Highlights

• Not Too Late for Child Tax Credit
• COVID Funeral Benefit Reminder
• WIC and Formula Shortage
• P-EBT Issuance
• P-EBT for Kids Under 6
• Ukrainian Evacuees Soon Benefits Eligible
• Free Testing and N95s
• High Speed Internet Expansion
• Free Senior Living Advisors
• Housing Right to Counsel Needed

Sections

• Program Highlights
• Health Care Coverage
• Policy & Social Issues

Questions, comments about the newsletter? Contact Ellen Forman, 617-726-5807.

Another 330,00 Massachusetts residents will be getting $500 checks in the mail next month. Gov. Charlie Baker's administration says it’s preparing to send out the second round of checks to low-income workers as part of the premium pay program that was included in a spending plan for federal COVID funds last winter.

The second round of payments are based on 2021 tax returns and will go to those who didn't get a check during the first round in March (eligibility has also been slightly tweaked due to changes to the minimum wage and federal poverty levels).

The long story short: those who made between $13,500 and $38,640 in 2021 (the income limits are higher for larger households), but didn't get anything in the first round of payments should expect a check.

More information.

- From Get ready for a rare May scorcher, WBUR Today, May 20, 2022.

It’s not too late for families to claim their 2021 Child Tax Credit payments. Code for America and the Department of Treasury recently launched a simplified portal for families to claim their CTC and any missed stimulus payments- GetCTC.org (and in Spanish: getctc.org/es).

The Child Tax Credit for tax year 2021 is up to $3,600 per child under 6, and $3,000 per child age 6-17.

Families who received any monthly Advance Child Tax Credit payments in 2021, need to file taxes this year to get the second half of their money. The remainder of the Child Tax Credit will be issued in one payment.

Those who have not received any Child Tax Credit payments yet, can file simplified taxes now to get the whole credit.

Training June 2nd

Advocates attend a Webinar Thursday June 2nd at noon to learn more, including where clients can get free help and for multilingual outreach materials.

Register here: https://bostonmedicalcenter.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN__Ii9u6OKQUqGNTRJLLztqA

Thousands of workers who repaid “overpayments” for unemployment benefits during the pandemic will soon be getting a refund from the state.

The refunds include more than $15.3 million paid back by 3,168 jobless claimants whose overpayment debts are being wiped away by a federal waiver, according to figures from the state Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development.

Another $4.9 million was repaid by 10,174 claimants who can request refunds under a separate waiver process for state and federal overpayments.

A notice sent by the state Department of Unemployment Assistance to eligible claimants explains they don’t need to make more payments and will get a refund or credit.

“If you have made a payment toward this debt, you will receive your refund via direct deposit if that was your payment method,” the notice stated. “If your payment method was debit card, please update your account’s payment method to direct deposit, or make sure your mailing address is accurate, because we will mail you a check if no direct deposit account is available.”

Massachusetts shelled out a record $33 billion in state and federal and unemployment benefits between 2020 and 2021 as government-imposed shutdowns to stop the spread of COVID-19 sidelined hundreds of thousands of workers. But in the crush to process an unprecedented number of claims, an estimated $2.7 billion in so-called overpayments were made to 719,000 laid-off workers who received benefits that they were later determined to be ineligible for.

Last month, the U.S. Department of Labor partially approved the state’s request for a blanket waiver for non-fraudulent overpayments through the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance and other federal unemployment programs.

But the waiver only covers overpayments received from the week ending Jan. 2, 2021, through the week ending March 20, 2021, according to the agency.

State labor officials argue that the biggest driver of overpayments among Massachusetts claimants were changes in federal guidance for the PUA program. Those changes resulted in overpayment determinations for more than $1 billion in already paid claims, according to state labor officials.

- See the full Gloucester Times article.

As we reported in March 2021, (Americans Can Soon Apply for COVID-19 Funeral Cost Reimbursement) in April of 2021, FEMA began a program to reimburse COVID funeral expenses — up to $9,000, which is roughly the average cost of a funeral. And it was retroactive.

A year into the program, the federal government has paid more than $2 billion to cover funeral costs for COVID victims. More than 300,000 families have received reimbursement, averaging $6,500. But fewer than half of families have started applications. Many surviving family members have run into challenges or still don't know the money is available.

It's generally not a question of eligibility. There are no income limits, and life insurance does not preclude participation. And there is still no deadline. One of the few disqualifiers (detailed here) is if a funeral was pre-paid.

FEMA launched a big call center, hiring 4,000 contractors in Denver. Survivors must call to initiate the process, as applications are not accepted online.

Jaclyn Rothenberg, FEMA's chief spokesperson says there's a new pot of stimulus funding from the American Rescue Plan Act.

FEMA is launching an outreach campaign to promote the program since there's plenty of money left. The agency is focusing on the populous states of California, New York, Pennsylvania and Texas, and efforts are targeting vulnerable populations.

The government is also leaning on community groups connected to those who most need to know about the money.

COVID Survivors for Change, founded by Chris Kocher, has been helping people navigate the process, including through a Facebook webinar. "We were able to connect people to some of the survivors that had been through that process already just to help them walk through it," he says. Many just need someone to complete the application for them.

