governor’s commission on senior services - oregon · governor’s commission on senior services...

Governor’s Commission on Senior Services Meeting Minutes

August 13, 2015 Fort Rock Room

3414 Cherry Avenue NE, Keizer, OR

Members Present: Suzette Boydston, Jim Davis, Joseph Greenman, Mary Rita Hurley (on phone), Ruth McEwen, Nancy Pierce, Charles Richards, Kathleen Schonau, Catherine Skiens, Laurie Slye, Judy Strand, Kenneth Viegas, Kyle Linhares (on behalf of Representative Gomberg), Angela Weaver (ODC Liaison) Members Absent: Jonathan Bartholomew, Victoria Blachly, Peggy Brey, Lee Po Cha, Ken Dudley, Paul Krissel, Jeff Kruse (Senator), Keith Putman Panel: Paula Carder, Kenny LaPoint, Margaret Salazar, Vicki Walker Guests: Dianna Chappell, Elaine Fiesen-Strang, Juan Guzman, Sarah Hout, , Leroy Patton, William Schmidt Staff: Rebecca Arce, Ann McQueen, Yvonne Fleming (scribe) Called to Order Meeting was called to order at 9:35 am by Charles Richards. Welcome Introductions were made by all present. Agenda The agenda was reviewed. Motion was made to adopt the agenda as written. Seconded and Approved. Meeting Minutes The meeting minutes from June 11, 2015, were reviewed. Motion was made to adopt the minutes. Seconded and Approved. The Commission expressed their appreciation to Yvonne Fleming for taking and transcribing the Commission’s meeting minutes.

Governor’s Commission on Senior Services Meeting Minutes August 13, 2015 2 | P a g e

Meeting Packet The meeting packet was reviewed and accepted as presented. Public Comment Charles Richards announced that Erinn Kelley-Siel is resigning as Director, Department of Human Services, and Charles would like to recognize Erinn for her service to the Commission and to the seniors of Oregon. Charles said that SEIU is the benefactor of a large class action suit having to do with whether healthcare workers are required to join a union and pay union dues. White House Conference on Aging (WHCOA) Suzette Boydston said that she was selected to attend the National WHCOA in Washington DC in July. Usually thousands attend through a delegate process, but this year only 220 were invited to attend the final conference at the White House. This event occurs every ten years to map out and plan policy and legislation to benefit the aging population for the next decade. Suzette’s only criticism of the conference is that there were many “great minds” in attendance that were not being utilized. However, there were incredible panelists and speakers with great ideas at the conference, and it was an honor for her to attend. Suzette said that in April, she and Judy Strand attended the Regional WHCOA in Seattle and said that the caliber of panelists and presenters was outstanding. And, it was a good opportunity to interact with others in the region that are in the same line of work. Suzette also attended the Oregon WHCOA in Lebanon which was packed with Oregonians who care about aging in place and the future of seniors. Suzette was very pleased with the outcomes from that conference. Jim Davis thanked Suzette for all of the work that she has done for the WHCOA conferences. However, Jim said that real questions are being raised nationally if the conference will actually make any strong policy statement, commitment, or make any movement as other White Conferences have? There are some serious questions being raised about the end result and impact of the conference. Jim asked Suzette and others to address what impact will it have on policy and where do we would go from here.


Suzette suggested that everyone look at the national WHCOA website where there is incredible data. She also said that she would have focused the conversation at the national meeting on the four hot topics (retirement security, healthy aging, long-term services and supports, and elder justice), especially retirement security. At the conference, President Obama highlighted some changes that he has already made and strategies that he laid out including other changes that he wants to make. Suzette said that that is where the Commission now needs to focus its energies. The work that the Commission is going to be doing today is vital and any issue that it has or its greatest concerns for our populations can work and move forward in the four focus areas in the future —even though they are broad, they are specific. Charles Richards said that he was on a teleconference call with 28 other states and was told that only two states held individual state conferences on aging. Charles congratulated Ann and her staff on the great conference in Lebanon. Oregon WHCOA Recommendations The Commission was divided into two groups to review the recommendations from the Oregon WHCOA to determine which issues they felt that the Commission should work on. One group reviewed the recommendations on Healthy Aging and Elder Justice; the second group reviewed the recommendations on Long Term Services and Supports and Retirement Security.

