Examine all the facts and keep Fircrest open

The campaign to close Fircrest School, a state-run home for individuals with profound developmental disabilities, is based on myths about the cost of care and superiority of living in a "community setting."

These myths have been perpetuated by the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) and advocates for community-based care who believe that everyone, no matter the degree of disability, is better off living within a "community setting."

As a result, real harm is being done to real people. A total of 61 Fircrest residents were forced to move — 11 without their guardians' consent — subjecting them unnecessarily to the trauma of relocation. Three of these fragile individuals have died following the moves.

This is not a case of isolated, anecdotal stories. It's about how we care for our state's most profoundly disabled citizens.

Gov. Christine Gregoire should be applauded for stepping in to stop the downsizing and coerced moves of Fircrest residents. She has called for a "timeout" in the ideological battle between those philosophically opposed to state-run homes and those who believe they are the best possible source of care for their loved ones.

She has formed an advisory council, which is charged with conducting a neutral, fact-based study to develop solutions on how to meet the needs of all Washington's citizens with developmental disabilities.

We agree that it is time for everyone to set aside their differences and work cooperatively, with an open mind. In so doing, we hope the council will look closely at the misinformation so frequently repeated by DSHS and those who believe there is no place for state-run residential homes in our state's continuum of care. Our points would be:

• Community care is not cheaper. The state's net cost on a daily basis to provide a comparable level of care for profoundly disabled individuals is about the same, regardless of where the individual lives. This finding is based on careful analysis of state studies and budgets. Keep in mind, however, that the community-care cost of $149 a day does not even include the housing, food, medical, psychiatric or dental services, while the state-run homes' cost of $143 a day is all-inclusive.

• Not everyone can live in the community. Fircrest and other state homes are populated by individuals who are severely mentally retarded, often with profound physical and/or behavioral disabilities. Their conditions are so severe that they require highly specialized, constant behavioral management or medical attention to survive. Many Fircrest residents are there because they were turned away from community-based homes unable to handle the severity of the clients' needs.

• Not everyone wants to live in the community. Community advocates cite a U.S. Supreme Court ruling to say the "trend" is toward closure of state-run homes because they are too "restrictive." This interpretation not only demonstrates a complete ignorance of the kind of care offered at Fircrest, it also misses the point: The court said states must offer a complete continuum of care to ensure that people with disabilities are recognized as individuals and get the level of care that matches their needs, no more and no less.

• Closing Fircrest will not result in a financial windfall. A state-hired real-estate consultant valued Fircrest and its 87 acres at $43 million. Sounds good until you realize that DSHS says it will take $60 million to close the facility, duplicate the services elsewhere and then move the residents. After that, there is the ongoing cost of care. Where's the windfall?

The real-estate report, of course, could not put a value on Fircrest's services, many of which cannot be replicated elsewhere because they are tied to neighboring universities, colleges and health-care facilities.

As the only state residential center within the urban Puget Sound corridor, Fircrest School also is a valuable research center, with continued funding tied to regular, rigorous audits. Fircrest, unlike many community-based programs not subject to these audits, meets the highest requirements of patient care and sets the bar to which other care facilities should aspire.

Why ever would we consider closing it?