More information: COVID Funeral Assistance FAQs

To apply: Call 844-684-6333, Monday-Friday, 9 - 9 Eastern Time. Multilingual services are available.

- See the full NPR story.

MA WIC and the Department of Public Health have posted information for families here (a brief overview) and more in depth information here.

Excerpts:

On February 20, 2022, DPH requested and received three federal regulatory waivers from USDA that provide additional flexibility in response to the shortages such as: (1) covering other formula brands (other than Abbott) without medical documentation, (2) covering varying, nonstandard container sizes and (3) retailers’ ability to exchange recalled formulas purchased with WIC benefits for non-identical but similar formula products.

As a result, Massachusetts WIC has added 8 more formula brands (including Mead Johnson and Gerber products, as well as a full range of private label/store brand options) and a total of 68 new formula products/can sizes that are now covered by WIC benefits.

MassHealth has made it easier for members and providers to access medically needed formula by waiving prior authorization at pharmacies for members with a prescription.
The Division of Insurance (DOI) and MassHealth are directing health plans to waive any prior authorization for formula needed for medical reasons for 90 days to prevent any undue delays in member access to specialty formula.

If families are experiencing challenges locating formula, they should contact their local WIC office, the 800-number on the back of their WIC Card, or by email to: wicinfo.dph@massmail.state.ma.us . 

When SNAP EBT accounts are idle for too many days without any SNAP purchases, DTA can take SNAP back or “expunge” the value of the old benefits. The 2018 Farm Bill (federal legislation) shortened the expungement timeline from 365 days (12 months) to 274 days (9 months). This means if a household has not accessed their EBT account for 274 consecutive days, then DTA is required to permanently take away (expunge) the SNAP EBT benefits that are 274 days or older. Once expunged, there is no way to get them back. DTA will not take away any SNAP benefits issued more recently. This change is only recently being implemented.

DTA has also aligned this change with P-EBT benefits that haven't been accessed at all in 274 days. However, P-EBT is different from SNAP in this way: Families can get expunged P-EBT back. DTA should send the family a notice about their expunged P-EBT benefits and the family should call DTA to ask for the P-EBT to be put back on the account. 

- From [FoodSNAPcoalition] coalition mtg Tues on P-EBT, DTAConnect in Haitian Creole, expungement change, Victoria Negus, MLRI, May 2, 2022.

On May 5, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced a policy to improve equitable access to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by including discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in the prohibition against sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

As the USDA explained in its statement, “This action is in line with President Biden’s Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation, and is consistent with the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, in which the Court held that the prohibition on sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 extends to discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.”

Recent research underscores the importance of the USDA action for health and well-being. Census data has documented disparate rates of food insecurity experienced by LGBTQIA+ adults. New findings by the UCLA Law School Williams Institute also highlight the deep disparities that transgender people experience:

• Transgender people were almost 2.5 times more likely than cisgender people to face food insufficiency during the pandemic (19.9% versus 8.3%), with the disparity rising to nearly five times for transgender people of color compared to white cisgender people (28.% versus 6%).
• Fewer transgender people who met SNAP’s income requirement were enrolled compared to cisgender people (29% versus 39%).

USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) has detailed specific steps state and local agencies and program operators must take in implementing the policy.

These include:

• Program administrators and operators must accept and process discrimination complaints based on sexual orientation or gender identity, making any necessary updates to their discrimination claims systems to do so.
• Administrators and operators must update their Nondiscrimination Statements to include “gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation” in addition to existing protections. Translations in more than 20 languages will be forthcoming from USDA.
• As supplies are available, administrators and operators must update signage, such as “Justice for All” posters that provide important onsite visual reminders of protections in FNS programs.
• State agencies must distribute USDA’s memorandum about the policy “to local agencies, program operators and sponsors, and all other subrecipients of federal financial assistance.”

- See the full FRAC blog post.

This week DTA started issuing P-EBT (Pandemic EBT) benefits for school year 2021-2022 on P-EBT or EBT cards! Children who missed school for a COVID related absence may be eligible. Families should start to get notices from DTA about this very soon. In the meantime, families should check the balance on their P-EBT or EBT card. DTA bases the amount of P-EBT benefits issued on data the Mass Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE ) received from the child’s school about COVID-related absences. The notice families will get tells them if the P-EBT was put on a P-EBT or EBT card. For more information, see MAp-EBT.org.
To be eligible to get P-EBT funds for the 2021-2022 school year, students must have: 

• Been approved for free or reduced-price meals (under the National School Lunch Program), OR 
• Attended a school where every student gets free meals (under a special rule called Community Eligibility Provision), AND 
• Missed school days due to COVID reasons. For example: 
• Student had COVID 
• Student had to stay out of school until getting a negative COVID test
• Student was out of school because they were a close contact with someone who tested positive for COVID) 
• Student missed school because of symptoms (even if they were not COVID positive):
• Fever or chills, cough, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing, muscle or body aches, headache, loss of taste or smell, sore throat, congestion or runny nose
• School building was closed due to COVID-19

If a family thinks their child missed more days of school due to COVID-related reasons than reflected in the P-EBT amount, they should fill out a “Request for Review” form and return it to their school. For more information on this process, see this page on MAp-EBT - the form is translated into 11 languages here. 

