and

continue to suffer such harm. There have been deaths of

provide necessary medical care.

. Because of the

, the vast majority of the residents

Ladd School have

regressed and deteriorated since

Many of them exhibit

and

uncontrolled

postures, etc. which is not the result of mental retardation

but instead is the result of

in a barren

inhumane environment.

45. Because of the

, Plaintiff residents and others of

the Plaintiff class have been deprived of the habilitation

necessary to enable them to speak, read, communicate, mix and

assemble with others of their choice and also to exercise other

protected the First Amendment.

, Plaintiff residents and others of

class have been

of their

to

and

the Fourth and Fourteenth

Amendments.

- 24 -

47 Because of the

class have been denied due process and

of the law in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Because of the

, Plaintiff residents and others of

Plaintiff class have been

of their

, suitable

been retained in other than the least re-

environment suitable to their needs

Because of the

, Plaintiff residents and others of

class have been denied the benefits under Title XIX

Social

Act, 42 u.s.c. s 1396, et. seq. which

the funds

pursuant to the Act be

care and treatment in non-institutional

for the needs of the Plaintiff

and others of the Plaintiff class.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs

pray:

1. That this Court determine that this action may be

a class action and make such orders for notice as

may deem

and proper.

That this Court determine and declare that all residents

at Ladd School have been denied their constitutional

receive care and treatment

individualized

a safe and

environment,

25 -

adequate staff and have a realistic

medical and dental care - such that to lead a more useful and

this Court determine and declare that Ladd School

meet

minimum standards of

care treatment, education and

Court declare,

and hold that the

acts of comission and omission, violated the

Constitution, by

A. To

the resident Plaintiffs and members of the

Plaintiff class in the least restrictive alternative

or facilities suitable to their needs

B. To create and maintain an

number of such alterna-

tive

or facilities;

c. To establish maintain, and enforce minimum standards

to ensure that the resident Plaintif~s and members of the

Plaintiff class are benefitted their

in such

alternative

and facilities;

D. To provide the resident Plaintiffs and members of the

Plaintiff class with suitable treatment under the

restrictive conditions consistant with their treatment

needs

E. To carry out their

in other

as described above

- 26 -

5. That the Plaintiffs be

a

and upon final

, a permanent

sufficient to

the unconstitutional conditions,

and

herein

6. That said

direct Defendants

to meet

such standards as this Court may

7 That the Defendants be ordered to provide for the

residents now in Ladd School such

additional habili-

tation as may be necessary to compensate for the

and

deterioration they have suffered

8 That a Receiver or Master be

and endowed with

the necessary

to oversee and

said orders and

injunctions

9. That this Court retain jurisdiction over this matter

until the

have been completely implemented.

10. That this Court grant such othen and further relief as

shall be deemed necessary and

, including but not

limited to an award of attorneys' fees and costs to the Plaintiffs

submitted,

Fullerton Massachusetts 02181

27

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

CIVIL ACTION NO. 77-0727

JOHN W. IASIMONE, JR., ET AL, Plaintiffs
vs.
J. JOSEPH GARRAHY, ET AL, Defendants.

INTERIM CONSENT DECREE

1. Based upon the record and consideration of the responses filed by all the parties in conjunction with this case, this Interim Consent Decree ("Decree") is consented to by the parties and entered by the Court for the purpose of establishing a framework for providing a suitable living environment and habilitation services for each member of the plaintiff class, in accordance with federal and state co~stitutional standards. This decree will facilitate the process of negotiations for a possible final consent decree.
2. The defendants shall prepare and present to the Court and to the plaintiffs a comprehensive plan of service for the mentally retarded citizens of Rhode Island, with special emphasis on those persons currently residing at the Ladd Center (hereinafter "the service plan"), detailing the living arrangements and services necessary for the adequate habilitation of each class member. The plan should identify those services necessary for the eventual

habilitation of the class membership in the least separate, most integrated, least restrictive community setting. The plaintiffs and the defendants are in disagreement as to the legal and constitutional obligations of the defendants to provide each member of the plaintiff class with the least separate, most integrated, least restricted community setting. Therefore, the use of such terms within this Order is employed as a planning standard only and does not require implementation of such standard by the defendants under this Order.
3. The service plan shall include: a. A statement of purpose and policy setting forth
defendants' commitment and obligation to all mentally retarded persons, including plaintiffs, to provide them suitable community living arrangements together with such community services for adequate habilitation.
b. A description of the mentally retarded persons to be served including demographic, developmental characteristics and service needs.
c. A description of a model services system taking into account the existing services provided by the Department of Mental Health, Retardation, and Hospitals (MHRH) and those services to be provided by other agencies.
d. A description of the method to be used to determine class members' service needs, to establish an individualized evaluation and service planning process by which defendants will provide a written individualized program plan to each member of plaintiff class and to provide annual periodic review thereof. Such description shall also include the specification of resources
-2-

procedures, and a schedule for individual evaluations and the formulation of individual community program plans and the periodic review thereof. The process for development of the individual service plan shall provide for the participation of the individual class member or his designated representative, parent, guardian or advocate, as appropriate, and the plan shall include provision for an independent review process in the event that any party shall disagree as to the merits of the individual service plan.
e. A description of the method to be used to establish an individual records system.
f. A description of the method to be used to establish a suitable case management service to provide a fixed point of accountability for each member of the class. The case management plan shall specify the proposed method for providing a sufficient number of qualified staff to manage the program plans for each member of the class.
g. A plan for the creation, development and maintenance of mechanisms to monitor a system of services to assure that living arrangements and other services of the necessary quality and quantity are provided to retarded persons, to provide for
~
the physical health, safety, and well being of each member of the class.
h A plan specifying the quantity and type of living arrangements and other services necessary to meet the needs of the plaintiff class.
-3-

i. The service plan shall specify the capital and matic needs at Ladd Center so
including care, treatment, education and training shall be each member of the class, during the interim operation of Ladd Center and so long as he shall reside at Ladd Center.
4. The defendants shall include within the service plan, management techniques, policies and procedures designed to provide ongoing services with the least disruption in the class member's life.
5. The defendants shall develop appropriate procedures for receiving comments and suggestions from representatives of the plaintiffs in the development and preparation of the service plan. The sole responsibility for the final content of the service plan will be that of the defendants, and the service plan need not be approved by the plaintiffs as a prerequ\site to the defendants' compliance with this Order.
6. The defendants will complete the said service plan and file it with the Court and the plaintiffs on or before May 31,
7. For each component of the service plan as specified above defendants will prepare an implementation schedule which will include the budgetary and staffing requirements necessary to implement the service plan and the proposed timetable for tation. The implementation schedule shall provide for the interim operation and utilization of Ladd Center and a proposed timetable for replacement of services at Ladd with services in the community as appropriate.
-4-

8. Defendant may meet the planning requirements by a comprehensive plan of services for the mentally retarded of Rhode Island. However, in each and every component specified above such plan shall include and identify in particular the community living arrangements, community services, case management and monitoring system, to be provided for all members of the class and shall include measures to insure the safety and well being of all Ladd Center residents and measures to assure that all activities at Ladd, both programmatic and otherwise, contribute to the prompt provision of services necessary to the habilitation of each member of the plaintiff class.
Counsel to the Plaintiffs
ATTORNEY G~NERAL Counsel to the Defendants

Dated

Approved and entered as an Order of the Court

this

day of

' 1979.

-5-

 
 l
I

·~ .,,u .,. .\....... f A.

I'!~MBF.R MO. OAYYEAR ~
f.=

... ~

~ ( ..

