Advocacy in Action (August 2025): Fire Safety Saves Lives
July 31, 2025
On a July night in Massachusetts, flames tore through Gabriel House, an assisted living facility. The fire claimed the lives of nine residents and injured more than 30. Survivors described heartbreaking scenes: residents leaning out of windows, screaming for help as staff members fled. Many were rescued only by the bravery of firefighters, neighbors, and police officers who broke down doors and carried people to safety.
Despite the building having a sprinkler system, fire drills had not been conducted, elevators were broken, and residents with mobility limitations were trapped.
A field supervision with Massachusetts’s long-term care ombudsman pled with the state to investigate Gabriel House’s faulty elevator. He was met with excuse after excuse.
In 2024, a fire at Brandon Woods senior living facility in Lawrence, Kansas forced the evacuation of 85 residents. Dense smoke filled the structure, and a passerby was the first to call 911 and begin evacuating residents. Mutual aid from surrounding counties was called in, and a Lawrence police officer was hospitalized for smoke inhalation. Thankfully, no residents were hurt — this time.
These two incidents tell a clear story: fire safety inspections and emergency preparedness are not optional. They save lives.
And yet, during the 2024-2025 legislative session, a bill was introduced in the Kansas Senate that would have eliminated minimum fire safety standards for 720 adult care homes and provider locations
across the state. Senate Bill 276
(SB 276) would have removed the authority of the State Fire Marshal to inspect these facilities or enforce compliance, a move KABC calls a recipe for disaster.
KABC strongly opposed SB 276 because it would have stripped the State Fire Marshal of its vital role in inspecting facilities, identifying hazards, and ensuring life safety codes are followed. While the bill allowed for the Kansas Department of Aging and Disability Services (KDADS) to contract with the Fire Marshal’s office, it did not require it, leaving oversight optional and dangerously unclear.
Worse still, KDADS is already chronically understaffed. Its surveyors, who are not trained in fire safety, are struggling to meet existing inspection requirements, often with only half the staff needed.
By contrast, State Fire Marshal inspectors are specifically trained to identify fire code violations and help facilities improve safety before tragedy strikes
Fire and burns are the sixth leading cause of death for older adults
in the U.S. In long-term care settings:
- Cooking is the leading cause of fires (72%)
- Faulty appliances and electrical systems follow closely
- Smoking remains the leading cause of death from fires
Due to diligent oversight, Kansas has had only two fire-related deaths in adult care homes over the past decade. That record could be reversed if oversight is weakened.
Families who entrust care homes with their loved ones do so with the belief that these facilities are regularly inspected, meet state and national safety codes, and are prepared for emergencies.
At KABC, we believe every older adult deserves safe, dignified care and that includes protection from preventable tragedies like fires. As we approach the 2026 legislative session, we anticipate this dangerous proposal could return and we’ll be prepared.
Kansas has announced that it is exiting the Money Follows the Person (MFP) program, citing a drastic reduction in and possible elimination of federal funding. According to the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services (KDADS), the state had planned to reinstate the program on July 1 after several years of inactivity. Instead, Kansas is now withdrawing from the program altogether. For many Kansans, this decision represents a significant missed opportunity. The MFP program was created to help states rebalance their long-term services and supports systems by making it easier for people to move from institutional settings, such as nursing facilities, back into homes and communities. The program provided funding for critical transition expenses, including home modifications, furniture, bedding, kitchen supplies, and other necessities that help make community living possible. At its core, MFP recognized a simple truth: most people want to live in their own homes and communities, not institutions. Research consistently shows that older adults overwhelmingly prefer to age in place. In an AARP survey, 75 percent of older adults reported wanting to remain in their homes as they age. Yet many feel they will eventually have no choice but to move into a facility because the supports needed to remain at home are unavailable or unaffordable. Programs like MFP help bridge that gap. When people remain in nursing facilities despite being able to live safely in the community, there are consequences, not only for the individual, but for the state as a whole. First, individuals lose autonomy and control over their daily lives. Living in the community allows people to decide when they wake up, what they eat, who they spend time with, and how they participate in their neighborhoods. These choices may seem small, but they are fundamental to dignity and quality of life. Second, unnecessary institutionalization can contribute to social isolation. People living in their own homes can remain connected to friends, family, faith communities, volunteer opportunities, and local activities. Community integration promotes both physical and emotional well-being. Third, keeping people in nursing facilities when they could thrive in the community often comes at a higher cost to the Medicaid system. Home and community-based services are frequently less expensive than institutional care while also aligning with what most people prefer. Helping individuals remain in the least restrictive setting can benefit both taxpayers and the people receiving services. Finally, programs like MFP help remove barriers that prevent people from exercising their right to choose where they receive care. Transitioning from a nursing facility to the community is often not as simple as opening the front door and leaving. Many individuals need assistance securing housing, obtaining household items, modifying their homes for accessibility, or coordinating services. Without dedicated funding and support, these barriers can become insurmountable. Kansas has made progress over the years in expanding home and community-based services, but significant challenges remain. Housing shortages, workforce shortages among direct care workers, and waiting lists for services continue to make community living difficult for many people. The loss of Money Follows the Person means one fewer tool available to help Kansans return home.
2026 legislative wrap-up for long-term care advocates in Kansas.