- From P-EBT, FindYourFunds webinar, Ukrainians & SNAP, and more!, Victoria Negus, MLRI, May 26, 2022.

USDA approved the MA Department of Transitional Assistance’s (DTA) plan to issue P-EBT to kids under 6 (ages 0-5) on SNAP, retroactively to September of 2021. The initial amount for September, October and November 2021 will be $37 per month per eligible child. DTA will issue families these P-EBT benefits on June 25th. Stay tuned for more information on the December 2021 through June 2021 payments. See DTA’s press release. 

P-EBT is a food benefit during the 2021-2022 school year for two groups: 
1) Kids who are in Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) schools or qualify for free/reduced price meals through the National School Lunch Program and who missed days of school due to COVID related reasons (first issuance May 25) and 
2) kids ages 0-5 on SNAP, or who are part of a household with people who get SNAP (first issuance June 25). 

NOTE: Like last summer, Summer P-EBT (almost $400/eligible kid) is coming for kids under 6 on SNAP and for school kids who go to a CEP school or qualify for free/reduced price meals! Encourage families with young kids to apply for SNAP to qualify for SNAP and also for P-EBT! 

- From Coalition, Budget action items, P-EBT for kids under 6, COVID tests, Victoria Negus, MLRI, May 18, 2022.

The US Senate has passed and then President Biden signed the United for Ukrainians emergency package. Section 401 of the legislation allows Ukrainians granted humanitarian parole to qualify for federal benefits the same as refugees and asylees. That means these Ukrainian parolees will now qualify for SNAP, TAFDC, SSI, LIHEAP and other federal public benefits with no 5 year waiting period and regardless of length of parole status. As reported last month, many of these evacuees had been granted parole for 364 days- one day short of the minimum 365 day parole otherwise required for benefits eligibility.

Please make sure DTA is aware of any Ukrainian families who previously applied for SNAP or cash benefits so they can get an application filed moving forward. There are a couple hundred Ukrainian parolees who will benefit from this law in Western Mass alone.  

Here's MLRI's media statement.

Please join us in thanking Congressmen McGovern and Neal profusely for their work on this!  

- From P-EBT, FindYourFunds webinar, Ukrainians & SNAP, and more!, Victoria Negus, MLRI, May 26, 2022.

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) Secretary Becerra has committed to providing states and other stakeholders with at least 60 days’ notice prior to ending the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE). The current PHE declaration is set to expire on July 15, 2022, making May 15 the 60-day notice deadline. As HHS did not announce that the PHE will be ending, we expect it to be renewed. 

The extension has implications for a variety of public benefits and health care programs.

- From: From DC: White House Plan to Increase Affordable Housing, Public Health Emergency Expected Extension, and more, Justice in Aging, May 20, 2022.

Most Massachusetts residents can show their insurance card to get free rapid antigen tests at the pharmacy desk of stores like CVS and Walgreen's. Each insured person is eligible to get up to eight free tests each month, so a parent could obtain eight free tests for themselves and another eight for their child, as long as they provide both insurance cards.

In January, the federal government required health plans to reimburse their members for buying rapid tests. People could purchase the tests out-of-pocket, then submit receipts to get paid back by their insurer. Some insurance companies have been taking orders for tests on their websites and mailing them out to members.

In recent months, in a shift that's making rapid tests more broadly accessible, major pharmacies have begun offering the tests for free by processing them just like any other prescription.

"Gathering the receipts and sending them constitutes its own barrier," said Stephen Kissler of the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health. "But if you can go to the pharmacy and pick them up using your insurance card right there on the spot, that's really helpful."

That free availability at pharmacies doesn't seem to be widely known. Even Kissler, who studies the effectiveness of rapid antigen tests, wasn't aware they could be picked up that way until GBH News asked him about it.

The federal rule in January said prescription coverage in medical insurance plans should cover the cost of up to eight rapid antigen tests per person each month
.
According to the state's office of Health and Human Resources, the tests should be available for free at pharmacies for people with coverage through MassHealth, which covers both Medicare and Medicaid recipients in the state.

Even if they're more able to get rapid tests now, many people continue to be confused about when it's best to use them and what exactly the test results mean.

Stephen Kissler of Harvard said there are two times he finds rapid tests to be most useful. "The first is if I'm about to go see someone who might be high risk," Kissler said. "So if I'm about to see an older relative or somebody with some co-morbidities that would make it bad if they were to get COVID, I usually take test before going to see them."

The second time he'll take a test, Kissler said, is if he has symptoms like a cough, or if he's been exposed to someone who had COVID-19. "Usually I'll wait a couple of days, try to reduce how many encounters I have with people outside my household, and then take a rapid test — sometimes two — to essentially clear myself for more regular day-to-day contact," he said.
The key piece of information a rapid test tells you, Kissler said, is whether you're contagious at that moment, so it's best to take the test right before you make a visit to an older or immune-compromised loved one. And people should note, he said, that because it can take several days after exposure to become contagious, someone who tests negative today can become contagious — and test positive — tomorrow.