Recap from Healthy Aging and Elder Justice Group Joe Greenman said that this group’s discussion centered on Healthy Aging more than Elder Justice, but that the two overlap to some degree. Joe said that there is an absence of data and information about the issues associated with healthy aging, and the programs that are up and running that assist people with issues associated with healthy aging demonstrate a big barrier between OHA and DHS in being able to work together in the exchange of data and information. It really causes problems with not understanding what the causal factors are behind the issues that are detrimental to healthy aging, making it more difficult to get these programs to work more efficiently and getting to the preventative types of solutions as opposed to just constantly finding people in poor condition and basically dealing with the outcomes instead.


Joe said that it carried over into the elder justice piece because within the context of elder abuse issues and the adult protective services structure that is in place to help them, there are a lot of inconsistencies throughout the state from county to county in terms of how information is collected, how to report it, and what “elder abuse” means from place-to-place, both culturally and legally. The data issue is pervasive within topics of both healthy aging and elder abuse, and more work needs to be done closely with the department, the Governor’s office, and any other state government agencies that are involved in these issues to get it together and get a much higher priority and focus on getting some good research and data going so that the issues can be quantified, can be understood, and policymakers and advocates can begin to think constructively about solutions and then measure those solutions to start getting to the bottom of what is evidence-based, what’s going to work, and what are the things that need to be discarded because they are not an efficient use of the available limited resources. The group also talked about healthy aging, primarily focusing on building communities which, in addition to the data piece, is key. Transportation is also critical as well as housing. There are a lot of local government agencies that are trying to dig in on the housing issue. For instance, housing is a critical issue and big priority in the city of Portland, but with a more cohesive statewide strategy, the Commission could get involved with and support in whatever way that it deems possible as the housing piece is important. The other issue that the group focused on was the mental health piece which is clouded by the data issue that was previously discussed. The group felt that there is a mental health issue where the mentally ill populations are not getting adequate levels of supports and services that they should get and is not translating into the actual provision of services in those populations and areas. The Commission should continue to put this as a high priority. The group discussed getting the Commission more involved in understand-ing the “livability” piece within communities. There are metrics and information out there about what constitutes livability and which places have it and which don’t have it, but there is a need to get more information and


feedback from the actual people who are living it and experiencing it rather than using criteria selected by someone who has completed a research study. Actually find out how the people living on the ground perceive livability in their own environments. Sometimes the criteria that someone might select for them as livability may not actually be the criteria that the people living there are actually interested in. It may be something completely different.

Jim Daivs added that a lot of time and emphasis was put into Senate Bill 21 about the data collection issue with the hopes of seeing it pushed forward. At one time, a research and data unit was collecting actual data in numerous areas. APD may be a good place to again start and develop a research unit. Putting together a piece of legislation would also be a way to get it out in front of the legislators. Flip Chart Notes from Healthy Aging/Elder Justice

Issue #1 – Medicare/Medicaid Reimbursement Recommendations: Collect, analyze, and report date—can be done locally.

OHA and DHS need to “talk.” Governor’s office needs to know that they need to talk. Doctors need to follow through with recommendations. Motivational interviewing—CDSM programs supported by Medicaid dollars. Traditional Health Workers (THW) CCOs support THWs—costs the CCO money if patients don’t follow through. CCOs need to show data that this works— show outcomes: financial, etc. State data—State invest in data collection. DHS and OHA together! Matrix from CCOs data versus other data??? Also—NO DATA AT ALL! CCOs have to have it. AAAs—hard to get data/not sharing. We need to know how money is spent and on who? People are returning before 30 days?! We need more data and we don’t trust the data we get (objective: third party needed). Example—mental health (not collected).


Bench marks? Where are they? Not organized—not reviewed. Cannot quantify the scope of the problems. Best case practices on data collection! Natural/core/data collection/standard Child Services has a good system. Law enforcement has an even better, tight, system. All caregivers need training. (Exception—family members because not being paid—not really.)

Care Act will help. Free caregiving training is available statewide (OR Care Partners)

Issue #2 – Building Communities for All Ages

Transportation/housing (has been addressed). Money to build communities? How help established communities? Neighborhood associations helpful? Housing has some guidelines. AARP has a website about livability, but is it in the voice of the seniors?

Issue #3 – SR/Disability Mental Health Expand programs—Mental Health and Addictions.

Joe said that his group needs more time to transition into solutions to take to the Executive Committee to determine an action plan and define the goals.