23 $

i-- i
I

Ol03/l 77 0727 12 09 77 3 ~ l

I

X

PLAINTIFFS

OTHER NUMBER OEM. YR. NUMBER

DEFENDANTS

77 0727

·-' ..... _.~

I JOHN W. IASIMONE, JR. , by his father and I
next friend, JOHN W. IASIMONE; MARY THERESA DiPIPPO, by her father and next friend, ALBERT DiPIPPO; WILFRED GIRARD, by his :father ani next friend, CHAR1liES GIRARD; JOSEPH LeCOUNT, by his sister and next :friend, ANITA LACOURSE; · WALTER POOLE, by Jds mother and aext ,i..'
friend, ADALINA POOLE; NORMAN WAITE by
his mother and next friend, GERTRUDE' WAITE; KATBEEEN QUINN, by her mother and
next .friend, GLORIA 'JJINN NoLAN;
MARION LeVASSEUR, by her mother andnext . fr~end, EILEEN LeVASSEUR; GERTRUBE VERRY, ~-- her sister and nextfriend, DOROTHY CATLa.t; ~ PELLETIER, by her .father and next friend, JOS~..J'~~~

J. JOSEPH GARRAHY, Governor,

State of Rhode Island

\

ROBERT LIQ.UORI, Director, Depart-

I

ment of Administrations

JOSEPH J. BEVILACQ.UE, Ph.D. ,

Director, Department of Mental

r
'

Health, Retardation and Hospitals '· ·

DONNA M. CONE, Ph. D.,

Assistant Director, Division of

Retardation

EDMOND R. COLLETTA, Assistant Director, Planning and Budgets, Dep- .

artment of Mental Health, Retards..:...

tion and Hospi tals
JO~T G. SMITH, Superintendent,

Joseph H. Ladd School

w o. - GEORGF.

l l i J N I I ' = ~ ,;. .. -k.o ..

\

~

CAUSE

l l

i 4.

This is a class action sui to secure a right to care, ments. This action arises

ttrberaotumgehnt tupanodnhbabeihlail~faojdfoan lwl hriecshidmeenettss

of the Joseph H. Ladd School minimal constitutional require-

under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United

~, ~:-:~~ n~~~~: ~=·~ ~~:.u.s.c. h9fl3. Juris.U.ction is granted to this Court by 28

_ __ '--- -'' -~· ·- -- -- - - - - - - - - - - -·--·--- __.__ .-

--..-·. ------

A. Arnold Lundwall, Esquire

.

Jameson, Locke & Fullerton

Eight Grove Street

.

Wellesley, Massachusetts 02l8l
617-235-7000

Mark Mandell
SJoulsman~Cearllinl
One Park Row

'\J.-J~ ~ .
~,
()I'

-f j ~ ( ~ E.u. .g.,evniedeFn.ee,rRiial

'
.Bank

(T )"
Building

Providence, RI

··

.S4 'JJ ··.,_.

~~

Pau1 Jameson, Esquire Jameson, Locke, & Fullerton Eight Grove Street

;(73

y

*

.

3Ct"J~11

.
/P?J

erMI/~· _·

~~?"?tJ-t:J -/'/f/'.?~j'tL •ctr/ '/"t-'.5

f

Wellesley, Mass.

Paul Pisano 40 W.es tmins

, t

erEsqS

~

reet

/.rt v/ -6i1t- isc 617-235-7000

~ ?t/- 9.A,1~-IzJ

\x-Deborah . Dept of

~P tal

~lth;·R<e:rit>ardation

&

Hos'"'

S.• Arlene V · let, Esq.'>

600 New London Avenue

1 '"'