"A rapid antigen test is the best tool we have to tell me how I should behave," Kissler said.

PCR tests, which are conducted in a lab and are considered the gold standard, tell people if they've had COVID-19, but not whether they're still infectious.

Also: the Government is sending an additional 8 free tests per household. See accompanying story.

- See the full WGBH story.

Americans can once again order free COVID-19 tests from the federal government by visiting COVIDtests.gov. In this round, the U.S. Postal Service will deliver eight free rapid antigen tests to any household in the U.S. that wants them, according to the website. That brings to sixteen the total tests offered per household so far.

This comes as COVID cases in the U.S. have risen more than 60% in the first weeks of May and hospitalizations have begun to climb again as well. "As the highly transmissible subvariants of Omicron drive a rise in cases in parts of the country, free and accessible tests will help slow the spread of the virus," explains a White House fact sheet.

The administration has been criticized for not giving away as many tests as households might need if someone comes down with COVID. But officials previously said they were holding back to see how much demand there was.

Four months into the program, the White House says 350 million tests have been given away to 70 million households, more than half of the households in the U.S. In the midst of the first Omicron wave, with cases spiking and tests hard to find, the Biden administration announced it would order one billion tests to distribute free to Americans.

The first round of tests sent out in January and February provided four per household, and the second round in March provided four more tests per household, for a total of eight. This latest round doubles that, getting more tests out more quickly.

White House officials have been pleading with Congress to pass another round of COVID prevention and treatment funds, with little progress. Part of that funding would go to buying additional tests to keep the nation's supply up even if consumer demand wanes.

- See the full WBUR story.

Need more tests or need them sooner? Insurance should cover 8 a month per person. See accompanying story.

Free high-quality masks are available in some pharmacies, often with a per-person limit. This CDC site offers a mask locator: CDC Free Mask Finder.

- From Helpful COVID-19 information and resources, Senator Jason Lewis, May 12, 2022.

The Baker-Polito Administration launched a new free telehealth program to help people more easily access treatment for COVID-19. The program is available to residents who are 18 years of age or older who have tested positive for the virus and are experiencing mild to moderate symptoms. They will be now able to schedule a video consultation with a healthcare professional to determine if they are eligible for Paxlovid, a COVID-19 treatment pill taken orally that can reduce the risk for severe symptoms and hospitalization by nearly 90 percent.

The program, accessible at www.mass.gov/covidtelehealth, is designed to be a quick and easy way for people to see if Paxlovid is the right treatment for them. The program is not for medical emergencies and is only for those that currently live in Massachusetts. 

“Paxlovid has been shown to be highly effective in treating COVID-19 and can prevent patients from getting seriously ill,” Dr. Larry Madoff, Medical Director in the Bureau of Infectious Disease and Laboratory Sciences at the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, said in a statement.  During these telehealth visits, residents will take a short health intake survey and a clinician will review symptoms and risk factors. If Paxlovid is determined to be the right treatment, a prescription will be ordered to a pharmacy convenient for the patient. Free overnight delivery of Paxlovid can also be arranged. 

“This treatment must be started within five days of symptoms, so it is essential to speak with a clinician right away. This new telehealth option makes it easier for residents to connect quickly with a clinician and we encourage individuals who test positive to utilize it,” Madoff said in a statement. 

The program and prescription are free, and residents do not need to have health insurance to access it.

Clinicians are available every day from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m., and the telehealth consult is free. Insurance is not required. Individuals 18 and over will have to show ID (which will not be shared), a photo or PDF of their positive test result; a list of medications and vitamins they’re taking; and, if they have kidney disease, a copy of their lab results from the last three months. People may use any smartphone or computer that has video.

Paxlovid is intended for people 12 and older with a mild to moderate case of COVID-19 who are at higher risk for severe COVID-19, are within 5 days of symptom onset, and have tested positive for the virus, regardless of vaccination status. Treatment must begin as soon as possible after testing positive and within five days of symptom onset. Paxlovid can reduce the risk for severe disease progression and hospitalization by nearly 90 percent, according to the administration’s announcement. “Fortunately, we have reached a point in the pandemic where the tools to stay safe and healthy are much more widely available. Those include vaccines first and foremost,” Dr. Shira Doron, Infectious Disease Physician and Hospital Epidemiologist at Tufts Medical Center said in a statement. “But now anyone who gets COVID and has even a single risk factor can and should also avail themselves of one of several highly effective treatments, including two oral antiviral medications, of which there is plentiful supply. It is important for the public to know that these treatments are safe and effective at reducing your risk of progressing to severe COVID-19.”

The telehealth program is supported by Color Health, a company that helps connect patients with COVID tests and treatment. 

- See the full Boston.com article. Additional material from The Global Toll, Telehealth Targets Paxlovid, and more..., MHA's WEEKLY WRAP-UP, May 6, 2022.

President Joe Biden announced this month that 20 broadband providers have agreed to lower costs and increase speeds for high-speed internet plans for low-income people across the country.