Recap from Long Term Services and Supports and Retirement Security Group Laurie Slye said that the group discussed Long Term Services and Supports, but did not have time to discuss Retirement Security. “Transportation” was the only issue discussed under long term services and supports. The group did not come up with any specific recommendations but did have some good discussions about the discrepancies in big cities such as Portland in comparison to the rural areas in Eastern Oregon and how it is so different in each area. One concern noted was that the people in each area do not know what kind of transportation is available to them. How can that information be made known? The group discussed “thinking


outside of the box” on ways to provide transportation to senior citizens and how transportation can be individualized for the weekends. Charles Richards said that the group discussed sharing the load and finding solutions outside of the normal patterns like the Veterans Administration does. There are a lot of organizations out there that want to help, but they don’t know what exists and don’t know how to go about finding out. There are also barriers such as insurance and other things that prohibit organizations from participating. Looking to the state to pay for everything is not going to work. Jim Davis said that a pattern is emerging that has continued from the state White House Conference on Aging in settings where people sit down and discuss long term care services and supports and come to the conclusion that “transportation” is a major issue. The Commission needs to take this on as a priority issue, and there needs to be more discussion around this. When the Commission is prioritizing around long term care services and supports, because there are so many other critical issues around our in-home community-based supports, care system, issues out in the field, issues in defense of our system, and of development of our system, the Commission needs to have a strong recommendation about its involvement in the transportation issue.

Charles Richards related a personal experience where he started attending meetings for a long term ombudsman program that was working, doing its job, and being very successful, so the Legislature, in its infinite wisdom, doubled their work load and gave them Mental Health and Guardianship programs. They had to double the size of their facility, and in the process of training people for these new programs, they realized the people that they had to train for Mental Health and the Guardianship programs needed totally different training from an ombudsman program. It began putting a lot of stress on that organization because it took a lot of extra work, and there wasn’t enough money to cover all that needed to be done. Those are the kinds of things that one has to be careful with. Things that are good, make them work better. Things that need work, work on, but it will take more time and money to make it successful.


Ken Viegas reiterated Charles’ concern regarding involvement in Mental Health. Ken is in his eighth year as an ombudsman and has experience with mental health units. Ken is not sure that the state could train people in that role. Everyone wants volunteers because they think that they are free labor. However, volunteers need to be properly trained and supervised, and there are many costs associated with that. It is a very demanding field and takes a lot of different kinds of skills, and the need for volunteers is always an issue. And if there is to be any diversity in those that are providing service, financial supports are needed so at least volunteers can get paid for travel. The fixation on free labor, the idea of volunteers doing all of the work is in serious difficulty because organizations cannot recruit enough people which is also coupled with the serious problem of retention. Organizations are constantly recruiting and retraining, but there is no discussion about the rapid turnover. Volunteerism is a serious issue because if we look at the service structure in Oregon, it is highly dependent upon non-profits as well as the public sector volunteers. Further comments made regarding volunteers: Millions of dollars of labor are given to the state every year by

volunteers. It is a very valuable service. Volunteers can’t just be sent out in the field. It is an investment to

recruit, train, and support them. Can a budget be requested for volunteers to be validated by the work

that they do and the areas that they work in? DHS still has a volunteer program. Some volunteer coordinators are

funded, some are not. Some funds were cut by the legislature. Can volunteerism be tied into grant programs for education? The number of volunteers is reducing due to death and aging and a

different mind-set. How can a sense of unity and taking care of each other be done generationally?

Volunteering is learned through education, a societal thing. If a child is taught to give so many hours of service, it is one thing. If a child volunteers with their parents or finds something that they are really interested in, then it is another thing.

Agencies are hurting for volunteers. Services have been reduced and the compensation that some of the volunteers receive has also been reduced.


People today don’t have time to volunteer. They are busy trying to take care of themselves.

In the past, meals were served at a senior center. Today, people want their meals delivered to their home (for those that are eligible) so that they can eat it on their own time schedule.

