remain institutionalized in nursing facilities throughout Florida. Nearly two thousand others will have no guarantee that they will receive the medically necessary nursing services to which they are entitled under the Medicaid Act, and no guarantee that they will not be placed at risk of institutionalization through further discriminatory administration of Defendants’ programs. Additionally, the facts of this case support class certification, especially in light of the established precedent that class actions are appropriate mechanisms for resolving civil rights violations, including those involving rights protected by the ADA, as well as those enforcing the Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic and Treatment (“EPSDT”) requirements of the Medicaid Act, 42 U.S.C. §1396 et seq. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs T.H., L.J., A.G., A.C., A.R., C.V., M.D., C.M., and B.F. are children who have been diagnosed as fragile,” and who qualify for services through the State of “medically Florida’s Medicaid program, including those services that allow individuals with disabilities to live at home in the community. (See Pls.’ Second Am. Compl., ECF No. 62, (“Compl.”) (Filed Aug. 23, 2012) ¶¶ 1, 15-17.) They allege that, despite being qualified for community-based services, they either have been, or are at risk of being, required to enter nursing facilities to receive necessary care. (Id. ¶¶ 7, 14) They further allege that this is the direct result of State policies that do not ensure that medically necessary community-based services (specifically, private duty nursing services) are appropriately offered or provided and that these policies violate the ADA and the Medicaid Act. (See ¶¶ 4-14.) They also allege that Defendants id. administer a federally mandated nursing home pre-admission screening program in a manner that both conflicts with federal law and results in inappropriate admissions to nursing facilities. (See ¶¶ 329-335.) Thus, Plaintiffs have brought the present action for declaratory and injunctive id.
remain institutionalized in nursing facilities throughout Florida. Nearly two thousand others will have no guarantee that they will receive the medically necessary nursing services to which they are entitled under the Medicaid Act, and no guarantee that they will not be placed at risk of institutionalization through further discriminatory administration of Defendants’ programs. Additionally, the facts of this case support class certification, especially in light of the established precedent that class actions are appropriate mechanisms for resolving civil rights violations, including those involving rights protected by the ADA, as well as those enforcing the Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic and Treatment (“EPSDT”) requirements of the Medicaid Act, 42 U.S.C. §1396 et seq. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs T.H., L.J., A.G., A.C., A.R., C.V., M.D., C.M., and B.F. are children who have been diagnosed as “medically fragile,” and who qualify for services through the State of Florida’s Medicaid program, including those services that allow individuals with disabilities to live at home in the community. (See Pls.’ Second Am. Compl., ECF No. 62, (“Compl.”) (Filed Aug. 23, 2012) ¶¶ 1, 15-17.) They allege that, despite being qualified for community-based services, they either have been, or are at risk of being, required to enter nursing facilities to receive necessary care. (Id. ¶¶ 7, 14) They further allege that this is the direct result of State policies that do not ensure that medically necessary community-based services (specifically, private duty nursing services) are appropriately offered or provided and that these policies violate the ADA and the Medicaid Act. (See id. ¶¶ 4-14.) They also allege that Defendants administer a federally mandated nursing home pre-admission screening program in a manner that both conflicts with federal law and results in inappropriate admissions to nursing facilities. (See id. ¶¶ 329-335.) Thus, Plaintiffs have brought the present action for declaratory and injunctive
th-dudek_soi(2).docx