The White House said the companies have made a commitment to reduce rates for millions of people who qualify for the Affordable Connectivity Program, which was created by the infrastructure law Biden signed last year. As many as 48 million households qualify for the program, which can cut internet service costs by up to $30 a month, or $75 a month on tribal lands.

The commitment of the service providers means eligible households will be able to receive high-speed plans for no more than $30 a month, the White House said.

Families whose incomes are at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level and people who participate in a number of government programs are eligible, the White House said. Qualifying programs include the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income, Federal Pell Grants and Federal Public Housing Assistance, among others.

To help people sign up, the administration is launching a website for applications and directing agencies who run the qualifying government programs to contact recipients to inform them about their eligibility.

The administration said it views a sufficiently high-speed plan as one that offers download speeds of at least 100 megabits per second.

"That's fast enough for a typical family of four to work from home, do schoolwork, browse the web, and stream high-definition shows and movies," the White House said. "In addition, the administration asked providers to offer such plans with no fees and no data caps."

The Administration has also launched GetInternet.gov, which provides information on the ACP benefit, how to apply, and how to find participating internet providers.

Read more in this White House Fact Sheet.

- See the full NBC News story.  Additional material from: From DC: New Internet Access Initiatives, Strengthening the Direct Care Workforce, Booster Vaccine Rates, and more, Justice in Aging, May 13, 2022.

AllWays Health Partners has announced a new, comprehensive mental health solution in partnership with Lyra Health to promote overall health and well-being. Beginning in June, Mass General Brigham employees and their families who are enrolled in the Mass General Brigham Select or Plus employee health plans will have expanded access to high-quality mental health services.

Lyra Health will not replace or disrupt existing services, coverage or provider relationships. Lyra expands mental health care access for Select and Plus members and their families.

Lyra provides secure and confidential access to clinically proven mental health services. Features of Lyra include: 

• Care how and where you need it with a first-available session in three days or less with a licensed mental health clinician or psychiatrist by video, messaging or in-person
• Diverse, multilingual and culturally responsive mental health care providers
• Access to 24/7 care navigators and concierge services to help find the appropriate mental health care
• Access to self-guided online programs to securely and confidentially receive evidence-based mental health treatment

Lyra was selected based on input from Mass General Brigham mental health experts as part of a rigorous and evidence-based review process.

Learn more about Lyra at https://mgb.lyrahealth.com/ or call AllWays Health Partners customer service at 800-432-9449.

Learn more about other behavioral and mental health resources available to all Mass General Brigham employees on The Pulse.

- From Broadcast MGB, May 3, 2022.

A Place for Mom (APFM) can assist patients and families seeking placement for Assisted Living, Independent Living, Memory Care and private-pay (non-skilled) home care. They help families find senior living communities that meet their needs and offer advice and support. Services might include education about types of care and help matching to the patient’s needs, helping to schedule appointments and tours and offering emotional support through the process.

They are able to offer services free to families as they are paid by their partner communities if a patient moves in. If engaging this service, please keep in mind that it is in their interest to recommend participating providers, and that their listings may not include all local facilities.

APFM does not own or operate any of the providers in its platform. APFM offers options, but does not endorse or recommend any specific provider, “as we believe that the family is in the best position to select the appropriate option.” Families are encouraged to tour and ask questions of each provider to ensure that they select the one that best meets their needs.

Learn more about APFM.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issued a proposed rule that would create several new special enrollment periods (SEPs) and implement other changes to simplify Medicare enrollment. Among others, CMS is proposing SEPs for formerly incarcerated individuals and to allow individuals to enroll in Medicare after termination of Medicaid eligibility, which will be particularly important at the end of the COVID public health emergency. In addition, if the rule is finalized, Medicare coverage will become effective the month after enrollment for individuals enrolling in the last three months of their Initial Enrollment Period (IEP) or in the General Enrollment Period (GEP), thereby reducing any potential gaps in coverage. The proposed rule implements the BENES Act, which was passed as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, and makes other changes to Medicare enrollment and eligibility rules. The public comment period on the rule is open through June 27.

Learn more in this CMS fact sheet.

- From: From DC: SCOTUS to Hear Nursing Facility Case, New Medicare Special Enrollment Periods Proposed, Uninsured Rate Down, and More, Justice in Aging, May 6, 2022.

Right to counsel – with regard to housing – would legally ensure that residents of the Commonwealth have a right to legal representation in housing court.  Low-income tenants and owner-occupants who cannot afford an attorney would be provided one at no cost.
While the current housing crisis impacts a wide range of individuals and families, it disproportionately affects veterans.  Nearly 13 percent of homeless adults are veterans, despite the fact that veterans only account for 7 percent of the adult population.  Nobody, especially those who served our nation so bravely, deserves to live on the streets or to shift from shelter to shelter, wondering where they will next find a warm bed in which to sleep.

