Now
Fair
High
32°
Low
24°

HHS lays off 3 top managers; more may be on way

Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

BY NANCY HICKS / Lincoln Journal Star

Tuesday, Jul 10, 2007 - 12:29:52 am CDT

Three top Health and Human Services managers are being laid off, with more layoffs expected in the future, as part of a move to streamline the agency and flatten the top administrative structure.

One of the layoffs has raised concerns in Nebraska’s disability community about the agency’s commitment to clients with disabilities.

The three managers all work for  the new Division on Medicaid and Long-Term Care, the division that is furthest along in its strategic planning, according to Kathie Osterman, a spokeswoman for  the Department of Health and Human Services.

The three managers who received layoff notices  were originally hired by the former Department of Social Services. 

Mary Jo Iwan, administrator for home and community services,  was hired in August 1972 as a case worker.

 Cec Brady, a Medicaid deputy administrator, was hired in June 1988 as an attorney for the social services agency. 

David Cygan, a medical/surgical managed care administrator, was hired in March 1994 as an attorney.

The decision to lay off Iwan, who has worked recently to create more community-based services for seniors and younger adults with disabilities, has members of the disability community worried about the future of that program,  said Tim Kolb, a well known advocate for people with disabilities.

The work Iwan did requires great understanding of people with disabilities, Kolb said. “It is not about the numbers. It is about the lives of people who are trying to be served in the community.”

Iwan’s dismissal is worrisome, he said. The fear is that the top leaders — the governor; Chris Peterson, the CEO of the Department of Health and Human Services;  and    Vivianne Chaumont, the new director of the Medicaid and Long-Term Care Division — have a very conservative position and their ultimate goal is to greatly reduce community services, he said.

Cutting back on the commitment to community services may reduce current expenses, but it will be more expensive in the long run, Kolb said.

But Osterman said, on behalf of  Chaumont, that the administration and staff are committed to the community-based programs.

“No programs for people with disabilities are being eliminated,” she noted. 

“But we are restructuring the division and in that process difficult decisions have to be made,” she said on behalf of Chaumont.

Iwan said in a telephone interview that she has helped build several programs over her 35 years with the state, including establishing community-based services, the respite care network, and the Disable Persons and Family Support Program, and an early intervention program for infants and toddlers with disabilities. 

“I’ve probably had the best job in state government,” Iwan said.

Iwan said she does not know what she will do after her layoff at the end of this month but is considering consulting work. 

The other two managers did not return telephone calls. 

The layoffs  are part of a strategic planning process being undertaken by the six divisions of HHS. 

The planning process, which includes prioritizing, streamlining and flattening management, means making difficult decisions about people and positions, Osterman said.

The layoff letters did point out that none of the layoffs are in any way a negative reflection on the individuals or their performance,  she said.  

The Medicaid and Long-Term Care division is further along in its planning process, she said.  

As the process continues in other divisions, there will likely be layoffs, she said. But there is an expectation  that front line staff will not be included in those layoffs, she said. 

“We heard state senators and the governor loud and clear that the outcome of our reorganization cannot be business as usual,” she said about discussions this year that led to the decision to create a single Health and Human Services department with six divisions.

The division directors must also find ways to reduce spending since the Legislature did not provide enough funding to continue operations at the current level, Osterman said. 

The agency’s administrative budget lost about $10 million in state and federal funding during the budget process this year, she said.

“As an agency, we are looking at ways to reduce spending,” she said.

The divisions will be saving money in printing and publications, equipment, travel, contractual services and temporary employee budgets, but it probably is “not going to get us to $10 million,” she said.

So the layoffs of top managers will “help us meet the amount the budget was reduced,” she said. 

