The fund need to go towards at-risk individuals in day support and getting them back to day support instead of languishing at home.  My son's program is prioritizing individuals that live in group homes that they own and just doesn't seem right to me.  They have not kept in touch except to mail quarterly reports.  It irritates me that they are being paid to NOT provide services to my son who falls in the severe range of ID but is not medically fragile.  He had just finished his 60-day assessment right before the shutdown.  He was already languishing at home for most of 2019 after graduating from high school in 2018. Zero efforts were made to do anything creatively at the day program where he is a "participant".

1. Day programs can do telehealth services or community engagement with the higher functioning and let the lower functioning that don't benefit from video calls to come for face to face.
2. Pay Day Programs a higher rate, if they do 1:2 community engagement instead of 1:3.
3. Allow Community Coaching 1:1 for individuals who don't have behavioral needs but can't do 1:3 community engagement due to safety issues related to their level of ID.
4. Allow community engagement to start and end services from the person's home so they don't need to come into the center and mix with the participants who are not in community engagement.
5. Allow community engagement to use volunteers to increase ratios so that lower functioning participants can have a 1:1 for safety needs (looking for traffic, staying with the group, not going off with strangers, or maybe help with personal care while out.)  Motivecare uses volunteer drivers so why can't day programs use volunteers to bring ratios to a manageable level so that even the more intensive participants can go on community outing?