70 S. Mai Street

Cranston, RI ¥-& V -.::J.J-2...JL

Providen , RI 20903
'~ (- ?/29?.>

~tl't·(/1~

"s.J~~1s

Sl-e:;ien ;chtih;i
I 0/~ '/Je Sj~'~re,

~~~ ~ ~~7~3 r ~~ -1/..tm

t~,~,/1,~:.0 a~' ~

I ;J.. 7 Pt~rrAnt.t.

Pn-,~,

1/~1-'llp ~

,r,1Jrt?e 11,,,,~11
II/ ~A/IIl-i/n

'ft,l f~/0

,q /len

\

.

\_l?ulune

I:AJ ~tY'

..Z1~ ~\~3n>

l!f'#W&, ,..~~s-~-~,..?s

~~

. 7r~t5-l n~el"'

'151.... ;()

D

0 ~6HHEERCEK
IFFICLED:=:AS FORMA

tlt~:1:~2:-:~0D~9A~~T=7E~7====-c=r==-=~=#=~2=3~~2F1~~RI~ELC~~ElIP~~TNN~$;U1GM~5~B,F=E0R~0=E~=ES=~=PA=~I~~=D=~~-·-~c~.~Dr~.-~~NU~~)M~NB~~~E~~R-==-~~C_ARS!DTA~TIS~TDI~CAAT~LECMA~AR~IDLSE:D:J JS·6 Gl-01- 78

-----~UNfflPUAJIUT~P~EDDRiUIS~~~TEESt_.oit$~T~~~~C~T~~OUUlRRlTr.o~~~Ck~eE1tf..~-~-~--~~~..~-~-~-~- ---~--------- __ L·--- ----------==tJS~-6~- =_ -=__~_-~PC~--1=1- U=R=e- v=.1/=- 7fiJ)_ _

FOIL PL flJTF$ . 4-4---rt

:JQfhtJ S 11 t~on!J £ tL1 J£ I

!Je~s~s,

lfofff 1u

v--.

laadiJ..,o 1 f v-parJE

~

03~

~ ~~-'

'

pft{fV, teL (J2f!03

.· 521- q4·oD

I I

;;~'

.{ -~

Jl*E '. liiR.

PROCEEDINGS

Dec. 9 1

Complaint :f'Ued with A, Arnold Lundwall, Esquire in appearance·

2

Summons issued returnable within 20 days after service.

.

.: ( ,, ...

·3

Notice of Appear~ce filed bJ Paul Jameson; Esquire,.-·co-c~unsel :f'~r l'l~inti.fi' SPl r

Dec.l3

. 9 S~ons~s retu~ned, du.jy served-..and filed. . . ,

29

· Deft, .smith's .motion to enla<tge time to l/21/78 ·to .Mswer granted, entered

·.· and filed~ (1-h) · ·: ·

, ·

·

·

1978 . '
Janr ..~ :

Pltff~ -~-

. •.

" .

response to .deft,

John

G.

Smith's

motion . t~. e~large

t .ime

fo~

filing

answer filed·. · lk

.

.

..

Feb 18·. 24

'

s ·tipulation -re: Defe s · will answer by 2/13/78 · ~ith. no furt;her ex~ en~ion entered and f

Answer of Defta fi·led, (rh)

· ·

· ..

rh

. 2.4 : .. Defts'' • motion -for substitution of part.i~s .tilde, (rh) .

· ·•

. '•

Mar 15
Q);i 1979 Apr 6

·· 'Deft' 8 matton to subsitute parties granted'· ent~rei:l .arid fil"~d. : ~rh) ·

.. . ··.J·.·

...

~~

Interim· consent decree re: Defts will prepare ~-omprehe~e~vl! plan..of serY,ice

by 5/31/79. entered, filed. (rh)

· ·· ·

21

:ax Stipulation. r~: ·..::tme w:tt!i:f:n wlrl:cfi detts- will ~:tle c~pre~n~'Ye - p1a~ se:L·y:i.c.,

called· for :tn Interim Co~sent De~r~~ extend~d to and :.tnclu·d:t:ng 6/30/79 Clppro~ed
entered 6/20/79 and filed ·, lk

(

June 25

Entry of appearance for pltff of S. Arlene V.:t.olet Uied. 11<:

(

r July 5
@, \~1j 16
I
i Sept 26

Stipulation re: Time within w.hich defta w..:t.ll £ile co~rehensive plan of service called for in Inter:J:.m Consen·t Decree dated 4/6/79 :!a extended to 7/16/79 entered

')

and filed. lk .

J

ea.prelieilsive plan receiYeil~

Pltffs ' mtn/class action detem:inat:Wn .fi:led. 1k

Oct. 27
31 Nov 7
1( 1( 1 18
21

Deft's. Objection to Motion for Class Determination. filed. Deft's. Motion for extension of time to file memo in opposition to class cert filec.
Stipulation re: Deft•s may oppose m/class by 10/27/80. entered, filed . (rh) Order re: Deft's may have until 11/10/80 to file memo in opposition to m/class.•
entered. filed. (rh)

Defts' mtn/discovery 1n aid of class action determination filed. lk

Defts' ~e:x.tension to answer interrog Pltffs' obJ. to mtn/extension to answer

and request for admission interrog and request far a

to dn

12/5/80 ission fi

lfeidle. d1.

··~l·

k ·-

St1pulation re: Deft, Bevilacqua shall respond to request for admi"ssions and Deft, Gunther shall respond to interrogatories by 12/5/80. (rh)

l

)

~

Pltff's Mtn/Extension of Time for response to deft's motion for discovery to December 5, 1980, filed. jr

26
Dec 5,19 0
1981 July 2
7 Aug 24
31
sept 2a 10 10 15

Pltff's objection to m/discovery in aid of class filed. (rh)
~s. of Deft Gerorge Gunther to Pltf. Interr. Responses of Joseph Bevilacqua, to pltf req. of Adm. jew

Notice to take deposition of JosephBevil&:qua filed. 1k

Pre-trial order re: Maoos due 9/25/81 entered & filed. 1k

Entry pf Deborah Clake as co-counsel for clefts filed lk

I P1tffs' mtn/extmsict'l of time to answers intetrog t~ 9/17/81 filed, lk

5Ptrfl!~iPis~?mf;en~t1r:yR~upio~n1

°f1 ~Y?8f~~yn
land filed.

Chang~

£Van

7/15/81

to

8/7/81

entered

9/1/81

& ~iled

J

Pltff•s m/discovery filed. (rh)

Pltff's m/protective order filed. (rh)

"'' " ' "' IJV...I\11 1 \iUN IINUAI IUN li>nQr: I
PLA INTIFF

·- I\ J OHN W. ISAIMONE JR., et ala

DATE

NR.

DEFENDANT
J. JOSEPH GARRAHY, et ale
PROCEEDINGS

DOCKET NO. 77-07 27 PAG E _2_ OF _2_ PAGES

Sept.l5
21
24
25 28 Oct.6 Nov 16
13
13
Dec 2 Dec 2
2
8
9
7
21
29

Pltff's Response to request for admissions filed.

Pltff's Mtn. for Protective Order filed.

Deft's Obj. to request for entry upon land and examinati on of premi ses filed.
Deft's Obj. to mtn. for discovery and production of document s & ~hing e f i led.

Deft's enlarge time to comply with pre-tria~ order to Dec . 15, 1981 f i led.

Pltff's Notice to take deposition Daniel Mart in and J. Jos eph Garrahy filed.

Pltff's mtn . enlarge time to comply with pre-trial order file d .

Deft's obj, to Mtns. f or protect i ve or der and t o compel more r esponsive ans. filec

Deft's Mtn. for · Protective Order f iled.

.. ~

P1tff's mttvenla:t:ge time to· canply w/pretria.l order to ·12/ 15/81 grant ed, ent ered

& filed. 1k

Protective order re: access to resident records · restricted as listed .

entered, filed. (rh)

Order re: discovery will proceed as outlined. ent.ered, filed. (rh)

Deft's m/compel answers filed. · Order re: Pltff•s m/entry. upon

land

is

passed.

entered, filed .

Order re: Deft's m/protective order passed. entered, f i led. (rh)

Order re: Deft's m/compel granted as outlined. entered, filed. (rh)

Order re: Pltff's m/compel production granted. entered, f i led. (rh)

Notice to take deposition of RI Association filed. (rh}

Defts' objection tom/protective order filed. (rh)

Pltff's m/protective order filed. (rh}

1982 Jan 4

Notice to take deposition of J Healey filed. (rh)

21

Stipulation re: Pltff's m/protective order passed . entered, f i led. (rh)

- Jan 12 Apr12

Notice to take deposition of George W. Gunther fil ed . jlc
. Defts' mtn/take ~sition of pltffs' experts. 1k

···-

Apr.jf .·
30 --

~ oSOPrRtldDfep!E:fuStsR:'.vU:t~R;n.a;byPEtos1:orteobaeSnninfat.eoetiiPrftaeroulnpelfCcaat:r::eCt:rauit1!noa:.qidenne.)n~dls2i.oa. snf&-uc-pmebfnajwoer-stc/ititeteirtsomonasptohopferfoesvcxtoepidneptrbuitnylsuactifnioiolguenrjd,tu.aarnnisyddPiiBcntl:ci'ot~ynotnroayfa.t.methdvieis.n. fctooorutrhotr.ids er

vapacpalitcinagblsetirpeulileafti;onan, ydp:la:srmtyias~ ing

the underlying tmVe to m:>dify

action,· final·judgpletlt or other or vacate provisions of stipul.ati

c

~

30

for good cause shown or as reasonable attys' fees and

othetw:lse provided under ·FRCP clefts costs of pltffs entered, 4/29i82, .

Order ·of notice to class entered 4/29/82,

shall

pay· the .
· ·

30

Notice· entered, 1k .

.._ j\1ay 4
4

Stipulation. deponant

$re9:50D. epeonstietrioend.

of

J
.

McGee

to be ·

4/27/82,

Defts

agree

to

reimburse

S~ipulation re: Depqsition of K Schwaninger to be 4/24/ 82, Defts agree to

· reimburse deponant $350. entered. . (rh)

Jul 15

Form of notice. rh

.

- - · - - - .., __ - ~

--

* -

DC· 111A (Rev. 1/ 75)

CIVIL DOCKIT CONTINUATipN SHEBT PLAINTIFF