Reach Nancy Hicks at 473-7250 or nhicks@journalstar.com.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Local > Back to Top of Story

All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Lola wrote on July 10, 2007 5:01 am:
" Laying off three people isn't going to make up a $10 million budget shortfall. No programs are being eliminated, but what programs are being cut back and how many clients are affected? What impact is there going to be on state programs for troubled youth, the indigent elderly and the mentally ill? My state tax cut isn't worth hurting people already in need. "

stignob wrote on July 10, 2007 6:42 am:
" Finally, some reduction in govt. bureaucracy. Hopefully, this trend will continue. "

HHS stinks wrote on July 10, 2007 7:23 am:
" They need to lay off a lot morepeople, for job performance reasons. This is rge most dysfunctional agency in the stste. Somehow we'vedecided that the more important the agency's job, the less competent people we should staff the job with. "

HHS wrote on July 10, 2007 7:37 am:
" Firing Mary Jo Iwan is a BIG mistake. I work with hhss and I know how important her services are to the state. She is the best manager and dedicated employee... "

Insider wrote on July 10, 2007 9:03 am:
" These people all worked very hard and gave up lucrative careers in the private sector to make a difference for the people of the State of Nebraska. Their hardwork paid off with being terminated. This administration is only doing this for show, to appease people such as the commenter "HHS Stinks." This will solve nothing and only create more problems. "

Hattie wrote on July 10, 2007 9:24 am:
" This is a start, don't let it be the End. We need big changes for our citizens to be able to make ends meet. "

Worrisome... wrote on July 10, 2007 9:27 am:
" I have a disability and if my medication fails me, I slip into becoming a handicaped citizen of this state. The actions taken by the Governor and Chris Peterson does not bode well for me but thankfully I am healthy (as of today). All I know is I hope the players pulling the strings should have the best intentions here because otherwise, this will come back to them at the end. Just you wait and see. "

State Employee wrote on July 10, 2007 9:51 am:
" I just have to say that the moral at NDHH is the lowest I've ever seen. Staff are being asked to provide job descriptions to management with no explanation of why. Not only is this a crappy thing to do, it is the poorest of management practices. Everyone is on pins and needles wondering who will be next. The public will suffer this example of horrific managment as state employees find it harder and harder to be enthused about their jobs, wondering if they are next on the chopping block. "

More of the same wrote on July 10, 2007 10:06 am:
" Wish Nancy Hicks would do a review of the HHS history over the past 10-15 years - has there ever been a time when it was NOT being reorganized??? I was a manager there for 9 years and this is more of the same. Only problem I have with this is that Chris Peterson has somehow managed to become CEO - never met a more difficult person to work with who understood human services less than her. "

Smitty wrote on July 10, 2007 10:56 am:
" The first place it seems that they look for reduction is definitely in the wrong place. First of all I applaud the work that is being done so that the challenged people of this community are able to show that they can contribute to and be an active part of society. To let someone go who has been so instrumental is devastating. Taking something away from people who need these things is totally 100% wrong. My daughter lost her medicaid because I make too much money being a single parent making 8.00 an hour and I see all these people everyday, two parent families either where both parents work or where they just keep making babies so they can keep getting help and the state seems to look over that and give and give and give. What about all the people who are honestly trying to make it in this state that get told "you make too much" or "I can't do anything about it, talk to your congressman"? Open your eyes and help those who are honest and only want to survive in Lincoln or the state for that matter. Our minimum wage sucks and it is hard to make it when problems arise and the HHS department won't help. "

Ann wrote on July 10, 2007 11:02 am:
" I would agree with Tim Kolb that it is a great loss not only to those individuals with disabilities, but to all Nebraskans that Mary Jo Iwan's employment with HHS has ended. The leadership and commitment provided by Mary Jo can not be replaced. HHS has just cut a true visionary in making life better for individuals with disabilities. I understand that difficult decisions have to be made. But by brining in high dollar administrators will not cut the budget, little lone mustard. Thank you Mary Jo for your 35 years of service. You are the best! "

kate wrote on July 10, 2007 12:36 pm:
" So, we shouldn't be appalled that they've laid off Mary Jo Iwan since no programs are being cut? Right - they're simply getting rid of the person whose vision, passion and tenacity made those programs possible in the first place . . . how is this progress?? I never saw anyone at HHS work harder than Mary Jo to improve the lives of people who are constantly pushed to the margins - and this is how Nebraska repays her for 35 years of dedicated service. Shameful. "

JAZZY wrote on July 10, 2007 12:39 pm:
" So if the governor had to cut $10 million in the budget, why did all the upper dept heads get raises. Seems a little strange. It will probably be a blue collar that gets the shaft. "