Low-income tenants, which include a great many veterans in the Commonwealth, deserve to have an attorney by their side when faced with evictions or unsafe housing.  In Massachusetts, nine out of 10 tenants represent themselves in housing court.  We do not have to accept this.  There are two pieces of state legislation (H.1436 and S.874) that would establish a statewide right to counsel program that would promote housing stability.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Gov. Charlie’s Baker’s eviction diversion initiative increased access to legal representation, providing assistance in over 3,000 cases to over 7,000 people as of June 2021, six months within starting up.  The impact of this representation, which provided legal aid much like a right to counsel program, was housing stability, with 90 percent of closed cases resulting in positive outcomes, including preserved tenancy.

But there are added benefits born out of instituting right to counsel that further illustrate the positive impacts such a program can have on individuals, families, communities, and the taxpayer.

A report from the Boston Bar Association found that full legal representation, when provided to eligible, low-income beneficiaries, could result in a $63 million cost savings for the Commonwealth.  This includes savings in emergency shelter costs, health care costs, and foster care costs, and compares favorably to the $26 million cost estimate for instituting a program in Massachusetts.  That works out to $2.40 in cost savings for every dollar spent by the state to fund right to counsel programs.

But right to counsel not only saves money, it saves people’s housing and is an investment that a growing number of community leaders and organizations – from human services agencies, to medical providers and even to real estate and property managers – are supporting.

- See the full CommonWealth Magazine opinion piece.

As the coronavirus loosens its grip on Massachusetts, a new report highlights the economic, academic, and health disparities faced by the state’s Latino community well before the pandemic wreaked havoc on the Commonwealth.

The state’s Latino population is among the most diverse in the country. Yet, they lag behind other groups in Massachusetts and nationwide when it comes to economic, educational, and health outcomes, according to a report released by Boston Indicators, UMass Boston’s Mauricio Gastón Institute for Latino Community Development and Public Policy, and the Latino Equity Fund.

In the report, researchers call on the state to fill in the opportunity gap Latinos have encountered for decades with solutions like job training, homebuyer assistance programs, and economic assistance to Latino-owned businesses.

Among the report’s key findings is that the state’s Latino demographics vary from the rest of the US. While Mexicans dominate the majority of states’ Latino populations, Puerto Ricans and Dominicans make up the largest share of Massachusetts’ Latino community at 40 percent and 19 percent, respectively. In comparison, Mexicans make up 6 percent of the state’s population.

Latinos in the state are also more likely than other groups to face food insecurity, the report found. About one in four Massachusetts Latinos are food insecure, compared to about 10 percent, 6 percent, and about 5 percent of Black, white, and AAPI, respectively.

Statistics in the report showed that the economic fallout of the pandemic disproportionately impacted Latinos. More than one in four Latinos in Massachusetts were unemployed during the second quarter of 2020. Meanwhile, other groups’ unemployment rates rose to between 13 and 17 percent.

Aixa Beauchamp, cofounder and co-chair of the Latino Equity Fund, which supported the report, said the pandemic underscored how difficult it is for Bostonians without post-secondary degrees to stay float. Latinos, who face many hurdles to pursuing college, were hardest hit.

“Boston’s a great place to live,” Beauchamp said. “But it’s hard if you don’t have a college degree.”

Some of the report’s most staggering findings lie in K-12 academic performance. While most Massachusetts students outperform peers in other states, Latino students scored lower than most states. Latino eighth-graders placed 28th in reading and 21st in math when compared to other states. Other racial and ethnic groups placed first, second, or third.

These differences were more pronounced for low-income students. Low-income eighth-graders in Massachusetts that identify as Latino placed 39th in reading and 35th in math.

Amanda Fernandez, CEO of Boston-based Latinos for Education, said the lack of resources devoted to ESL programs and leaving Latinos out of conversations on academic inequities are some of the many reasons Latino students in the state lag behind their peers time and time again.

“Massachusetts is number one in the nation for education outcomes, but only number one for some,” Fernandez said.

The report also outlined historical and geographic factors that led to the current landscape. Conflicts at the turn of the 20th century and the need for seasonal labor drew Puerto Ricans and Dominicans to the state. Many Latinos living in Gateway Cities like Lawrence, Lynn, and Springfield, are out of reach from Boston’s stronger, higher-paying labor market.

In the report’s final section, researchers offered solutions to the economic, academic, and health inequities Latinos face. Improving job training in all sectors could secure higher pay and upper mobility for Latinos. Bolstering early college education and community college programs could promote college completion. Raising the amount of philanthropic dollars funneled to Latino-led nonprofits beyond the current two percent could ensure groups already doing the work have the resources to sustain and grow.

“We need to do a much better job of recognizing the demographic changes in our state and bringing our Latinos up to par,” Beauchamp said.

Beauchamp and Fernandez agreed that federal American Rescue Plan Act funds could also fuel more creative thinking around opportunities for the state’s Latino communities.

- See the full Boston Globe article.

Every year, thousands of Massachusetts families make the gut-wrenching decision to ask a judge to force a loved one into addiction treatment. In the last fiscal year, more than 6,000 people filed such petitions, although they have no say in where or for how long a loved one must remain in treatment.

While many states use civil commitment, Massachusetts is believed to be the only state that court-orders some men to treatment inside jails and prisons — even if they haven't committed any crimes.