DATE

NR .

DEFENDANT PROCEEDINGS

DOCKETNO. __________

- - - PAGE

OF

PAGES _,;. "
f

Jul 19 26
Aug. 30 Oct. 6

Stipulation Stipualtion
8/30/82.
StipRE exte

re: Pltff re: names entered.
nsion til

'sofaaguretheotroizesdetrteleprfeosren$t4a8t0iv0e0s

in fees may be

filed. rh

9/30/82 on names of authorized repre.

.

not entered. rh submitted by
to b~ submitte.' .

jG~

Affidavit of Deborah P. Clarke Affidavit of Kristina B. Schartner

Sep 7

Counsel for pltff entry of appearance, gm

Sept 30
Oct 3
7
7
7 13 13 24 Nov 1
1 1 Nov 4
7 ..
8
Nov 3 1983
Nov 14
Dec 14
1984 May 16
22

P]j[£ Pltf Atty

mtn to adjudge in contempt. mtn for withdrawal atty. RE
Violet & Jameson opposition

deft. jew: violaet & James·on. jew
RE mtn for withdrawal.

jew

DDSDueeebfffptttsos's'erneomas.bp/ejoernhnclsateirognetomttiom/·wemi/ttahoddjur1ad0wg/2ea0li/.8n3cfoinlteemmpetm. o. rhrh

Deft's m/quash. rh

Pltff's objection to m/quash. rh

Enter the Affidavit

appearance of of R Kessler.

E Hastings

for

S

Arlene

Violet.

Affidavit of A Violet. rh

AHHhJpeuepeadaeargirarnieirnngagghnHcaeccseooloednnfxttRiihnnWEiuubimeelidlsttinsaR.mEfpojlemCrtwftlsniauftnfboodsnrtdicsteuuofbt-tic.ooancrugonuoussefnlsacepnold.lutnf1rs4eemslet.tnx, 8hf.oedrx4ehcsw.iusiib2tonswnetsiitrstuensteeecs.rosv.njetedjiwen.wujeedw. jew

Affidavit of 0. It. Thompson. cb

Memorandum--Cpurt denie~ t counsel without projudice

ne motion snd defer

s f

to cite urther a

defts ction

in comtempt ~nd for a period of

to
90

remove days.

enter (

d

to DEFT"S M/AMEND
Pltff's obj. Deft's m/amend

~

Affidavit of A. Anthony Antosh

"Affidavit of Paul Sherlock

Affidavit of James V: Healey

July 3 9
16

Deft's modified P~tff'~ obj. to

m/amend judgment Deft's modified m/amend

judgment

Pltff's m/adjudge in contempt

Jul 25 Jul 27
Jul 30

Ooj to pltf's m/adjudge in contempt. cb 1CCianaw~sfe2etncwceaaeslel~llk.eesdd.{.5ADeu3xgewnuftisi;ottsni1tems3s./s,me1soC9.do8ifn4y1t)i0,nsuteiecxpd.bhoitbofitAJsu.plryiJl3,u0d~1g9e1892r8.e4s

Pltf's m/adjudge in at 10:00. co erves on decision.

contempt, Memos due

Sep 18
Oct 10 '

OORpDoiEnfRiopRnlae:nre3:P/1Sl5ttf/a8'ts5e;'msP/amldt/jmfufdo'gdseifymin/Jcucidtogenetmienmenpcttongirtseamndtpeetndi~deeddn,aietdede. ofetf'nsqteumro/etaadm.e4nr/dh30i/s85g,rasnutbemd.ission-
entered. cb

Noy
'

'
" - - - L - - --.....Jt....._

- - - . ·--· --~--

.

--· - - - . - - ...

- -· -- - ···--·- -··--~-

DO UlA
IR•v. 1/78)

PLA.lNTIFF

....--··.

Iasome

DATI:

NR.

CIVIL DOCKET CONTINUATION SHEET DEFENDANT
Garrahy
PROCEEDINGS

DOCKET NO. r-0727
PAGE :3--0F......-;rPAGES

t!ov 16 D~~ 26
19-95
Jan 2
Jan 2 3
Feb 1 Feb 1~ Fe6 1
Jan 18
May 1
~s Jun 26
Jun 28 !Aug 8 SepS
~ep 19 Sep 30 Sep 30 Sep 1~

Partial transcript, July ~o, 1~84, filed. M/withdraw.a1 of appearanceof.JViolet·. ·6b

Case called. M/wi.thdrawal of appearance of Violet - lllotion granted provided entry of appearance fs. filed w.f.tfiin 10 days·. to represent class· Rubdme to · ·
prepare..forni~ of order:; . CD

Affidavit of ~essler filed. ch

.

Order re: m/withdraw of Violet granted upon condition entry of subs~tute

counsel by 1/14/85, otherwise Court will give public notice seeking

subsitute counsel. entered. rh

Application of K McKenna. rh

Wf.tlidrawal of appearance of Ruo.fne for defts. cB Enter tne appearance of Sfierman for defts. c6

ORDER Re: Court will consider appointment of counsel from applications filed witfi. clerk. entered. co Deft'&m/amend Oct lU, . 1989 order. ch

Ladd Center BOnitorfng Committee report of June 21, 1985 meeting. cb Deft' s- -./amend. eli .
Enter the appearance of Hastings and Lichatin for pltfs. cb Stip re: ext of tiiOO far deft to 9-23-85. ch
Deft 1 s withdrawl of m/ anmend. ch
\!H tbdrmd of appeareance of Ias:im:me, et al for plntff. ch
·M/ for leace to file an entry of appearance as cmmsel far plntff. ch
Affidavit of Dr . Robert L. Carl. ch

Oct 15 15

10/23

Dec 15

)

Dec 15
12-23

Mandell's m/enter appearance granted. entered. rh Defts' withdrawal of m/amend granted. entered. rh
Fntry of appearance as comsel of Mark S. Mandell, Esq., Susan Carlin,
and Joln J. M:!Coonell 3r. Esq. for Pltf.
Pltf' s m/adjudge in contenpt. cb Pltf's obj to deft'"s m/amend. cb
CIUER RE: The state parties agree to reduce the Ladd population to not u:vre than 240 residents by JBIU.lat'y, 1987 in accordance, with the schedule a ttached hereto as exhlbit A. 'lhe State Parties agree to expedite the construction and operatioru of group Innes identified in F.xhibit A to the extent possible. 2. 'Jhe State Part ieE encourage the Advocate Parties and interested non-profit groups to submit proposa s for grants to construct additional p):'Oup homes to further reduce the Ladd populat on belCM 240 residents. Said proposals shall be consistent with the plan referred tc ir paragraph 3, infra, 'frut said proposals nay be sulmi.tted forthwith. Upon receipt <f c
proposal, approval by the State Parties shall not be unreasonably withheld. 3. Deft Dr. Carl, :in consultation with the State Parties, agrees to work top.ether With t .Advocate Parties to develop by March 1, 1986 a detailed plan for cormunity placement Of tbe ranai.ning !.add residentS 1 which plan Shall include programatiC > personnel> operational and capital requ:i.rne:lts. Said Plan shall be delivered to the other
State Parties for their consideration on or about March 1, 1986. 4. Deft 1 s m. arner k:I
filed in 6-30..-85 is withdrmam., The plntff 1 s m/ adjudgw defts in contempt

PLAINTI FF

CJVIL DOCKET CONTINUATION SHEET DEFENDANT

DOCKe:T'No. - - - PAGE _OF_ _ PAGES

DATE
Feb 5
4-29 5-7

NR.

PROCEEDINGS

and for sanctions. is withdrawn. 5. Upon inp1emmtation of this Order, and subJect
to the liU.ltual agre~t of the State Parties and Advocate Parties t:he parties intE to request this Court in January, 1987 to cease oversight of the C'.onsent Order i entered April 29., 1982. entered. ch.

Partial transcript of July 30·, 1984. cb

[etition for attny' s fees and costs. ch
Obj to petition for attny's fees and costs. ch

Jun 12
6-19
1987 Aug 14 Aug 19

Case called Re: M/attys: fees.. P1tf argues, deft argues. Court: · ~tion grantee

Fees: and costs of $6721.00 are awarded to firm of Mandell, Goodman, Familgelliti

and 5clvartz. co

"

ORDER RE: P1ntff's petition for atty fees is granted. Deft shall
pay to the law frim of Mandell, Goodman, Famiglietti & Schwartz the
sum og $6,512.71. entered, ch

Deft's. emiiDits: destroyed per·order of D. Clarke. cb
E:khi.frl.t receipt Re: AttY.' Carlinr;:i office witl1.dra.ws- pltf Is exhibits. ch

.ll/l-7J87
. '·/25 4/4/91
1/11/93 !1/14 1 1/15
2/2/93

DEFT'S m/to vacate Stip. & dismiss action.

na

Deft's wi.tb:lrawal of m::>tion to vacate. cb .

ENTRY of appearance of John J. McConnell,Jr. for p1ntfs. · kp

PLAINTIFF's emergency m/contempt. kp

DEFENDANTS' obj. to plaintiff's m/contempt. kp

WITHDRAWAL of appearance of Deming E. Sherman on behalf of defts. Deborah

Clark remains as attorney for defts. kp

·

H'E'JI.Rim Held on Plntfs' m/contanpt. Jack McConnell for plaintiff. Jim Healy

for advovate parties. Deborah clarke for deft MHRH. McConnell addresses

court. Court directs counssel to meet in the jw:y roan until 11;00 to work

out an agreanent. Counsel are to report back at 11:00. In court at 11:00.