Suzette Boydston is a member of the National Senior Corps Association which is a network of national service programs that connects people age 55 and over with the people and organizations that need them most. Senior Corp helps seniors to become mentors, coaches or companions to people in need or contribute their job skills and expertise to community projects and organizations. Volunteers receive guidance and training so they can make a contribution that suits their talents, interests, and availability. Grants administered through Senior Corps provide funding for three programs: Foster Grandparents, RSVP, and Senior Companions. Suzette said that Senior Corps receives funds from the federal government for volunteers, but it is trying to eliminate all funding for Senior Core because why would you pay volunteers to serve. Presently, reimbursement to volunteers is $2.65 per hour; mileage at 40 cents per mile; and $1.65 for every three hours that volunteers serve meals. All federal dollars spent on the program are critically reviewed by the government to make sure that no dollars are wasted on seniors. Suzette feels that Senior Corp programs are helping meet community needs.

State Plan and GCSS Involvement Sarah Hout, new Manager for State Unit on Aging (SUA), was invited to speak to GCSS about getting involved with State Plan on Aging. The state plan expires this year, but Sarah worked to get it extended until September 2017; the area plans expire September 2016. Sarah said that SUA is preparing instructions for the area plans which they hope to have out by the end of the year. SUA will give the AAAs eight to nine months to do their work and return their plans to SUA for review and approval by the end of 2016. Then SUA can begin working on the piece that they are responsible for. At this time, Sarah does not have all of the “ins” and “outs” of what is involved, but timelines have been developed by the SUA staff with lots of pieces and components including areas in which GCSS can be involved. Sarah suggested that GCSS may or may not want to be involved


with the “needs assessments.” Sarah said that the WHCOA recommendations that GCSS has been working on need to be folded into the state plan along with Senate Bill 21. Sarah reported that SUA did not get funding for the Gatekeeper program this year, but they were able to maintain their Options Counseling funding. SUA needs data that can go back to the legislature that says that the programs that they are doing are very worthwhile. SUA is looking at putting together a study or survey looking at a return on investment for options counseling as it is known that options counseling has given lots of people choices in knowing what is out there. But, how is that measured so that the legislature can be shown that it is really a worthwhile program? For instance, because of options counseling, a few hundred dollars may be spent to help a senior to stay in his/her home as compared to thousands of dollars a month that would be spent for placing the person in a nursing home at the system’s expense. How does SUA quantify that and show quality of life for the folks that they are serving? Comments/questions during the discussion: One of the biggest frustrations in working with the legislature is when they

ask for data and there is none. How do you ensure that all AAAs are making sure that local groups or

councils review their area plans? Traditionally, GCSS and other advisory councils have had an opportunity to

review area plans while they were being built. The area plans should be divided up and reviewed by the Commission. Mental health is not covered very well in the reports. More equality in reporting of all ethnic minorities and cultures is needed. Would some of the Commissioners like to have a role in the needs

assessment meetings? If so, would you like to know the date of the assessment meetings?

More involvement is needed by the Commission in the state plan before it is finalized.

Sarah said that instructions can be sent out with the area plans that can be shared with others in the community who may want to participate in the process. Sarah also said that SUA is reviewing some of their contracts and tightening up some of the expectations for using state funds and to hold the recipients accountable.


Sarah welcomes any feedback on a regular basis as SUA starts working on the instructions for the area plans. Ann McQueen concluded that GCSS will forward any updates to Sarah via email. Housing Panel The Commission invited four individuals to speak on a panel about affordable housing for seniors and people with disabilities. First panelist Kenny LaPoint, Housing Integrator, Oregon Housing and

Community Services (OHCS), said that OHCS funds and provides affordable housing across the state of Oregon. OHCS is not a direct service agency; in most cases they are a funder and fund partners across Oregon including housing authorities, community action agencies, and corporations, both local and regional. Housing statistics that Kenny mentioned: Generally, paying 30% of one’s income towards rent is considered

“affordable.” Nearly one in three Oregonians (150,000) pay more than 50% of their

income towards rent which is considered a severe rent burden. One in two pays more than 30% of their income towards rent.

94,860 seniors and people with disabilities in Oregon are in need of affordable housing.

OHCS partnered with developers to build 18,199 rental units specifically designated for seniors and people with disabilities.

Oregon is 76,661 units short of meeting the affordable housing need for seniors and people with disabilities which this does not include those who are homeless.(Clarification by Kenny: Other agencies and partners outside of OHCS have built approximately 14,000 units for seniors and people with disabilities which drops the number of units short to just over 60,000.)

In 2015, OHCS funded 616 units with a low-income housing tax credit. 297 of those units were for seniors and people with disabilities.