The REAL problem wrote on July 10, 2007 2:20 pm:
" I'm all for trimming the fat within all city and state government entities, but from what I've seen, the problem is not just administrative; the REAL problem are the people who lie, cheat, and steal to stay on welfare at the taxpayers' expense. I've known someone who did just that--turned down jobs or deliberately scored low on tests so she wouldn't be offered a job in the first place. Her 5th child (the other four were placed in foster care) is now 13 and this woman has been on welfare since the day this child was born. If she worked as hard at a real job as she does to keep her free ride going, THEN I might be impressed. And then there are people like Smitty who work for a living, need some help along the way, and are turned away. There is a massive breakdown in the system itself and THAT is where the "tough decisions" need to be made. Terminating employees who actually care about the people they serve is not going to solve anything. "

If the cuts are wrote on July 10, 2007 3:36 pm:
" keeping my taxes from going up then so be it. I'm sorry those 3 were laid off, but it sounds as if they should be ok given their educations. However, I do not want to continue supporting those who don't work for themselves. The disabled, indigent elderly, and mentally ill, fine, but those who are able to work need to do just that work. Hold down more than one job(been there) if you need to, but don't depend on my tax dollars for your support. "

Porchpup wrote on July 10, 2007 4:28 pm:
" How does one justify cutting positions in H & HS when they need MORE help and then give 3 - 5.5% raises to other "Heads of departments" including the one that just got hired in H & HS???? H & HS can't even keep their employees time sheets correct for 2 weeks and they cut positions? How about dealing with the real problems within the system? Efficency saves overtime and overstaffing! THAT cuts your budget!!!! "

Sorry but wrote on July 10, 2007 4:32 pm:
" This is a good start. Maybe the land slide of crap that they've institued will stop and we can get back to serving the people. "

Wake up folks... wrote on July 10, 2007 5:35 pm:
" Do a little research into what will really happen when all the advocates for humanity are gone and the only folks left can't even treat their own employees right. It's not the old days for these employees. Benefits have been cuts, medical has increased every year and pay raises held off. Aren't these the same folks who have been earning bonus money for Nebraska despite the convulted regulations the legislature dreams up? Aren't these the same folks who have been told that because they're aging as employees, they should expect to be let loose? Have I missed something or isn't the entire state aging? I worry that if they treat their own employees like that (while the legislature and administration got their raises) how are they going to treat the aging Nebraskans? Tell them to move out of their home state? "

shocked wrote on July 10, 2007 5:59 pm:
" I can't believe they laid people off who have worked there SO long. "

jazzy wrote on July 10, 2007 6:05 pm:
" I know that we just had a $190 million excess and it was put somewhere. Where did this money come from ??? I do beleive that there are a lot of free loaders in the state, but how far are they going to cut. If they cut a bunch of blue collar people then where are they going to get jobs , since Lincoln or Nebraska can't seem to get an new businesses in here. I wnat to know where they will go and if not jobs they will need the help for a while in some of agencies that they are overhauling. I hate to see the good guy go and keep the lousy ones. but that is going to be what happens. It's done everywhere. "

Disappointed wrote on July 10, 2007 8:03 pm:
" I understand the need to cut back, but how are the first steps firing the people with the most experience and understanding of people's needs. To have someone, like Iwan, in social service government impact so many and enjoy their job so much is rare to find. Appointing all new management with no experience and a greater concern for dollars than people isn't a positive step. I feel sorry for those on these different programs, your biggest advocate is gone. "

Tim wrote on July 10, 2007 8:27 pm:
" Mary Jo, Once you told us change is inevitable.In my fifteen years of being a State employee , that has always been true .Thanks for all you accomplished and for being my inspriration. "

Jack wrote on July 10, 2007 8:30 pm:
" Is it surprising to anyone that Chris Peterson, CEO headed the committee to reorganize? Seems she made a position for herself. "

