DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 237 728 CE 037 737

TITLE Oversight of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act and

the .Education of the Handicapped Act, 1983. Hearingsbefore the Subcommittee on the Handicapped of theCommittee on Labor and Human Resources, United StatesSenate, Ninety-Eighth Congress, First Session onOversight on Reauthorization of the VocationalRehabilitation Act and the Education of theHandicapped Act (February 24, March 21 and 23, 1983).

S.Hrg. 98-328.INSTITUTION Congress of the U.S., Washington, D.C. Senate

Committee on Labor and Human Resources.PUB DATE 83

NOTE 704p.; Not available in paper copy due to small

type.PUB TYPE Legal/Legislative/Regulatory Materials (090) --

Viewpoints (120)

EDRS PRICE MFO4 Plus Postage. PC Not Available from EDRS.

DESCRIPTORS *Disabilities; Elementary Secondary Education;Federal Legislation; Hearings; Minority Groups;Outcomes of Education; Postsecondary Education;*Program Effectiveness; Program Implementation;Program Improvement; *Vocational Rehabilitation

IDENTIFIERS Congress 98th; Education of the Handicapped Act 1983;Reauthorization Legislation; VocationalRehabilitation Act 1983

ABSTRACTThis document, a transcript of a series of

Congressional hearings, considers the reauthorization of theVocational Rehabilitation Act and the Education of the HandicappedAct. The hearings were designed to assess the effectiveness ofexisting programs and to seek ways to ensure their continued successin the future. Testimony and prepared reports were given by 85witnesses, support personnel, and organizations. The witnessesrepresented federal, state, and -local governmental agencies andorganizations that serve handicapped and displaced workers, includingthose serving-minority groups such as American Indians. The witnessesdescribed the programs provided by their agencies, their successes,and those programs that have not been as effective. They also askedfor increased funding for their programs that are funded under the

acts and suggested ways that various titles of the acts could beimproved. (KC)

***************************************L*******************************Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

from the original document.***********************************************************************

/OVERSIGHT OF /THE VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION

ACT AND/THE EDUCATION OF THE HANDL'

CAPPED ACT, 1983

/S. HRG. 98-328

(.1 HEARINGSBEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED(%1 OF THE

COMMITTEE ON

LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES

UNITED STATES SENATENINETY-EIGHTH CONGRESS

'IRST SESSION

ON

OVERSIGHT ON REAUTHORIZATION OF THE VOCATIONAL REHABILITA-TION ACT AND THE EDUCATION OF' CHE HANDICAPPED ACT TOASSESS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF EXISTING PROGRAMS AND TO SEEKWAYS 'CO INSURE THEIR CONTINUED SUCCESS IN THE FUTURE

'FEBRUARY 24, MARCH 21 AND 23, 1983

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION

ED CATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER IERICI

This document has been reproduced as

recemLJ Irom the person or organizationoriginating it.Minor charges have been made to improvereproduction quality.

Points of view or opinions stated in this docti

merit do nut necessarily represent official NIEPosition or policy.

B

EIBLARI1213 KNEIWAOLABILN @OK

Printed for the use of the Committee on Labor and Human Resources

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

21-974 0 WASHINGTON : 1983 .

COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah, ChairmanROBERT T. STAFFORD, VermontDAN QUAYLE, IndianaDON NICKLES, OklahomaGORDON J. HUMPHREY, New HampshireJEREMIAH DENTON, AlabamaLOWELL P. WEICKER, JR., ConnecticutCHARLES E GRASSLEY, IowaJOHN P. EAST, North CarolinaPAULA HAWKINS, Florida

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, MassachusettsJENNINGS RANDOLPH, West VirginiaCLAIBORNE PELL, Rhode IslandTHOMAS F. EAGLETON, MissouriDONALD W. RIEGLE, JR., MichiganHOWARD M. METZENBAUM, OhioSPARK M. MATSUNAGA, HawaiiCHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut

RONALD F. Doc ;ism, Staff DirectorKATHRYN O'L. HIGGINs, Minority Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED

LOWELL P. WEICKER, JR., Connecticut, ChairmanROBERT T. STAFFORD, Vermont JENNINGS RANDOLPH, West VirginiaPAULA HAWKINS, Florida THOMAS F. EAGLETON, MissouriDON NICKLES, Oklahoma SPARK M. MATSUNAGA, HawaiiORRIN G. HATCH, Utah EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts

(Ex Officio) (Ex Officio)JOHN A. DoYLE, Professional Staff Member

PATRIA FORSYTHE, Minority Professional Staff Member

CONTENTS

CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF' WITNESSES

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY n4, 1983

PageConn, George A., Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration, and

Acting Assistant Secretary, Office of Special Education and RehabilitationServices, U.S. Department of Education, accompanied by Fred Sachs, Asso-ciate Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services, Program Operations, and FredWindbeck, Associate Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services, DevelopmentalPrograms 4