Housing and rental rates in Oregon are increasing; vacancies are decreasing.

Housing choice voucher holders are struggling to find private market apartments to accept their vouches due to increasing rents, no vacancies, and the time limit for using the vouchers.


Landlords are being much more stringent with screening criteria for applicants because of lower vacancy rates.

$62.5 million was designated for affordable housing in the 2015 legislative session.

House Bill 2547 created a task force to research a Housing with Services model.

Kenny said that OHCS’s role in working with its partners is to try and service as many folks as possible; push the state to help folks achieve economic security, be stabilized in housing, start to build assets, obtain the goal of home ownership or owning a business, going back to school, etc., but housing stability is crucial to all of that. OHCS wants to serve greater numbers of low-income Oregonians more effectively within the housing system.

Second panelist was Paula C. Carder, Assistant Professor, Institute on

Aging, Portland State University, spoke on the characteristics of low income urban seniors, both subsidized housing residents and applicants, saying that: Nationally, applicants over age 62 have a two plus year wait for a

housing unit. 50% of those seeking housing are women with an average age of 63. The health condition of applicants:

▫ 57% have fair or poor health. ▫ 48% have had a major medical illness in the past 12 months. ▫ 47% have visited the emergency room during the past 12

months. 42% of applicants lacked enough food to eat. Public housing applicants were more likely to be homeless, report a

major medical illness, have used hospitalization or the emergency room, lack health insurance, and rate their health as fair/poor.

40% of current residents in 11 affordable high- or mid-rise buildings in Portland reported their health as fair/poor.

High blood pressure was the most common health condition among the surveyed residents followed by depression.

46% of surveyed residents were socially isolated. Social isolation is a risk factor for increased illness and depression.


More information is needed about cognitive impairment, mental health, substance abuse, and medication management.

Most current residents of subsidized housing are independent and have access to resources.

Older persons who are waitlisted for housing assistance, compared to current residents appear to be in worse health and are more vulnerable on some measures, but more information is needed.

Affordable housing is an important, but limited, resource for low-income older persons.

More information is needed about housing instability among older persons.

Third panelist was Vicki L. Walker, Oregon State Director, USDA Rural

Development, who oversees three USDA agencies: 1) Rural Business and Cooperative Service, 2) Rural Utilities Service, and 3) Rural Housing Service. In all, USDA Rural Development administers more than 40 programs including a number of funds to finance rural business development and expansion, invest in new approaches to rural economic development, and provide affordable housing for low-income rural Americans. Last year, the USDA invested more than $31 million to provide affordable rental housing in rural Oregon and more than $429 million to help rural Oregonians achieve the dream of home ownership. While this funding is significant, the needs in rural Oregon are greater than what a single Federal agency can provide. Vicki has learned that the success of federal programs depends on collaborative partnerships with state and local government, their nonprofit partners, and the private sector. Efforts such as the Commission’s work on senior housing are vital to enable Oregon’s rural communities to grow and thrive. The USDA Rural Development helps low-income rural residents access affordable housing through their Single Family Housing and Multi-Family Housing programs.


In all, the USDA has financed 193 apartment complexes for rural Oregonians across the state, providing over 11,000 units of affordable rental housing. Of those, 75 facilities and over 2,000 units are specifically designed for the elderly or disabled. Vickie believes that housing is an essential element of a community’s long-term viability and economic development. When individuals and families have access to safe, affordable housing that meets all of their needs, they are more likely to remain in their community for the long term, contributing to the local economy and helping their community thrive.

Fourth panelist was Margaret Salazar, Field Office Director, Department of

Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in Oregon.

HUD provides services to seniors through rental assistance for low and very low income individuals and families, subsidized housing properties, and financing for the construction and rehabilitation of affordable housing. Most of HUD’s senior housing properties are located in the urban areas of Multnomah, Washington, Clackamas, Marion, Lane, and Jackson counties. HUD awarded Oregon $2,335,000 in 2015 for 80 housing units which will allow persons with disabilities who are extremely low income to live in integrated, affordable housing. Funding from HUD allows owners of HUD subsidized properties to hire or contract a social service staff person to link elderly and/or disabled residents to specific supportive services. Residents of existing HUD properties: 25% are disabled. 30% are over 62 years of age. 46% of residents over the age of 62 are disabled. Average age is 72 – 75. Seniors are aging in place. Average income less than $13,000/year.