Counsel state that they have reached an agreement. Plaintiff will withdraw

his m/contempt. Court directs counsel to submit a letter to the court ·within

15 days to give the status of progress. Plaintiff is to prepare order withdrawj

them/contempt. (Louis Spertini court reporter)

 
 EXHIBIT A

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR .THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

JOHN W. IAS!t10NE, JR. , et al

vs.

C.A. NO. 77-0727

J. JOSEPH GARRAHY, et al

ORDER Having considered tha pleadings and stipulations filed herein, it is hereby
ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED:
1. That the Stipulation (attached hereto) entered into and agreed ·to among the parties, is approved by the court, and is incorporated into this Order by reference, and is subject to the continuing jurisdiction of.the court.
2. Upon substantial compliance with the terms of the Stipulation, any party may move for an order vacating the Stipulation, dismissing the underlying action, final judgment or other applicable relief.
3. Any party may move to modify or vacate the provisions of the stipulation for good caus.e shown or as otherwise provided under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedfire.
4. That the Defendantsshall pay the reasonable attorneys' 'fees and costs of the Plaintiffs.

Per Order,

ENTER:

(__.,

~~ I

C ~l 4'# ,
l"t"ancis j.

f

f

~~ cL

_

United Sta~es D1strict Judge

District of Rhode Island

ce.;~J.~/7FL

... . . ~ ..... / ......•: ...-:_.• : .. ~.:·,:--.·d.· ...............,..,d~;.~_.,.

STIPULATION

WHEREFORE, the

ies as hereinafter defined, have been

engaged in litigation in the United States District Court for the

District of Rhode Island, said litigation identified as

~ al v. Garrahy, et al, C.A. No. 77-0727, and;

WHEREFORE, the parties are desirous of resolving the instant dispute without protracted litigation, and;

WHEREFORE, by entering this Stipulation neither the State

Parties nor any one of them, make any admissions as to the allega-

tions, factual or legal, contained in the Complaint, nor admit that

the actions called for in this Stipulation &re required by the

provisions of any state or federal law or regulation, or the pro-

vislons of the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution

of the State of Rhode Island, and;

WHEREFORE, the parties recognize that at the tim~ the

Complaint was filed the population at the Ladd Center was approxi-

mately 750 residents, that the present population at the Ladd

Center is approximately 525 residents, and further that over 100

retarded citizens who were never institutionalized are now residing

in State supported community residences, and;

WHEREFORE, the parties recognize those changes that have

occurred at the Ladd Center, and;

WHEREFORE, it is the intention of the State parties to

continue their policies and practices of the past regarding the

reduction of the population of Ladd Center and providing for the care

and treatment of retarded persons in the State of Rhode Island, and;

.... · ...

··~ .. w

•

•••

WHEREFORE, it is recognized that the Advocate Parties have and will continue to be responsibld advocates for the rights of the mentally retarded population of the State of Rhode Island, and have made significant efforts on behalf of that population;

NOW. THEREFORE, the parties, with the consent of t;he Court, stipulate and agree as follows;

1.

parties to this Stipulation shall be:

a) Those persons and organizations named as Plaintiffs in C.A. No. 17-0727, including their representatives, guardians, successors, assigns, agents, officers, employees and affiliates (hereinafter referred to as the "Advocate Parties"), and
II
(b) Those persons acting in their official capacities and Departments of State government identified as Defendants in C.A: No. 77-0727, including their successors, assigns, agents and employees; however, substituting for any person or persons sued in their official capacity any successor official who, pursuafit to the provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d), would be automatically substituted therefore in said civil action (hereinafter referred to as the "State Parties").

2. The State parties shall delegate among themselves and

their subordinates responsibility for the actions necessary to implement this Stipulation.

3. The Advocate Parties, shall ~ooperate in good faith

-2-

.·
with the State Parties in the impl(!mentation of all phas(!S of this Stipulation.
4. This Stipulation applies to all class members. The. class is defined as all persons who were residents of Ladd Center, on or after December 1977 to the present.
5. Within their statutory and lawful authority, subject to the provisions of Paragraph 6 of this Stipulation, the State Parties agree to take action necessary to implement the following:
The Department of Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals shall provide services for the d~velopment, education, rehabilitation and care to members of the class who are mentally retarded persons, excepting only such members of the class who elect to decline such services. The terms "development, education, rehabilitation and care", and "mentally retarded persons" shall be defined in accordance with the provisions of R.I.G.L. §40.1-22-3. Provided, however, that if under State law or regulation the provision of such services is mandated to be provided to a mentally retarded person by another agency outside of the control o~the State parties, ~his provision of this Stipulation shall not apply.
b) The Department of Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals will provide annual individualized assessments for members of the class residing in programs operated by the State Parties. in accordance with the Title XIX regulations [42 CFR 442.400 Subpart (G)].
c) In accordance with the individualized assessments of those members of the class curr~ntly residing at Ladd Center, the
-3-

Department of Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals shall move

sufficient p-ersons to community residential placements so that the

maximum population at Ladd Center will fall within the following

ranges:
Date: Population:

May 1982 525

July 1982 465 to 485

1~\>V) ~)
July 1983 =:_July 1984--
390 to 410 315 to 335

July 1985 215 to 240

d) Except as authorized under the provisions of State law relative to emergency admissions, no admission nor re-admission

will be made to Ladd Center without an Order of a Court of the State

of Rhode Island, pursuant to R.I.G.L. §40.1-22-1 et. seq. The

Department of Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals will continue
to make e~ery effort to prevent institutionalization at Ladd Center.

e) The State Parties, throup,h the Division of Retarda-

tion, shall maintain the facilities and programs at the Ladd Center

in such a manner as to be eligible for con•inued certification of the Center as an Intermediat~ Care Facility for the Mentally Retarded (ICF-MR) undet Title XIX re~ulations. Provided, however,

that in the event that substantial changes occur in the Title XIX

prop,ram relating to standards of care for ICF-MR faciliti~, or

relating to federal financial participation in the ICF-MR program,

