Brianna McKinney testifies for Project Guardianship
Brianna McKinney of Project Guardianship, providing Article 81 guardianship services, supports Intros 978A and 1010 and Resolution 431, explaining how COLA increases can push clients over the income threshold and trigger cascading benefit losses that lead to displacement into more restrictive settings.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Chairs Joanne Lee and members of the Committees of Aging, Disabilities, and Finance.
My name is Brianna McKinney, and I work with Project Guardianship.
We provide guardianship services under Article 81 for New Yorkers with significant limitations and who a court has found unable to manage some or all of their own affairs.
And these are people who don't have someone like you, a family member or friend, to care for them.
We advocate for the least restrictive arrangement possible so that people can retain as much independence as they can.
And a big focus of ours is helping people live and age in their homes and communities despite those limitations.
We're here today to express our support for Intros 978A and 1010, which would raise the income thresholds for SCRE, DRE, SHE, and D.
We do our work to help people stay in the community in large part by providing hands-on management of benefits.
Therefore, when a threshold is too rigid or a housing option doesn't exist, the consequence can mean that a client loses a rent freeze,
behind on rent or ends up displaced into a more restrictive setting than they actually need.
For example, annual COLA increases for Social Security or Supplemental Security income can push our clients over the threshold and put a benefit that they depend on for housing stability at risk.
Because our clients often rely on several benefits at once to hold their stability together, losing even one can have a ripple effect across the rest.
It's then on us as their guardian to catch that risk, reapply, or appeal.
So raising the eligibility threshold reduces the chance of potentially harmful gap in coverage.
We also support Resolution 431.
When our clients can't find or afford housing in the community, the alternative is often a more restrictive setting than they need, which is the opposite of what Article 81 guardianship is meant to achieve.
Expanding housing options and shortening the wait for older adults and people experiencing homelessness gives guardians an actual path to keep clients in the least restrictive setting possible.
We appreciate all of your work, making these benefits more accessible and effective for the New Yorkers who depend on them, and just want to say this matters not only for individual clients, but for the strength of our communities as a whole.
When older adults and people with disabilities can remain safely and stably housed, the neighborhoods and support systems around them stay intact too.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
You have questions?
No, not questions, but I just wanted to thank all of you because I know a lot of your organizations and you guys do great work.
I'm getting a tickle, but just wanted to say thank you.
Okay, let's go to next panel.
Kaylin Doming, Marcus Jackson, Rebecca Paul,
Michelle Hall.
Gracia Torres.
I have a thousand.
Harlan English.
William Ney.
Catherine Kelly.
She's here.
Okay, when you're ready, you can begin.
I'll begin, guys.