Dusenbury, Joe S., Chairman, National Council on the Handicapped 28Fenderson, Douglas A., Director, National Institute of Handicapped Research;

and Joseph B. Moriarty, director, West Virginia Rehabilitation Researchand Training Center, on behalf of the National Association of Rehabilita-tion Research and Training Centers 31

Cruz, Neva Rae, project director, Client Assistance Projects, Salt Lake City,Utah; Hank Elandford, Division of Protection and Advocacy, State of Ken-tucky; and Ethan Ellis, deputy director, New Jersey Department of PublicAdvocacy 80

Galotti, Joseph, commissioner, Department of Education, State of Connecti-cut, on behalf of the Council of State Administrators of Vocational Reha-bilitation; John Banks. National Rehabilitation Association; and KarenClay, special education teacher, District of Columbia Association for Retard-ed Citizens, on behalf of the Association for Retarded Citizens of the UnitedStates, accompanied by Andrew Jackson, District of Columbia Associationfor Retarded Citizens Graduate of the Year, a panel 116

Mankowsky,"3ean, executive director, Vermont Center for IndependentLiving; and Max J. Starkloff, president, National Council of IndependentLiving Programs 146

Moore, John H., Jr., president, Threshold Rehabilitation Services, Inc., Read-ing, Pa., on behalf of the National Association of Rehabilitation Facilities;and Judith Valuckas, president, Connecticut Council on Handicapped 165

MOND1Y, MARCH 21, 1983

Bauer, Gary M., Deputy Under Secretary for Planning, Budget, and Evalua-tion, Department of Education, accompanied by George A. Conn, Commis-sioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration and Acting Assistant Secre-tary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; Carol A. Cichowski,Acting Director, Division of Special Education, Rehabilitation and ResearchAnalysis 217

Verville, Richard E., counsel, Am rican Council of Rehabilitative Medicine,American Academy of Physical edicine and Rehabilitation, Washington,D.C., and D. Kenneth Reagles, resident-elect, National Council on Reha-bilitation Education, Department of Rehabilitation Education, SyracuseUniversity, New York 228

Hall, Harry L., Washington representative, National Multiple Sclerosis Soci-ety and Martin Adler, executive director, Helen Keller National Center forDeaf-Blind Youths and Adults, Sands Point, N.Y 241

Bauer, Gary M., Deputy Under Secretary for Planning, Budget, and Evalua-tion, Department of Education, accompanied by George A. Conn, Commis-sioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration, and Acting Assistant Secre-tary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; and Dr. EdwardSontag, Acting Director, Special Education, Programs 267

IVPage

flofineister, Dr. Alan M., dean, school of graduate studies, associate vicepresident for research, Utah State/ University. 281

Mc Chord, Winfield, headmaster, American 'School for the Deaf; West Hart-ford, Conn., on behalf of the Conference of Educational Administratorsserving the deaf, and the Convention of American Instructors of the Deaf 297

WEDNESDAY. MARCH 23, 1983

Lauritsen, Dr. Robert R., division manager St. Paul Technical VocationalInstitute, St. Paul, Minn., and director, regional education program for deaf'students; and Dr. Thomas G. Bellamy, director, specialized training pro-gram, University of Oregon, and assistant professor of special educationand rehabilitation r- 310

Gallagher, Dr. James J., director, Frank Porter Graham Child DevelopmentCenter, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and Frederick J. Wein-traub, assistant executive director, Department of' Governmental Relations,Council for Exceptional Children, Reston, Va 348

Hanley, Dr. Dennis E., executive director, Mountain Plains Regional Center,Denver, Colo.; and Dr. Wayn.a Sailor, professor, department of special edu-cation, San Francisco State University, president, the Association for theSeverely Handicapped, San Francisco, Calif 383

Butler, Dr. Katharine G., director, division of special education and rehabili-tation, Syracuse University, New York; president, Higher Education Con-sortium for Special Education and Rehabilitation and Dr. Robert S. Black,director, Office of Programs for the Handicapped, Department of Education,Columbia, S.0 403

STATEMENTS

Adler, Martin A., MSW, ACSW, :jirector, Helen Keller National Center forDeaf-Blind Youths and Adults, prepared statement 252

Additional testimony 258Adult Learning Systems, Inc., Alice R. Roolofs, executive director, and Jan L

/ Black, president, joint prepared statement 538

/ American Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities, Inc., Jane Rozeghi, actingexecutive director, prepared statement 601

/ American Personnel and Guidance Association and the American Rehabilita-tion Counseling Association, prepared statement 210

Association of Retarded Citizens of the United States, Karen Clay, on behalfof', prepared statement 142