the nepartment shall promulgate regulations pursuant to R.I.G.L.

§ 40. 1-22-4 ( 5) , consistent W·i th s tanoa nis currently .in effect

under the Title XIX program.

f) With respect to memhers of the class who reside at

Ladd Center, the State Parties will use their best efforts to provide pro~rams In accordance with the individualized ~ssessments.

The term "hest efforts" shall be read in connection with the pro-

visions of Paragraph 6 of this Agreement.

-4-

g) During the.process outlined above, priority will be given to children residing at J.add Center, except when otherwise indicated within an individual's annual assessment.
h) On or before[lanmua~ry,-:1-~I 1985, the State Parties shall
provide to the Advocate Parties a plan relative to future reductions in th~ population at Ladd Center and the time frames therefore, reflecting the intention of the State Parties to continue to provide those remaining residents of Ladd Center with individualized assessments as called for in Paragraph S(b) of this Stipulation. In accordance with those assessments and resources available to the Division of Retardation, the IJepartment of Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals intends to provide additional community placements consistent with the standards set f~rth in Paragraph S(a) of this· Stipulation.
6. The State Parties shall make good faith efforts to obtain the approval of the Gene.ral Assembly for all appropriations necessary to implement the provisions of this Stipulation. If after the State Parties have engaged in such good faith efforts, ~he appropriations and capital development funds to the Division of Retardation are insufficient to meet any one or more of the provisions of this Stipulation, the State Parties' obligations relative to such provision or provisions shall be considered null and void. Provided, however, it is expressly understood that the Advocate Parties make no admission, nor should be deemed to consent to the fact that insufficient ·appropriations or capital development funds, constraints, or failure of the Legislature to fund this Stipulation in any way preclude the Advocate Parties from applying to the Court
-)-

... _... !f·/-•·1 •..__.· ....... ' .•.. ":'• .... .,.,·

for relief independent of this Stipulation under Iasimone. et al v. Garrahy, et al. In any such application, the Advocate Parties expressly reserve the right to raise any violations of Constitutional and/or stat~tory rights.

7. Reasonable access shall be given to the Advocate

Parties thro~gh their designated representatives in order to monitor

compliance with this Stipulation. For purposes of such monitoring

the Advocate Parties, through counsel, shall designate the names of

authorized re1prc~s~~nt:atives within sixty (60)

after entry of the

v. Garrahv, et al. The State Parties will receive reasonable advance no~ice of any changes in the list of authorized representatives. Access to confidential health care information shall be governed by the provisions of R.I.G.L. 5~37.3-1 et seq. and Title XIX regulations [42 CFR 442.502].
!I'
8. The parties agree to meet and confer to make reason.'lhle efforts to resolv~ any di ffcrPnce with respect to complianct! with this stipulation prior to ftny application to the Court for relief.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto by and through

their counsel have caused this instrument to be executed this

day of

, 1982.

For the Advocate Parties: S. Arl~nc Violet, Esq.

For the State Parties:
C\~ ~ine,Sl - Esq. -
Special Assistant Attorney GenerHl

DehorRh Clarke, Esq. Legal Counsel Department of Mental Health,
Retardation & Hospitals -6-

 
 LADD CENTER MONITORING COMMITTEE - MEETING OF ADVOCATE PARTIES AND STATE PARTIES -

DATE: TIME: ATTENDING:

June 21, 1985
8:00 - 9:30 AM
FOR THE ADVOCATE PARTIES: Dr. A. Anthony Antosh James V. Healey Dr. Paul V. Sherlock
FOR THE STATE PARTIES: Deborah Clark, Esq. Dr. Robert L. Carl, Jr. Derrrning Sherman, Esq.

This meeting was held at the request of the State Parties; and Mr. Demming Sherman informed the Advocate Parties that he asked for this forum to announce that the state will be requesting another extension from the U.S. District Court for the reduction of the Ladd population. Mr. Sherman described the following as the non-compliance items:
1. The state will not meet the July 1985 deadline to reduce the census at Ladd to 240 as is stipulated in the Court Order.
2. That the current population at Ladd is 349 - causing 109 residents to remain at the institution beyond the agreed upon date.
3. In order to place these 109 Ladd residents into community facilities an additional 24 homes are needed.
(Dr. Robert Carl clarified that number by adding that the four (4) homes involved in the "bankruptcy" situation are somewhere near completion; so that reduces the number of additional homes needed to 20.
Dr. Carl also noted that the state continues to review property and has several sites under consideration.)

LADD CENTER MONITORING COMMITTEE June 21, 1985
Page 2

4. The state expects to have the
population at Ladd to 288 residents by April of 1986.

5. The state will not meet the "240 deadline" until at least January of 1987.

Dr. Paul Sherlock reminded the State Parties that RIARC met with the Administration in April of this year regarding the lack of "active treatment" because of serious staff shortages at Ladd; and that it was not until the federal Region I Office threatened the loss of $20,000,000 that the state added $1,680,000 to the Ladd budget. (Letter from Dr. Lawrence Osborne, M.D. is appended.)

Dr. Sherlock then noted that the State Parties failed to meet the June 30, 1984 deadline of 335 - then failed to meet the extended April 30, 1985 deadline of 335. Now the State Parties are requesting a third extension to 1987 - with absolutely no assurances that such a goal is achievable. Dr. Sherlock offered further that there was not enough bond money for the state to actually get to 240; and he outlined the provisions of the Bond Issue bill passed by the 1985 General Assembly - noting that the Administration had requested $0 in its original bill - 85-H 6395.

(A copy of the amendment which lists the provisions of the Bond Bill is appended.}

Dr. Sherlock emphasized that $3,000,000 w~s added for group homes for Ladd residents and $3,000,000 for group homes for retarded people currently being in the community.

Dr. Carl posited that these capital funds will enhance the state's efforts to move ahead - that the bonds would be sold by February.

Mr. Sherman reminded the parties that the state would continue to

place four (4) Ladd residents and two (2) people from the community in

each group home.

~

James Healey proposed that if the state decides to make grants of the bond funds to non-profit agencies, it is likely that the people with retardation in the community will be placed in community residences long before the state meets its obligation to either of those populations (Ladd/Community).

LADD CENTER MONITORING COMMITTEE June 21, 19"85 Page 3

Dr.
District the state process.

Anthony Antosh proposed that Court was to cause the status
clearly appears to continue

the concept of being in u
quo to be different; but their "business as usual"

.

s.