Fan of Mary Jo wrote on July 10, 2007 9:32 pm:
" Mary Jo Iwan can look back with pride at her 35 years of accomplishments. Taxpayers have gotten a tremendous bargain from this dedicated manager who has worked countless extra hours. Because of her work, people have had options to expensive institutional care. Thanks, Mary Jo, for all you've done for Nebraska. "

underpaid state employee wrote on July 10, 2007 10:24 pm:
" Once again Dave "Cheap" Heineman's policy of trying to get something for nothing. Something isn't right when Heineman's cronies get pay raises and the state has a 190 million dollar surplus, jobs are cut and pay raises are held up in court. The progress that HHS has made in the last years is being totally undermined by Dave Heineman's policy of fiscal conservatism It takes money to help people whether that be abused kids, veterans or the community from juvenile offenders. When a kid is seriously hurt from abuse because there aren't enough workers to do the initial assessment or you are victimized by a juvenile offender because there aren't enough JSO's to keep track of them, call Dave Heineman personally to complain. Knowing Heineman's track record though, any problems that arise because of his stingy ideas won't be his fault but rather he will blame the HHS employees that work their butts off to protect kids from dangerous situations and protect your community from juvenile offenders "

upset wrote on July 10, 2007 10:29 pm:
" They make cuts but the 5 agency heads (they added 2 from the old HHSS) all make over $100000? go figure! Cut the agency heads out if you want to start to make a difference. "

Simply amazing wrote on July 10, 2007 11:13 pm:
" The gov and Chris Peterson are trying to sell the lame story that they are streamlining HHSS. How about asking them why this latest reorganization has increased the number of Directors making $100,000 plus from 4 to 8? And ask them how many Deputy Directors will be hired to be the fall guys when things inevitably go bad? Ask them to explain the irony of having the "layoff" story on the page opposite another story where one of those highly paid Directors proudly announced the amazing accomplishment of starting a fruit and vegetable stand outside the State Office Building (and, believe it or not, HHSS needed the help of the Dept of Ag to achieve this colossal waste of time and money). No matter how thin you slice it, it's still baloney. "

whatever wrote on July 11, 2007 5:30 am:
" These folks may or may not have been an asset to the state, but anything we can do to minimize the damage this useless department causes is OK with me. Seems one of it's primary functions is to find abuse and juvenile crime under every stone and to continually feed the juvenile justice system. "

Victoria Mulvey wrote on July 11, 2007 10:51 am:
" This is the typical smameful method of eliminating the "good guys"when you come in new, and want to select your own managers. Throwing out someone with thirty-five years service, and giving them only two weeks notice is unconscionable. The governor should intervene and demand justice in this case. The people of this State would be wise to revisit this travesty in a year, and hold accountable the officials who promise improvements at less cost by their reorganizing efforts. I will want to know if we have been misled. I also want to know if these peope can be dismissed with two weeks notice, or if their terminations will include a multitude of benefits and payoffs. Let us see what are the "golden parachutes" in their employment contracts, and at least provide the equivalent to the lady who served thirty five years before being axed. "

layoffs are not a solution wrote on July 11, 2007 1:50 pm:
" The Governor has not indicated in any way that these layoffs are going to improve services. Logic would indicate that although Chris Peterson says that services will improve as a result of layoffs, and spending cuts, that this is actually another silly political game of renaming the obvious. Kind of like "No Child Left Behind" etc. What actually seems to happen is that the voters get excited about change, a few heads roll, but they are then replaced by friends of the Governor, they get raises, and the voters don't know the difference. Funds are getting cut, therefore services are being cut. Wake up folks. It's the same shell game. "

kelly33 wrote on July 11, 2007 1:59 pm:
" When we still havent filled the positions at Tecumseh's prison, and we have grossly underpaid staff and minimal care in the facilities for our developmentally disabled and mentally ill, why are we even beginning to talk about budget reductions? We should apply the existing funds, and additional funds, if necessary, to raise the quality of care of our most vulnerable citizens. Afterall, how many of us want to get older, and live in facilities which our state proudly brags "meets the minimum requirements." That's just disgusting. Most farmers provide more than "minimum requirements" for their livestock. Our human services systems could at least get above the absolute bottom of the barrel quality of service. Reassign staff maybe, but layoff? Makes no sense. "

Somebody Should wrote on July 11, 2007 4:59 pm:
" Nancy why don't you get the figures of how many state employees are funded by federal money? I've heard that HHS has put the kabosh on applying for federal grants. They have been told that they can not partner with agencies on grants as well. WHAT ARE THEY THINKING "

what's next wrote on July 11, 2007 5:59 pm:
" Nothing that happens at HHS surprises me anymore. The staff there are treated worst than the clients that they serve. Sounds like Heiney and Chris Peterson are paying off some debts to the people that helped Heiney get in office by hiring all of his good old boys out of Omaha. "