University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
view search results
page permalink
Case Name DOJ Investigation of South Dakota Use of Nursing Facilities to Serve Individuals with Disabilities PB-SD-0002
Docket / Court docket unknown ( No Court )
State/Territory South Dakota
Case Type(s) Public Benefits / Government Services
Special Collection Olmstead Cases
Attorney Organization U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Case Summary
On May 1, 2016, the U.S. Justice Department released a letter reporting the findings of an investigation into South Dakota’s system of care for persons with disabilities. The report found that South Dakota unnecessarily relied on nursing facilities to provide services to people with disabilities, ... read more >
On May 1, 2016, the U.S. Justice Department released a letter reporting the findings of an investigation into South Dakota’s system of care for persons with disabilities. The report found that South Dakota unnecessarily relied on nursing facilities to provide services to people with disabilities, in violation of the community integration mandate of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Supreme Court’s decision in Olmstead v. L.C.

The ADA and the Olmstead ruling required states to make services available to people with disabilities in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs, regardless of age or type of disability. The Olmstead court ruled that unless a nursing home is medically necessary, people have a right under the Americans With Disabilities Act to receive care without being segregated from society. However, the report found that in South Dakota, thousands of patients were being held unnecessarily in restrictive group homes.

The investigation was initiated on August 11, 2014 by the Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the District of South Dakota. The investigation focused on the availability of community-based, long-term care services for nursing facility residents and those at serious risk of nursing facility admission.

The report concluded that the State planned, administered, and funded its public healthcare service system in a manner that unnecessarily segregated persons with disabilities in institutional nursing facilities, rather than providing services in community-based settings. The findings letter also suggested that South Dakota had spent an inordinate amount of its Medicaid dollars on nursing home care that unnecessarily deny individuals with disabilities the “supports and services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs” that the ADA requires.

For example, one 51-year-old man told the Justice Department that he had entered the nursing facility to recover after a leg amputation, but had been trying to leave the nursing facility for months, without help. Other interviewees talked about nursing home staff causing “induced helplessness” by forbidding them from engaging in activities like opening cans or putting on their own shoes, the kinds of activities residents could practice to work toward living on their own at home again.

The findings letter included a section with recommendations on how the State could reasonably modify its service system. For example, the letter mentioned that the State could modify and expand these existing services to serve all individuals who are unnecessarily institutionalized in nursing facilities or are at serious risk of nursing facility admission; ensure each person receives an appropriate amount of services to meet his or her needs; and eliminate unnecessary limitations and barriers that lead to unnecessary nursing facility admission.

The letter also included recommended remedial measures. These measures included increasing capacity by expanding services and addressing limitations to adequately serve individuals who are currently living in nursing facilities or who are at serious risk of entering nursing facilities; preventing unnecessary admissions of individuals with disabilities to nursing facilities by developing a system to identify potential admissions and to promptly arrange for in-home care; developing a system to disseminate information about community services, identifying individuals in nursing facilities who are appropriate for and do not oppose community placement, and conducting adequate transition planning to ensure that people with disabilities receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.

The investigation is on-going.

Ginny Lee - 03/05/2017


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Content of Injunction
Discrimination Prohibition
Implement complaint/dispute resolution process
Defendant-type
Hospital/Health Department
Disability
disability, unspecified
Discrimination-basis
Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)
General
Confinement/isolation
Disparate Treatment
Housing assistance
Plaintiff Type
U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
Special Case Type
Out-of-court
Type of Facility
Government-run
Causes of Action Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.
Defendant(s) Office of the Governor
Plaintiff Description The investigation was conducted by the Civil Rights Division with assistance by the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the District of South Dakota.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party None Yet / None
Public Int. Lawyer No
Nature of Relief None yet
Source of Relief None yet
Case Ongoing Yes
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
  William G. v. Pataki
http://www.bazelon.org/william-g-v-pataki/
Date: 2017
By: The Bazelon Center (The Bazelon Center)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Disability Rights New Jersey v. Velez
http://www.bazelon.org/drnj-v-velez/
Date: 2017
By: The Bazelon Center (The Bazelon Center)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Williams v. Quinn
http://www.bazelon.org/williams-v-quinn/
Date: 2017
By: The Bazelon Center (The Bazelon Center)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  United States of America v. Commonwealth of Virginia
http://www.bazelon.org/u-s-v-virginia/
Date: 2017
By: The Bazelon Center (The Bazelon Center)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  United States of America v. North Carolina
http://www.bazelon.org/u-s-v-north-carolina/
Date: 2017
By: The Bazelon Center (The Bazelon Center)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  U.S. v. Georgia
http://www.bazelon.org/u-s-v-georgia/
Date: 2017
By: The Bazelon Center (The Bazelon Center)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  O'Toole v. Cuomo [Formerly DAI v. Cuomo]
http://www.bazelon.org/otoole-v-cuomo/
Date: 2017
By: The Bazelon Center (The Bazelon Center)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Amanda D. v. Hassan
http://www.bazelon.org/amanda-d-v-hassan/
Date: 2017
By: The Bazelon Center (The Bazelon Center)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
No docket sheet currently in the collection
General Documents
Findings Letter
PB-SD-0002-0001.pdf | External Link | Detail
Date: 05/02/2016
Plaintiff's Lawyers Gupta, Vanita (District of Columbia)
PB-SD-0002-0001

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
view search results
page permalink

- top of page -