Dr. Antosh stated, as he said the Advocate Parti

of occasions, that the state does not have a "plan";

process is a "seat of the pants" effort which is not

Division in state

of Retardation government.

and

lacks

any

accountability

es had on scores and that the
controlled by the on anyone's part

Dr. Carl offered that there were alternative means of

group homes Authority.

and

specifically

cited

the

Rhode

Island

Public

developing Building

Dr. Antosh proposed that whatever needed and should include:

process

is

used,

a

plan

is

1) a list of tasks (activites) involved to open a group home; identify resources and obstacles, develop strategies, time schedules and individuals and agencies responsible for all activities.

2) obtain in writing .from all responsible State Parties their commitment to this plan.

hCPPaoaasnrrttsbiieeeensestn, aDnMiiegndcrn.rotreheHrevee,ediaeeClwmbeoyyipunlrgtortheyme-tehdienSa datnceSaodtteematxtphePpreaeePhrrSltteaintenpassltiavedne-ePnvbaeeanulrrotatpailenesyddstsiipstslhuluoabrrsfmteumittathhntaeeatidnt tAsoptdoalvatpohntpchelaweitceIhnaSicbttehalretie.m

Dr. Antosh stated that both the need to be assured of accountability tinues to be lacking in this whole e

Advocate Parties and the Co - because such has been and ffort; and the results were

urt co

n-

predictable.

~

M etaPhnxaoedtrrnteiStimtheToteesahrietnepcagdsoroPonCopcatunorormeasmtiaseemoltnsftiwott-ctuaehsaetewl.liclanewisedtoeddrdtishsitcnebueetstf"whs2feeo4ede0rnmtsbPitnlrhaeiuneevt"efeclsryo- ponrasftonueddtbnhumtescdieetFdostecfedbbriytrbhouentaahdrteyMbsayos2rt0c-ahtc,htaee11ll9.5eA8,d5dT1vL9h"o8epac5dlaadtnbe"y

LADD CENTER MONITORING COMMITTEE June 21, 1985 Page 4

Mr. Healey stated in response to the fed million for additional the state's commitment efficient fashion.

that,despite the fact that the eral threat of decertification
staff at Ladd, he had serious to filling these positions in

Administration added the $1.68 concerns about a timely and

It was agreed that both parties woul

on June 27, agreement i

1 n

985 lieu

to of

continue the the Advocate

attempt Parties

non-compliance issues with the Court.

d meet again at to work out an
pursuing these

7:30 A.M.
acceptable serious

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:40A.M.

Respectfully submitted:

\_,.I !

.
James

V.

Healey

/
u/ ,

 
 ' \ \
May 31, 1
Robert D. DICenso, Chief Division of Facilities Regulation Department of Health 75 Davis Street Providence, Rhode Island 02908 Dear Bob, Re: Dr. Joseph H. Ladd Center, Medicaid Provider I/41-G018 oaRamdoTinvnffaheo~fddyiheiSss,cdatDwoileIblccyereiaai.hlaitlthiastdlotaResoaavcrttonrheiheebodawrecnentdiReiorslfilttthHeivhecChofedeoaoardasttolbtpiralhpsUoolgie,etpnweiavtoEr-laeioresuxstrt,fcplseuaveuctlsneooneutigaustttSyeifremvepnfxtre,rdeeopverifdDrissarmeciceolaiseunrmescsseate,osectotiamtdttouhesownprnebrwli,ytatiRciehnRiooclhnlneniNotyrt.scadcoaaesueuanrrdmrbwcnIayossisotluttiafhBaatofnnbionLdcccor,auedeuAdDrsetrdosleesaentSpnohatuatcuiMtsrpi,chataeCmotelyrianoioeLrnd2mnngtai0etetndf,inooodiSdsr1nfsCe9tsRaiMn8eotate5nenettGtnaeceILrteroCard,oan.lFeDrdcgdH/deTeMer,eCphnGaRraaiieltrnt.utilthgznamsetatOaihetnmnnhuensgdeerrt,
slIfceaAwtCuetrevdedegrefeIfaretg/snqeeiMtrefudmaosilaelucRntoetrraoewa,nrsttletutieesroognordtasuunadnusrlf.egiraaffrrvLtteeSseirytxqcoueyautupcnsnthhoriewshdrarruaeiaieitsdnrdtesncognntetrcbcoiasntoymewb.htoniufaeotdTtewdt,shudhpgiecteettrehbthhrecteoeeaaesdalvlcrcoscyerowareguiremtbearfgprenlop2Lurleer:oalan1srsarpdtpatttahodailebwsoesfctlanIfifiaenLllsiflfstn.iafocJiddtipnuaonidrcsonfngetlfgvaCeiideteeriecudaorncwtntaitfttiifiltaanofolersb1ignarc9liss.tsy8utitt4hloahaIt.ja,nfepewfptpooaANrCptLps9olaee,utaartwhnlcdhddaohtdeiJtueziinEegnroennwhgnagtacpalsrw1opsaree.narnl6vtottdpheeiitxnroorniooaausmavnlni1cniladftddyaogteieenrndemfldMlg.iyssicnmeuei2eiawdcWmancihthycoctaheiailaivgerill1ndeoyees.
aoapdntpWhdtafroetreatefrto!cqeilt!euhtdt-u.lnigaeetocatvhhnteneoheauduetrinoeseftamftscalamcteeofhioiontftfvnoitsaneettttsnihadngtndoaleutfrnesheeofxadLaesdfpfaacoereiSdful1dtrdioty0rtisa'rYce.stneM"earm!csmre.eeeoscddeinaTidnatcpshehtmataensiaocedtffeiinafatxssDa,ylttbeawbeItlnnotuefhsdiiiilpdrcavdterheroienednnddisgudnceisscoera.ettrsuraareoMrbefdnfrcleoooytsqcsumittuaolatenanoftatoffhecdfoeotrsnhcevcMlaoatoeyrostrmaeeetrtip"chmtcsblhortiiuaeorac4crnunncul,dgcia-maeeh1onr9nusd&itatttnssah"5l.snerSovaceMantepabardsrveoyteaeirjsaanieeelscgooaduncpvbartenaeivnllusrrigeed,em'yetrirmyarzbioaotioeennuuorsdgdsssft

Page 2- Robert DICenso

\'t'e further note that the recent lPR/UR findings Identify 66 Ladd dlents who are not

now, and who have not been in the past months, receiving active treatment. This finding

represents survey of a

a reduction in year ago. This

Ladd's active treatment rate will pred!ctably fall

rate rnuch

of about lOIY;; since the lower stillln the coming

federal months

if staffing resources remain at existing levels. As you know, the rendering of active

treatment is one of the statutory bases for the claiming of FFP for individual clients in

lCF's/MR. 190.5(dX2))

(See citations at 42 CFR 43.5..1009 and Efforts to economize by closing off campus

the day

Social Security Act, Section programs will also predictably

lower active treatment rates.

\Ve are aware that the Consent Decree applicable to the Latid Center, monitored l:.y the Federal District Court, requires that Title YIX certification be r.1aintained. Th!s Decree cScInaotslasltttsieltysuftocihrooanmvsiemganrureinefciitmcoyagonsnrteeiztfteluiidnrktgehtlhemyarottrodecelimsinuesacntkcltetseusttswihfohuenolaltylrria.ztanhavstaciinotinbotehnoeonfsteotahwcaenthiovLoeahfldtayedvnetcrllenieeaosnttsetbdreepesoantptruiscaloatitvltiaoreernga.aetnedOdS.ttlhaeestIenrs these States, plans have been made for staff to move with clients to such new treatment settings.

It further is our understanding that your office has just extended Ladd's [,kdicaid Provider

Agreement at 42 CFR

for a 60 442.16.

day We

period to presun1e

September 1, 1985 as the State's decision

provided for in to extend was

regulations located made in conformity

with these app!lcable regulations. We also would presume that any decision to recertify

Ladd beyond September 1, 198.5 wlU be made in conformance with the federal certifica-

tion requirements set forth in 42 CFR 442.105.

It is also our understanding that your office has properly rejected one Plan of Correction

already submitted by the facility because resources could not be identified that made the

implementation of the submitted by the end

POC feasible or credible. If of the current provider agre

no acceptable POC ement, September

has been or can be 1, 1985, applicable

regulations at 42 CFR 442.10.5(b} caU for your office to effect a termination of this CUprFnodRveird4e1or4u2fr.r3o0om(af)f(ti2ch}ee,'stfh.",elleodSoleckcalrdbeetpahrrinoydgc'r'aaanmum,thwoovirteihttiaoensc,aaStntoceceniladltahnSetecpaunrornivutiyadleArlocastgs, roeSfeemc$t2ei0onntmii1nl9ldi1oe0pn(ecin)ndoFernFt4Pl2y.

and unilaterally if Ladd has been improperly recertified beyond September 1, 1985.

Our estimation is staf:fing positions,

that approximately 1.5 approximately 100 staff,

million dollars worth wlll be needed to avoid