As legislators seem poised to add millions of dollars in funding for involuntary commitment programs under the law called Section 35, there are concerns among legislators, public health advocates and families on the state of forced treatment here.

There is a pending lawsuit that alleges men are discriminated against based on their gender because they are allowed to be civilly committed to treatment inside jails and prisons. In 2016, a similar lawsuit ended the practice of committing women to correctional facilities.

Phil Kassel said he petitioned the court hoping his son might get a spot at the Men's Addiction Treatment Center in Brockton, the only Section 35 program for men that is not in a correctional facility and is run by the Department of Public Health. The way the system works now, he said families end up afraid of bad outcomes because they can't control where a loved one will be committed or withdraw their court petitions.

"To have this sort of Russian roulette for people who file Section 35 petitions, where they don't know if their child is going to get treatment or incarceration," Phil Kassel said, "the system is ridiculous."

A 'disempowered' advocate 

Catherine Nash, of Holden, thought she understood Massachusetts involuntary commitment law when she petitioned the state to send her son to addiction treatment.

Her son, Jesse Harvey, a well-known recovery and harm reduction advocate, had been committed before.

Harvey started sober homes in Maine, often spoke at conferences about addiction and created a program called The Church of Safe Injection, which distributes clean syringes and helps active drug users. His motto was "people who use drugs don't deserve to die."

In 2019, Harvey was enrolled in a master's degree program at the University of Southern Maine. But at the end of that year, Harvey was having trouble controlling his drug use. He relapsed and thought another short stint in locked treatment might get him back on track.

"He wanted to go, and he knew that he needed help," Nash said during a recent interview at her Holden home. "It wasn't like I called the police or anything. We went to court and asked for the commitment because we both thought it would help."

Quickly, Harvey began to complain he was being treated like a prisoner at Stonybrook. He questioned why his phone calls were monitored and why he was threatened with solitary confinement. He wanted to know who had access to his medical records.

But, his biggest complaint involved when he could leave Stonybrook.

"He had completed 85% of the programming required for discharge," Nash said. "I called the program to appeal and explain he needed to leave to finish his last semester, but they said that he wasn't allowed to leave."

During an interview with WBUR in early 2020, Harvey said he was told his stay at Stonybrook had been extended because he needed more treatment, but he said it was not clearly explained what he had to complete. He filed a half-dozen grievances with the sheriff's office and went on a hunger strike.

"I got no good answers about why my release was being delayed," Harvey said at the time. "All of a sudden, the rules can change, and I would argue that extending my stay was an Eighth Amendment violation against cruel and unusual punishment."

In February of 2020, Harvey was released, but not in time to return to school or his job. Nash said her son became despondent.

"What they did was harmful," Nash said. "They beat people down, disempowered them, didn't treat them well. Because of the delay in his release, he lost his health care, his behavioral health providers. He lost a stipend he was going to get for work that year. It was really tragic."

A few months later, Harvey died of an overdose in his apartment in Portland, Maine. He was 28.

The debate over results and funding

In the past 30 years, the number of states with laws allowing civil commitments for substance use has nearly doubled, according to a 2018 study. The study, which focused on Massachusetts, concluded the evidence on forced treatment is "largely mixed and inconclusive on whether criminal-court mandated substance use treatment improves clinical and legal outcomes."

Experts say much of the research on forced treatment is murky. There's no clear definition of "forced," and no consensus on desired outcomes or how to measure them. Critics say studies of forced treatment are inherently biased, because they're typically measuring success among patients with the most severe problems. Still, some studies have found people may be at an increased risk of overdose after being civilly committed.

The Massachusetts Society of Addiction Medicine does not support coerced treatment, especially in carceral settings, saying it violates medical ethics because it can harm patients.

Dr. Todd Kerensky, president of the Massachusetts Society of Addiction Medicine argued the state should invest more resources in voluntary treatment run by health care professionals. He said the state should work to ensure people have immediate access to treatment, without having to ask the courts for it.

During budget debate in the House earlier this month, lawmakers rejected proposed amendments from state Rep. Ruth Balser that would have cut the funding to Stonybrook and Ludlow and directed the state to create non-correctional programs for Section 35. Balser also filed legislation to prohibit the state from using jails and prisons for Section 35 commitments.

This debate played out three years ago before a state commission tasked with reviewing Section 35. The panel released a set of recommendations, which included taking forced treatment out of carceral settings and providing data on its effectiveness. Commission member and Northeastern University professor Leo Beletsky said those recommendations went nowhere.

"The state chose to essentially ghost the recommendations," Beletsky said. "They ignored the recommendations, and the system has proceeded as it did before with very little transparency, very little oversight."

- See the full WBUR story.

The change of ownership from a local resident to a group of investors is increasingly common across Massachusetts — from the cash-strapped neighborhoods of Springfield to tony neighborhoods in Newton and Nantucket, the GBH News Center for Investigative Reporting has found.

In 2021, business entities purchased nearly 6,600 single-family homes across the state, more than 9 percent of all single-family homes sold. That’s nearly double the rate of such purchases a decade ago, according to a GBH News analysis of data provided by the Warren Group, a real estate data analysis firm.

