What Now for NJ DDS?
By Ed Heaton
Recently, I was reading the biography of George Steinbrenner, by Bill Madden. The more I read, the more familiar the character of Mr. Steinbrenner seemed to me. The ego, the incessant demands, the never admitting of a mistake, blaming either his manager, general manager or players on the field for his failures. George Steinbrenner actually fired someone once because it was raining.
After reading the book, I realized why Mr. Steinbrenner seemed so familiar to me. I had the unfortunate experience of working for the George Steinbrenner of NJDDS: Joseph Amoroso.
I would have probably never written this column except for the action of Mr. William Ditto, recently retired director of the Division of Disability Services. Mr. Ditto named Mr. Amoroso Acting Director of the Division. In so doing, he took a cold and turned it into influenza.

Besides Mr. Amoroso’s questionable people skills, there are questions surrounding him concerning figures and facts. According to a document written by Mr. Ditto in December 2008, DDS’s Information and Referral Area (led by Mr. Amoroso) receives 1,700 calls per month. What Mr. Ditto did not state was what types of calls are being received. How many of the 1,700 calls are new requests for information, repeat calls, or follow-up calls? Both Mr. Ditto and Mr. Amoroso like to point to the amount of calls received as an indicator of the success of the I & R Area. Without outcomes attached to the calls, the number of calls received is not a true indicator of the effectiveness of the I & R Area. In fact, without a report of outcomes, an evaluation of the I & R Area’s effectiveness in assisting consumers cannot even be determined.
While interpretation of data can be debated, facts cannot. In my June column, I noted that Mr. Amoroso was found guilty of a discrimination complaint by the Chief of Staff of the Department of Human Services. Since then, I have discovered that the Merit System Board denied Mr. Amoroso’s appeal of that complaint. The thing is, if Mr. Amoroso had admitted he was wrong and just accepted his punishment, I would have never found out about the complaint. Instead, by always needing to be right, Mr. Amoroso filed an appeal, which became a matter of public record. It also bothers me that a person found guilty of a discrimination complaint, not once, but twice (because of the review), was named Acting Director. Given this, wasn’t there anyone better qualified?

A search committee has been formed to find Mr. Ditto’s replacement. In his final column in the Able Newspaper of August 6. 2010, Mr. Ditto states, “We have recruited several people from outside of state government to serve on the committee to make it as fair and impartial as possible.” What Mr. Ditto does not mention, by limiting his comment to “state government”, is that all members of the committee that I know of are directly connected to government in one way or another: either county, academic, or retired state government employees. There is no one from the disabled community or the non-profit provider community to assist this committee in making their choices. My recommendation would be to name a CIL director (Eileen Goff) and a person from an advocacy organization (Lowell Ayre), to the committee to expand its outreach. It is my sincere hope that a replacement for Mr. Ditto is named quickly.
The people I feel most sorry for are the current employees of DDS. I have served my time in hell. Theirs is just beginning.