of new and restored the decertification of

Ludd Center and the loss of 20 mlllion dollars in federal revenues.

By June 15, 198.5, please submit to this office the following:

a) Acknowledgement of your receipt of this letter and your sharing of our d>ncern regarding the continued certification of the Ladd Center with other State agencies and o!ficlah who are involved in the resolution and/or the consequences of the pr-oblems that exist.

b) Copies of the recent IPR/UR documents for the 66 Ladd clients found not to be receiving active treatment.

Page 3- Robert DICenso

c)

Your Ladd

plan' for the between now

periodic monitoring of and any recertification

the possible deteriorating conditions at dedsion made by September 1, 1983.

d)

Your documentation of the basis agreement per 42 CPR /#42.16.

for

the

decision

to

extend

the

faclHtys

provider

Please Federal

also submit, u District Court,

they become available, any or consultant reports pertaining

POC's, to the

communicatio Ladd Center.

ns

from

the

Thank you for response.

your

immediate

attention

to

this set

of

concerns

and our

requests for

Sincerely yours,

cc: George Gunther Robert Carl Nancy Bordeleau
DHSQ:LWOsborn/gss 5/30/85 223-16.57 Rewritten:OGC:CPlerce/gss 5/31/&5

Lawrence W. Osborn, !\~.D. Associate Regional Administrator

 
 s TATE 0 F R H 0 D E I S L A N D

IN GENERAL ASSEMBLY JANUARY SESSION, A.D. 1985

F L 0 0 R AMENDMENT

TO

85 -- H 6395, As Amended

An

Act

to

Provide

Authority to Issue Bonds and Special Capital Development

Notes to Program

Finance

the

1985

Mr. Speaker:

I hereby move to amend 85 -- H 6395, As Amended, entitled "An Act to Provide Authority to Issue Bonds and Notes to Finance the 1985 Special Capital Development Program," as follows:
In Section 1, on page 2, between lines 22 and 23 delete in its entirety the provision for Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals.
In Section 1, on page 2, between lines 22 and 23 add the following language:

"(4) Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals $12,680,000 ·To provide funds for construction, acquisition and/or renovations and repairs to community facilities for retarded, mentally ill, autistic or chronic alcoholic individuals or for the provision IIof grants for the same purposes; for the purchase of equipment and furnishings for these facilities; and for the purchase and replacement of equipment and furnishings at MHRH facilities related to national, federal, and state certification and code requirements and other environmental needs. Funds shall be allocated as follows:
(a) Community Centers

Blackstone Valley Cranston Center Fogarty Center Trudeau Center Maher Center Northern R.I. Center

430,000
410,000 720,000
'"'
625,000 265,000 465,000

Olean Center

205,000

Training thru placement

310,000

(b) Mental Retardation and Austistic Community Residences

L~,dd Residents

3,000,000

Community Mentally Retarded and Autistic

3,000,000

(c) Young Adult Residential Services

750,000

(d) Mental Health

1,000,000

(e) Alcoholics

500,000

(f) Ladd, Zambarano and R.I. Medical Center Complex

1,000,000"

On page 11, line 9 delete the following language:

"SECTION 16."

On page 11, line 9 add the following language:

"SECTION 17."

On page 11, following line 8 add the following language:

SECTION 16. Report by Department of Administration. -- The department

of administration shall report quarterly to the general assembly on the

implementation of Section 1, Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals, of

this act, until such time as all funds available under Section 1, Mental

Health, Retardation and Hospitals have been utilized.

II
Respectfully submitted,

DL395/2

Paul V. Sherlock Representative District 30

-2-

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHOE ISLAND

JOHN W. IASIMONE, JR., et al. v.
EDWARD D. DIPRETE, et al.

C.A. No. 77-0727

ORDER
1. The State Parties agree to reduce the Ladd population to not more than 240 residents by January, 1987 in accordance with the schedule attached hereto as Exhibit A. The State Parties agree to expedite the construction and operation of group homes identified in Exhibit A to the extent possible.
2. The State Parties encourage the Advocate Parties and interested non-profit groups to submit proposals for grants to construct additional group homes to further reduce the Ladd population below 240 residents. Said proposals shall be consistent with the plan referred to in,paragraph 3, infra, but said proposals may be submitted forthwith. Upon receipt of a proposal, approval by the State Parties shall not be unreasonably withheld.
3. Defendant Dr. Robert L. Carl, Jr., Ph.D, in consultation with the State Parties, agrees to work together with the Advocate Parties to develop by March 1, 1986 a detailed plan for community placement of the remaining Ladd residents, which plan shall include programatic, personnel, operational and capital requirements. Said plan shall be delivered to the other State Parties for their consideration on or about March 1, 1986.

4. The Defendants' Motion to Amend filed June 30, 1985

is withdrawn. The Plaintiffs' Motion to Adjudge Defendants

in Contempt and for Sanctions is withdrawn.

5. Upon implementation of this Order, and subject to

the mutual agreement of the State Parties and Advocate Parties,

the parties intend to request this Court in January, 1987 to

cease oversight of the Consent Order entered April 29, 1982.

Entered as an Order of this Court this

day of

December, 1985.

BY ORDER:

ENTER:

Attorney for Attorney for Defendants

PROJECTED GROUP HOMES TO BE OPENED BETWEEN 12/1/85 AND 1/1/87

ICF/MR

PROJECTED OPENING DATE

TOTAL CLIENTS

Sayles Hill Road North Smithfield, RI

12/85

6

Beechnut Road Johnston, RI

12/85

6

Backstay Stree--.. Jamestown, RI

7/86

6

Tourtellot Road Glocester, RI

12/85

6

Apt. in Kent Warwick, RI

Count

RegiOil

7/86

8

Burdick Drive Cranston, RI

3/86

4

Chruch Avenue Warwick, RI

3/86

4

Cooke Drive Scituate, RI

4/86

6

Revere Avenue West Warwick, RI

4/86

4

New River RoaC: Lincoln, RI

1/86

6

Bertenshaw Road Woonsocket, RI

l/86

6

Blueberry Lane North Kingstown, RI

3/86

4

Pemberton Street Jamestown, RI

4/86

6

Hallville Road
Exeter, RI -
Pinecrest Road Exeter, RI FLA's

l/86

6

8/86

6

15

C'uiENTS

PLACID

FROM OUT

OF

LADD COMM. DIX ZAM STAT_E

3

3

6

5

1

2

2

4

4

1

3

4

4

2

1!

4

2

4

3

3

4

""

4

2

6

5

1

5

9

2
I
1

* Property not yet purchased

EXHIBIT A

PROJECTED GROUP HOMES TO BE OPENED BETWEEN 12/1/85 AND 1/l/87

ICF/MR

PROJECTED

OPENING DATE

TOTAL
CLIENTS

Transfer of Clients

to Gen ICF.Skilled Nursi tlg

5

e,IENTS PLACID FROM OUT OF
LADD COMM. DIX ZAM STAT£ 5

Transfer of Clients to General Hospital

5

5

William Reynolds Road Exeter, RI

8/86

6

4

2

Kings Factory Charlestown, RI

8/86

6

4

2

Cumberland Street Providence, RI

8/86

6

4

2

Wood Road Rivhmond, RI

10/86

6

4

2

Atlantic Avenue North Providence, RI

12/86

6

4

2

Absolona Hill Scituate, RI

7/86

6

4

2

TOTALS

21 Homes

Property not yet purchas d

145

92

46 4

3.

"

LADD POPULATION PROJECT! DNS

December 1, 1985

329

Anticipated Placements

by 1/1/87

92

Projected Ladd Population 1/1/87 237