Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

You are here: Home About Us DRC News Parkinson nears KNI decision

Parkinson nears KNI decision

BY TIM CARPENTER January 26, 2010 - 9:09am

Click here to download pdf version

Govenor could approve or block proposal to close Topeka facility

Gov. Mark Parkinson is on the cusp of determining the fate of Kansas Neurological Center in Topeka.

A commission concluded in October the facility serving 160 profoundly disabled adults should be closed and residents transferred to Parsons State Hospital or smaller community living units.

A bipartisan contingent of the Shawnee County legislative delegation opposes KNI's closure, while advocates for placing people with disabilities in the least restrictive environment argue KNI should have
been shuttered years ago.

Parkinson possesses authority to advance or block the commission's blueprint for reform at KNI. The governor visited the facilities in Topeka and Parsons.  He's listened to parents, guardians, staff, advocates and state officials. Documentation tied to the debate is as thick as a telephone book.

The governor appears ready to reveal his findings, perhaps Tuesday, but his staff has been tight-lipped.
"Governor Parkinson is still collecting and reviewing information as he contemplates this decision," said Beth Martino, a spokeswoman for the governor.

Parkinson intended to make a decision before the start of the 2010 legislative session, but missed
the self-imposed deadline.

The Democratic governor has the power to outright reject the commission's recommendation,
approved on a 7-3 vote. That would spike the commission closure process as it relates to KNI. If
Parkinson issued an executive order putting the transfer into motion, only a majority vote by
either the House or Senate could derail consolidation.

House Speaker Mike O'Neal, a Hutchinson Republican, said the state's estimated $400 million
deficit in the upcoming fiscal year and the high per-capita expense of managing large institutions
could compel lawmakers to advocate for closure of KNI.

"The report makes sense to me, but I understand the families' angst," O'Neal said.
Stakes are high for the men and women with severe developmental disabilities who await their
fate. Nine out of 10 KNI residents have significant intellectual disabilities. Two-thirds can't walk,
while four of five are unable to speak. Nearly all have lived at the Topeka facility for more than a

Some parents and guardians have lobbied against consolidation, but disability service providers
insist treatment will be better outside KNI.
"I'm not convinced it will save the state anything in the long run," said Sen. Laura Kelly, a Topeka

Rocky Nichols, executive director of the Disability Rights Center of Kansas, said as much as $14
million could be saved each year by moving as many people as possible into community-based
facilities. Anyone who argues there would be little or no savings is being "incredibly intellectually
dishonest," Nichols said.

"I understand what it means to be parochial," said Nichols, a former House member from Shawnee County. "Their arguments are not steeped in reality." Rep. Lana Gordon, R-Topeka, said she wasn't convinced facilities in the community would be equipped to accommodate the influx of clients.

"I'm concerned this is an instance of penny-wise but pound foolish," Gordon said.
The Facilities Closure and Realignment Commission was adamant about one element of its
recommendation: Any savings from phasing out KNI must be earmarked for expanding in-home
services to those with disabilities who are on waiting lists in Kansas.

About 4,000 Kansans with developmental disabilities are on the Kansas Department of Social and
Rehabilitation's waiting list to receive services provided through Medicaid waivers. Some people
have been on the list five years.

Sale of state property where KNI is located in Topeka could be allocated for unmet needs of the
state's disabled residents, said Tom Laing, executive director of Interhab, a coalition of groups
serving the disabled.

Laing said state officials had a moral obligation to attack the waiting lists.
"No more waiting lists for vulnerable Kansans," he said. "When we sacrifice their interests, we
ultimately sacrifice our own."

The Topeka Chamber of Commerce, which opposes closure, says Topeka risks forfeiture of $66
million in annual economic activity tied to the institute. However, agitation about potential
economic losses in the Topeka area could be overstated because many residents will move to
housing in the metropolitan area and cause a ripple in employment.

Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said he was skeptical the Legislature would
be disciplined enough to invest all of any savings in the waiting lists for services. Special interests
competing for scarce resources will be playing hardball, he said.
"There's no guarantee the money will follow the client," Hensley said. "The recommendation to
cut the waiting list has got to go through the appropriations process. And, quite frankly, I have my

Nichols said the state's closure of Winfield State Hospital demonstrated the quality of life for
residents could improve outside a large institutional setting. Eighty-five percent of the 240
residents at Winfield transferred to the community, while 15 moved to KNI or Parsons.

"There's this perception that with KNI, you spend more money, you must get better outcomes at a
place like that," Nichols said. "It's the most crucial part of the post-Winfield closure study. People
experienced better outcomes when they left."

Nichols the state couldn't financially or philosophically justify operation of massive hospitals for
disabled people. For every person at KNI needing the highest level of services, he said, there are
about 30 people with comparable needs living in community-based housing.
"People will get that care somewhere," he said. "Just not from a state-run, large-bed congregate

Click here to download pdf version