Demand for senior housing will skyrocket. There will be more than 200,000 additional seniors in Oregon in the next seven years.

Properties are aging. Affordable properties are now 30-50 years old. Issues that must be addressed are deferred maintenance, accessibility upgrades, aging in place repairs, energy efficiency, seismic repairs, obsolete configurations, etc. Preserving these properties requires sophisticated ownership and comes with a big price tag.

Resources for services are scarce and housing costs are rising which makes it harder for seniors to pay for health care and other services. In addition, the HUD budget is vulnerable to cuts in fiscal year 2016, and there is a limited production of new units.

Opportunities and recommendations from HUD: Production: Need comprehensive strategy to increase supply of

housing affordable to the lowest income seniors. Housing and Services: Seek innovative models for integrating housing

and health care to achieve cost efficiencies, and to fund supportive services.

Preservation: Preserve existing senior housing projects to help seniors age in place. Financing for big ticket items such as accessibility.

Location: Look ahead at land acquisition to site future senior housing development with proximity to services.

Ann McQueen asked each of the panelists for one specific suggestion that the Commission could work on that would help move some of the housing issues forward. Responses were: Look at specific sources of funding for services for seniors to be integrated

into affordable housing. Incentivize development of affordable housing. Incentivize for funding services for seniors on site. Make better use of the CCOs by requiring them to provide services for

seniors from the funds that they receive (redirect funds given to CCOs).


Emphasize services for seniors and find creative ways to provide more services.

State of Oregon’s Flexible Spending Waiver #1115 is coming up for renewal next year. Advocate for language in the flexible spending waiver that says that housing supports and wraparound services can be provided using Medicaid dollars.

Make those on waitlists for housing more visible. Dignity and Quality of Care – Legislative Subcommittee Joe Greenman briefly reviewed items approved by the legislature in the 2015-2017 budget for APD along with funding for special purpose authorization items (summary of both were included in the meeting packet). Joe mentioned the status of the following bills: General assistance – bill died Mandatory employer safety – bill passed Keeping criminal records in the long term care system – reconfigured Power of attorney – unchanged Task force is being created for housing with services issue (GCSS should

track) Voluntary retirement security – bill passed Judges are now allowed to execute search warrants outside the jurisdiction

of the court in elder abuse cases. Jim Davis continued with the following comments: APD budget did well overall. OPI received 20 million with an additional 6 million for the continuation of the

pilot. Need to get to complete “age equity,” but the legislature decided not to

adopt it at this time. Losses included the Gatekeeper program and the Innovation fund. Two hundred thousand dollars were designated for a needs assessment for

Deaf and Hard of Hearing issues. Money was given back for property tax relief for people that had been left

out of the property tax deferral program which was the right and decent thing to do. Jim says that the next step is to eliminate the waiting list as the


program is catching up, and it doesn’t have the deficits that it had before. Let’s get it going like it used to be.

The medical equipment bill died; maybe that can be resurrected. The bill to remove anti-trust exemptions from CCOs to make all of their

regular and advisory council meetings public went down. The fight to open their meetings to the public needs to continue as they are given hundreds of millions of public dollars.

The General Assistance program for the “poorest of poor” went down. The AARP Care Act passed which provides for patients admitted to

hospitals the right to name a family caregiver who coordinates medical records, performs post-discharge care, etc. to be trained in discharge care.

Senior Mental Health received over 6 million dollars on the Addictions and Mental Health side that is going towards the salaries of 25 individuals who are going into the field and serving as senior and disability mental health specialists – to coordinate mental health services for older adults with mental health conditions and additions. They will not have any resources and will have to have to invent them, but at least there is someone out there who cares.

On the senior and disability side, the ADRCs have money for prevention work around mental health and addictions.

Aging as an Asset – Workforce Workgroup Kathleen Schonau said that the workgroup is hoping that the Governor’s Commission will support the Senior Community Services Employment Program (SCSEP) by broadening peoples’ knowledge about the program and increase the funding so that it is available to more people. (The SCSEP program is part of the Older Americans Act (OAA) and helps older people with low employment prospects learn new skills by placing them in internships that are funded by the OAA.) Ann is going to write a policy brief based on the work of the group. The workgroup will look at it, send it to the Commission for review, and pursue getting it in front of the Governor and other lawmakers who can help move the work forward. Judy Strand said that now is a good time to look at it by first determining what the Commission’s priorities are in relation to this program before proceeding further.


