Texas Guardianship Issues Biennial Report: 2000 Page: 2
[90] p.View a full description of this report.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
APPENDIX M-1998 Transition Plan
Overall, the 2000 budgets for local guardianship and money management programs
totaled $3,470,663. This amount includes funds from county treasuries, APS
contracts, and from foundations and other sources.
In 2000, the PRS budget for guardianships totaled $2,188,617 for both its direct
delivery guardianships services and contracts with local programs for
guardianship services.
5. Funds Requested 2000-2001
As an exceptional item in the agency appropriations request, PRS has requested and
received funding for the for the 2000-2001 biennium to maintain existing
guardianship responsibilities and to expand to new cases (about 500 total cases).
In the agency appropriations request, HHSC requested about $135,000 annually for
guardianship in the 2000-2001 biennium to continue to develop and expand local
programs.
Funds Requested for 2002-2003.
In 2000, HHSC submitted as part of its budget request the Guardianship
Advisory Board LAR seeking an additional $615,000 appropriation to HHSC
each year for a total of $715,000 annually in grant funds for guardianship
services in fiscal years 2002-2003 (total request for two years is $1,430,000).
6. Transition (See XI)
* A transition planning period is needed to affect the transition, over a six-year period,
from state-funded guardianships provided through state employees to mainly local
programs that utilize volunteers and professional staff. The transition period will
provide the time to plan for and coordinate local and PRS guardianship services to
provide better access to individuals in need, enhance availability of local guardianship
programs, and minimize the need for and the cost of the APS guardianship program.
This approach will provide a more systematic approach for guardianship services
without creating another state bureaucracy. The transition plan would address the
following six points.
a. The need to maintain the current momentum of the Guardianship Alliance in
fostering the growth and expansion of local guardianship programs. A
structural change at this point could slow down momentum due to the time
and costs associated with reorganization. In addition, the current structure
needs time to mature to see if it will work, and any changes in the statewide
structure at this point may be premature and counterproductive.
b. The need to continue the current guardianship responsibilities of PRS as
guardian of last resort, while local programs are established or expanded to
serve additional areas of the state and additional populations.
c. The potential conflict of interest when APS serves as the guardian for an
incapacitated person. Conflict of interest issues may arise when staff
members that investigate abuse, neglect and exploitation are also appointed
guardian and when staff members that are guardians mistreat APS wards.
APS addresses conflict of interest issues through (1) specializing guardianship
staff from investigations staff; (2) using the PRS internal investigations2
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Guardianship Alliance of Texas. Texas Guardianship Issues Biennial Report: 2000, report, December 1, 2000; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1544020/m1/85/: accessed August 15, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.