Investors and other businesses — the majority of them limited liability companies — spent more than $5.6 billion last year in Massachusetts purchasing these properties, the majority in cash, to rent or flip as the state’s housing market rises. Rates of investor purchases in two and three-family homes are even higher.

“It’s becoming more prevalent in Massachusetts and everywhere,” said Adam Travis, a Harvard doctoral candidate studying rental housing and the private market. “More and more rental properties are coming to be owned not by individuals, but by companies, by business entities.’’

Investors are spurred by high demand for housing, rising rents and soaring home values, making it a lucrative business. But housing advocates say the trend is making it harder for individual homeowners to buy, and driving up rents so renters get priced out.

Further issues arise with the model of using LLCs to buy homes. The shell companies they tend to be worse landlords than individual owners, research shows. And the business structure obscures and protects its individual owners, a corporate veil that creates additional headaches for housing advocates and government officials seeking accountability from landlords.

“It’s crazy the amount of time that we would spend trying to unravel, find someone to serve,” said Lisa C. deSousa, deputy city solicitor for the City of Springfield Law Department, recalling cases where there’s a problem with a rental property. “We can clearly see who’s protected by it, but who is harmed by it? It’s poor tenants in poor cities.”

When investors buy up foreclosed homes, lower-income dwellers frequently get pushed out with few options to afford rising rents. “They're buying these properties, sight unseen, on an online platform, knowing full well that they're occupied,’’ Webster-Smith said. “Then they bully these people out of their homes and people don't know their rights.”

Redfin Senior Economist Sheharyar Bokhari told GBH News that speculators make it increasingly hard for families to compete.“You want your hardworking families to own housing, and they are competing with all-cash investors,” he said.

To address concerns about the lack of information aiding illegal activity, Congress in 2020 passed the Corporate Transparency Act, which requires LLCs and other business entities to report certain ownership information to the U.S. Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. While regulations are still being implemented, currently there are no plans to make this information public, which would grant housing activists the ability to track down bad landlords.

 “Sometimes tenants don't even know who their landlord actually is.”
Travis, the Harvard Ph.D. candidate, said LLCs also are linked to higher rates of disrepair and more evictions in rental homes, especially in low-income Black and brown communities. He found evidence of the trend in Milwaukee in a 2019 report he authored.

He recently released new research showing LLC ownership of rental housing is most prevalent in poorer communities, like Springfield, across the country.

“These entities tend to be associated with not-so-positive housing outcomes for tenants, whether that is housing quality or higher rates of eviction,” he said. “That should be really concerning.”

- See the full WGBH story.

Members of Congress from Massachusetts and Maine are demanding the oversight office for the Department of Homeland Security launch a formal investigation into the Boston asylum office’s abnormally low rate of approving asylum applications.

In a letter sent Thursday to the Office of the Inspector General, the delegation wrote they’re concerned over a report that only 15.5% of asylum applicants reviewed by the Boston asylum office between 2015 to 2020 were approved, which is roughly half of the national average of 28%. This is the second-lowest in the nation after the New York asylum office.

In an emailed message, Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who led the letter, said the group is “demanding answers” and wants to ensure that applicants get “fair and proper treatment” in the asylum process.

“Asylum seekers should not have to worry that their applications might be rejected by officers who improperly exert excessive influence or allow hateful bigotry towards immigrants to influence their decisions,” Markey said. The message was also signed by Democrats Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Reps. Jim McGovern, Jake Auchincloss, Lori Trahan, Ayanna Pressley, Katherine Clark, and Rep. Chellie Pingree of Maine.

After this story published, a spokesperson for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services — which oversees the Boston asylum office — sent a statement saying "USCIS adjudicators evaluate every petition and application fairly, humanely, and efficiently on a case-by-case basis before issuing a determination, and agency employees welcome people from all parts of the world to add their unique skills and talents to the American fabric."

The lawmakers wrote that denying legitimate asylum claims without proper due process exposes asylum seekers from the prosecution they fled if they are deported.

There are around 20,400 immigrants with pending cases before the Boston asylum office, according to the American Immigration Lawyers Association’s New England chapter, and those cases are impacted by the low grant rate and issues surrounding it.

The study, titled “Lives in Limbo,” found the Boston office is “dominated by a culture of suspicion and distrust toward asylum seekers,” bias, and “compassion fatigue." It found the Boston asylum office sends cases to immigration court, a longer process with other hurdles, instead of adjudicating them in-house.

The report also alleged the asylum office was "recycling" decisions, whereby an officer would plug new details into old cases instead of offering a new assessment at the end of each person’s case. The report also said that Black immigrants often faced even lower grant rates. Angolan immigrants and those from the Democratic Republic of Congo had grant rates of 2 and 4% respectively, while in Newark’s asylum office, those rates were 17 and 33%.

“There’s been little out of the Boston asylum office responding to our report,” said Anne Welch, director of Maine Law’s Refugee and Human Rights Clinic, who was part of a group that sued USCIS when the agency didn’t initially release public records about applications and grant rates. The report is based off the data they won in court.

- See the full WGBH story.