Aging as an Asset – Volunteer Workgroup Mary Rita Hurley was not in attendance to give a report. Rebecca Arce stated that a survey had been developed about older adult volunteers (survey was included in meeting packet) and was going be sent out to organizations. Commission Business Contact for Senate Issues

Ann McQueen reported that she had written Judge Kemp regarding a change in Senator assignment to the Commission, and he confirmed that Michelle Vanschaick would be the contact for this process. Judy Strand volunteered to write a letter requesting a change in Senator assignment if needed.

Liason Reports OPI Expansion Pilot

Meeting notes from the June 30 meeting were included in the meeting packet.

Long Term Ombudsman Charles Richards said that the construction of the building on Wolverine is complete, the building has doubled in size, and they are in the process of getting 15 people to take over the upsurge of business that will come through. No one has been permanently appointed to head up the agency.

Oregon Disabilities Commission (ODC) Angela Weaver reported that two citizens from Bend spoke to the ODC during public testimony at their last meeting saying that the “City of Bend” was not accessible. The ODC tried to help them with suggestions which failed, so they were asking for some direction from GCSS who recommended that they contact Representative Knute Buehler. Two celebrations were held for the Americans with Disability Act for its 25th year anniversary. Over 200 participants attended each celebration, one in Portland and one in Salem.


ODC is targeting “employment” for people with disabilities. ODS has identified the following to further this endeavor: 1) Schedule a guest speaker from OBRS leadership, 2) learn more about what is going on at the Workforce Investment Board, and 3) look at the models that the Portland Commission on Disability is doing with the city of Portland, and use it as a possible model for employers hiring people with disabilities and see how that model can be applicable for other DHS and state agencies.

Home Care Commission (HCC)

Ruth McEwen mentioned that the HCC has some maps/reports showing what Oregon counties have good workforces, which have none, etc., and will forward a copy of the report to Ann.

Commissioner Business

Name Tags A Commissioner requested that blank name tags be made available for visitors who come to the Commission meetings.

Future Agenda Item Jim Davis requested an update from APD on what their action plan is from all of the recommendations, data, and research that was done on Senate Bill 21.

Ann McQueen said that she was not at the last Manager’s meeting, but that Fred Steele, Interim Manager, was there, and Senate Bill 21 is a high priority with that group as Advocacy and Development is still kind of overseeing that work.

Priority Issues Ann mentioned that Jeff Puterbaugh and Deborah White (Advocacy and Development) are teaming up to work on housing and are part of the group gathering names for a task force. Some of the work is temporarily on hold until the task force is appointed.


Ann has attended some meetings about transportation, and that work is ongoing.

Service equity is being discussed and how to integrate it into housing and transportation so that it is not left on its own. Rebecca Arce is also involved with this issue.

Jeanette Hulse left APD and is now an auditor with the Secretary of State’s office. She did some work on caregiving before she left and that work will be picked up also.

John Bartholomew from AARP will be gathering stakeholders to talk about respite.

Judy Strand asked the Commissioners if they would like Fred Steel to speak at a Commission meeting about Senate Bill 21. It was decided that priority issues will be discussed at the next GCSS meeting and at the following meeting, someone will be asked to speak about APD’s action plan for Senate Bill 21.

Budget

Ann said that the Commission has $4,000. It was decided that the budget would be brought up again when the priorities are discussed.

Update on Membership

Ann gave an update on the Commission’s membership: Three members need to reapply if they desire to serve another term:

Jim Davis, Peggy Brey, and Keith Putman Three members have reapplied and have been accepted: Suzette

Boydston, Nancy Pierce, and Judy Strand One member is not reapplying: Paul Krissel Three applicants are waiting for confirmation: Leroy Patton, William

Schmidt, and Elaine Fiesen-Strang Ann said that the Commission totals 21 including two serving extensions and three waiting for confirmation. Judy added that if any Commissioner knows of anyone that may be interested in serving, to forward their name(s) to her.


Meeting adjourned at 4:00 pm. The next GCSS meeting will be held on Thursday, October 8, 2015, 9:30 – 4:00, at 3406 Cherry Avenue (formerly Fish and Wildlife), Room 123.

governor’s commission on senior services - oregon · governor’s commission on senior services...

Documents