JUSTIN BROWN: Hi, so we got actually two questions about housing.
One about housing first and a second about housing as a right and not as a privilege, and I think this is a place where the independent living movement and our civil rights movement for people with psychiatric disabilities converge.
So housing first is a fairly simple idea, it's an evidence-based practice.
It's simply that if you provide housing unconditionally, rather than making it contingent on some kind of recovery, people do better, and most important, when you provide services as an addition to housing first, people choose voluntarily those services.
What's the alternative? 
The alternative is something called the continuum of care.
In the early '80s, I was homeless down in DC, and got involved with activists there, and we really believed if we could just make this issue more public we'd make a huge difference, and today, about $1.
5 billion is spent by the federal government on housing for homeless people under McKinney Vento.
The problem with that, and the problem with most states is that it's not housing first.
What it is, is, I'll give you an example.
I'm homeless, I get outreach services.
If I'm cooperative and compliant with those outreach services, then maybe I'll get something more than just a shelter.
I'll get transitional housing, some level of stability but it's still not permanent, it's still not mine, it's still kind of congregate housing, and if I'm really good, and I really show how much I comply with all the expectations you have of me, then finally I get permanent housing.
Well that's housing as a privilege.
That's not housing as a right.
And what we need to do as a movement is take that $1.
5 billion we're spending on coercion, to force people into compliance, and transfer it to housing first, and that's equally true in our state of Massachusetts.
I bet it's true for your states as well.
MIKE BACHHUBER: Okay, there was another note, someone asked about, whether CILs can own respite houses, and for folks who have been around IL for a while, you know Rehab Act and the regulations say that centers are nonresidential agencies serving people with disabilities.
But we know of at least a couple of centers around the country that got guidance from RSA when RSA was administering the program, suggesting that short-term housing was okay, so less than 30 days.
There are potentially some problems with that, so people ought to not rely on what I'm telling you here necessarily, but that is a possibility and it probably would be worth exploring, if the opportunity arises.
RUTHIE POOLE: Just to let folks know, I work with six what we call recovering communities in Massachusetts and we have one peer run respite that has been very, very successful.
Our Western Mass recovery learning community runs it, so they're under the Western Massachusetts training consortium is the nonprofit.
It runs domestic, antidomestic violence programs.
It's not disability related.
It's more kind of women's movement related as well as they run the Western Mass recovery learning community.
So about four years ago, they opened a Afiya House, and it's a three-bedroom peer-run respite.
It's just a delight.
And so I think it is something that NIL could do, I was really glad Mike knew the rules of RSA, cause I wouldn't know that.
But the math works.
They have always a waiting list of at least 30 people.
They've never had any problems there.
It's completely peer run.
They're trained in a model that Sarah is going to talk about IPS, which is intentional peer support.
And they're very, very good, and it's been incredibly successful.
And so you can get, go on the internet, and you can find out a lot about peer-run respites.
There's how many now, Dan? There's 16 peer-run respites around the country.
So I think it's really exciting, if an IL would think about that, because that would be pretty cool.
MIKE BACHHUBER: I just wanted to add, in Wisconsin, one of the three peer respites that are either in operation or in, being developed has been working with a consortium of agencies that includes the local Center for Independent Living, so that's another option is centers being involved with other organizations to develop peer respites.
SARAH LAUNDERVILLE: We had a question about how do we increase our funds? 
I'm guessing a lot of people around the room also had that question.
We're going to talk about that a little bit this afternoon, and if I don't answer your specific question at that time, then make sure we reask those questions.
And we had a comment about being aware that some have no experience and to reach out to emerging leaders, and we want to thank you for that comment, and it's a good reminder to us up here, and we'll be mindful of that as we move on through the day.
And then we had a question around what policies are in place to protect people with psychiatric disabilities in the workplace, and so we have a couple of thoughts, and the big one is The Americans with Disabilities Act, right, that that's something that is going to be something that folks can go to around all of, all of the law pieces and draw from that around policies and we're going to talk this afternoon a little bit around thinking when it comes to program development and policies within your Center for Independent Living.
DANIEL FISHER: Good morning.
Well, I just wanted to add, there are policies and there are actually practices, and as I mentioned yesterday, although the ADA in theory covers people as far as nondiscrimination, it's very hard in mental health to prove that it was discrimination.
So in actual practice, there are a couple of guidelines that, that we've worked out, at least in mental health center, and one is, don't hire just one person with a psychiatric disability.
It's very hard to be in a meeting and you're the only one to then disclose at the meeting or disclose even in the workplace, and also it's important that supervisors have, and then the other staff have some exposure and some training, so they're not going to be themselves be practicing prejudice or discrimination, and then the question of having maybe a support group is helpful.
In the center where I used to work is community mental health center and actually quite honestly, community mental health centers are probably the most discriminatory and most prejudicial places to work.
It shouldn't be.
I mean for people with mental health histories.
We formed a special group for people working in the center but also had a psychiatric history and we support each other, and you have to be make sure there's pretty clear boundaries, not as big of problem probably in an independent living center.
But we had our group going and then one, one of the members had some difficulty, so the administration came to our group, because it was meeting on company time.
And said, what are we going to do about so and so? 
And I said, what do you mean, we? Well, you've been meeting on company time, so you should help us with your peer.
It's like, no, no, we're not going to.
So the support group is better to have it outside of the work setting but it is helpful to do it.
I think the next one is also directed at me.
Does emotional CPR dissuade further treatment? 
Curious that that impression came across.
The short answer is no.
But maybe it came across because we hope and have actually found already that emotional CPR can decrease the need for crisis services.
We've had reports already of people, oh, I used emotional CPR with somebody who I knew or somebody who was a friend or somebody they'd been working with, and as outreach didn't need to then use crisis services, so I think it clearly seems to decrease a need for crisis services, but if somebody is, you know, you're with them, you only have so much time, you can't call someone else into assist or a friend or family member, which is really what we prefer first.
We don't say automatically, you know, refer to a professional, what is their network, who can you call? 
And if that doesn't work out, you're tired and exhausted, call, you know, find a professional, if you can.
If you can.
Okay.
I think that's it.