AIDS Issues Update
PWAs, Pull Up a Chair
Feds clear path for mandatory PWA representation on ASO boards
Sellman urged the Planning Council last week to make sure ASOs bring PWAs on board
The feds say that a New York City Ryan White Planning Council resolution passed last week doesn’t violate any federal rules, paving the way for a groundbreaking new policy mandating that some AIDS Service Organizations that receive Ryan White funding include HIV-positive clients on their boards of directors.
The Council voted 20 to 2 that non-profit organizations receiving Ryan White Part A funds that primarily serve HIV-positive clients must have a consumer (someone who uses the organizations’ services) sit on their boards of directors. The members of the New York City Department of Health (DOH) who sit on the Planning Council cautioned last Thursday that the resolution might be nonbinding because of Human Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) policies. However, HRSA’s said otherwise.
“There are no HRSA rules that either allow or prohibit the Council from making rules that influence the make-up of boards of organizations receiving Ryan White Part A funds,” said HRSA spokesperson David Bowman.
A spokesperson from the DOH said it is consulting with its legal department because the resolution “has numerous implications that need to be explored.”
Last Thursday, the Planning Council voted 20 to 2 “that all non-profit organizations receiving Ryan White Part A funds shall be required to include no less than one (1) HIV-positive consumer, who is willing to be known as such to the public, and who has been elected by other consumers of that organization to its board of directors, except in the case of grant recipients not directly serving primarily HIV-positive clients, in which case the consumer representative(s) may be elected to that organization’s existing board of directors, advisory board or other appropriate body.”
DOH, as the feds’ grantee, is required to carry out the Council’s resolutions. If the DOH doesn’t comply with Council resolutions, the Council can refuse to pass motions that the grantee needs to operate, fail the grantee in its yearly assessment or call for HRSA intervention.
But hopefully it won’t come to this. Asking organizations receiving city funding to alter personnel and hiring practices is nothing new.
“I’m outraged that the DOH has any doubts about carrying forward this resolution,” said Housing Works President and CEO Charles King. “The Planning Council resolution is no different than San Francisco requiring organizations to amend their personnel policies to requiring city contractors to provide domestic partner insurance coverage.” Housing Works supports the Council’s resolution.
Denver Principles in action
This resolution was an outgrowth of the PWA-empowerment-focused Denver Principles Project, which most New York AIDS service organizations have endorsed. At the Planning Council meeting, speakers accused these groups of hypocrisy for endorsing PWA involvement without having a board member who is HIV-positive.
Although this resolution will affect many nonprofit organizations receiving Ryan White Part A funds, the resolution was of particular interest to members of the Gay Men’s Health Crisis Client Advisory Board (CAB), which has been calling on GMHC to have a seat on their board of directors for the past two years.
“I suspect we’ll get some pushback from the leadership at GMHC. If we have to, we’ll pursue legal action,” said Joseph Sellman, a member of GMHC’s CAB.
GMHC didn’t respond to the Update’s request for comment by deadline.
Comments (6)
Posted by GLEN PHILLIP, June 27, 2009 at 1:03am
As a planning concil member, the entire event was remarkable, however it was visible that HIV POLITICS is still in play, when we are given salt when we requst sugar, we constantly being ignored due to the politics.
Posted by Pennington Lane, June 30, 2009 at 5:00am
Very interesting, the subject matter is very powerful and on the money, I look forward to receiving more information on the endeavor.
Posted by Jimmie Cooper, June 30, 2009 at 2:42pm
It just makes me wonder what hidden agenda these agencies have in not allowing a client seat on the board. Something about this smells of corruption. I see no reason why they should’nt be delighted to have a client be a part of the process. Maybe the see us as cash cows and have no legitimate interest in our well-being. Have they ever given any rational reason why the oppose this?
Posted by Paul B. Hatchett, June 30, 2009 at 8:36pm
As per Jimmie Coopers allusion that ‘something smells of corruption”, Lest we forget that “Not-For-Profits” are still a business. They have a rather subtle, dark side to them!(corporate underbelly)Because they have been able to obtain a 501 C3, does Not translate into going into the bowels of Calcutta and laying hands on the lepers. It means that collectively, they must show a 0 balance at the end of the fiscal year. Moreover the C.B.O.,s prime directive is to justify funding which will therefore perpetuate the existence of the agency. They are only stewards of monies allocated for consumer services. It is not their money, IT’S YOURS! Consumers, come up at of this mindset of modern day enslavement!For those who choose to dismiss the stark reality of “The Beast”, you all can just lay back and wait for the “pop” This is the first sound which you will hear if and when your heads come up from out of your arses!
Posted by Russel Stephen, July 01, 2009 at 2:30am
As a casual chess player, we have come the that point in the game where the CBOs are a few moves away from check mate. I do not expect them to give in without some sort of resistance. But if they think before responding not reacting they will see that having a client/s on their board of director, will speak volumes to their community donors. If they resist out right, say “NO” it would be a slap to the face of the HIV/AIDS community. Then we the infected and affect need to remind these CBOs with out us they do not have a job. Remember “ACT UP” are they ready for it in front of their establishments. , I know that we are. We the consumer nothing to lose.
Posted by Paul B Hatchett, July 02, 2009 at 7:20pm
Many years ago I had the honor and privelege of viewing, viv-a-vis public broadcasting, the events which took place at the conference in Denver which gave birth to the Denver Principles. Although it was not up close and personal,(channel 13)I was able experience that which we were up against, at this particular place and time in our history. I listened to the likes of the late Michael Callen and Ginny Appuzzo. I was mesmerized at the response to the readings of the Denver Principles. It was a rousing,approximately, ten minute standing ovation. P.L.W.A.‘s were so overwhelmed, that they had to physically prop each other up , in a mass show of support. If I were to encapsulate what that experience meant, and still means to me, I would say, “God made us both in his image. Why then, would you still, not only shun me, but deny me my most basic human rights; the right to exist…..the right to live?”