Bauer, Gary M., Deputy Under Secretary for Planning, Budget, and Evalua-tion, Department of Education, accompanied by George A. Conn, Commis-sioner, Rehabilitation Services Administiation an Acting Assistant Secre-tary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; Carol A. Cichowski,Acting Director, Division of Special Education, Rehabilitation and ResearchAnalysis 267

Bauer, Gary M., Deputy Under Secretary for Planning, Budget, and Evalua-tion, Department of Education, accompanied by George A. Conn, Commis-sioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration, and Acting Assistant Secre-tary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; and Dr. EdwardSontg, Acting Director, Special Education Programs 217

Bellamy, G. Thomas, Ph. D., University of Oregon, prepared statement 340Black, Robert S., president, National Association of State Directors of Special

Education, prepared statement 416Blandford, Hank, Kentucky Protection and Advocacy Division, prepared state-

ment 90

Blumenfeld, Eric, St. Paul, Mimi., prepared statement 337

Burrell°, Leonard C., associate professor, Indiana University, prepared state-ment 438

Butler, Dr. Katharine G., director, division of special education and rehabili-tation, Syracuse University, New York; president, Higher Education Con-sortium for Special Education and Reht.:,..ilitation and Dr. Robert S. Black,director, Office of Programs for the Handicapped, Department of Education,Columbia, S.0 403

Prepared statement A07

V

PageConn, George A., Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration, and

Acting Assistant Secretary, Office of Special Education and RehabilitationServices, U.S. Department of Education, accompanied by Fred Sachs, Asso-ciate Commissioner, Rehabilitation Serv:ces, Prorram Operations, and FredWindbeck, Associate Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services, DevelopmentalPrograms 4

Prepared statem..:ht 9Consortium for Citizens with Developmental Disabilities, prepared statement 451Council for Excep_Ioncl Children, Freder:A J. Weintraub, assistant executive

director, department of governmental relations, prepared statement 361Councl of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation, prepared state-

ment 119Cruz, Neva Rae, project director, Client Assistance Projects, Salt Lake City,

Utah; Hank Blai.dford, Division of Protection and Advocacy, State of Ken-tucky; and Ethqn Ellis, deputy director, New Jersey Department of PublicAdvocacy 80Prepared statement 83

Dublinske, Stan, Ed. D., director, State/regulatory policy division. governmen-tal affairs, department, the American Speechanguve-Hearing Associ-ation, prepared statement 568

Dusenbury, Joe S., Chairman, National Council on the Handicapped 98Easter Seal Goodwill Industries Rehabilitation Center, Inc., prepared state-ment I35Ellis, Ethan B., president, National Association for Protection and Advocacy

Systems, prepared statement 108F'enderson, Douglas A., Director, National Institute of Handicapped Research;

and Joseph B. Moriarty, director, West Virginia Rehabilitation Researchand Training Center, on behalf of the National Association of Rehabilita-tion Resear: and Training Centers 31Prepared statement 35

Frank Porter.Graham Child Development Center, 'Tames J. Gallagher, direc-tor, prepared statement 692

Gallagher, Dr. James J., director, Frank Porter Graham Child DevelopmentCenter, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and Frederick J. Wein-traub, assistant executive director, Department of Governmental Relations,Council for Exceptional Children, Reston, 1/a 348

Prepared statement 351Galotti, Joseph, commissioner. Department of Education, State of Connecti-

cut, on behalf of the Council of State Administrators of Vocational Reha-bilitation; John Banks, National Rehabilitation Association; and KarenClay, special education teacher, District of Columbia Association for Retard-ed Citizens, on behalf of the Association for. Retarded Citizens of the UnitedStates, accompanied by Andrew Jackson, District of Columbia Assocationfor Retarded Citizens Graduate of the Year, a panel 116Prepared statement 9

Goodwill Industries of America, Inc., Rear Adm. David M. Cooney, USN11

(Retired), president and chief' executive officer, prepared statement 479Hall, Harry L., Washington representative, National Multiple Sclerosis Soci-

ety and Martin Adler, executive director, Helen Keller National Center forDeaf -Blind Youths and Adults, Sands Point, N.Y 241Prepared statement 244

Hall, Sandra G., project director, and Kristina T. Madison, program coordina-tor, Goodwill Industries, prepared statement

Hanley, Dr, Dennis E., executive director, Mountain Plains Regional Center,Denver, Colo; and Dr Wayne Sailor, professor, department of special educa-tion, San Francisco State University, president, the Association for theSeverely Handicapped, San Francisco; Calif 383

Prepared statement 386Hatch, Hon. Orrin G., a U.S. Senator from the State of Utah, prepared

statement 79Hofmeister, Dr. Alan M., dean, school of graduate studies, associate vice

president for research, Utah State University 281Prepared statement 285Inouye., Hon. Daniel K., a U S. Senator from the State of Hawaii, prepared

statement 428

t)

VI

Kingsley, Ito:,,er P., Ph. 1),, director, congressional relations division, govern-mental at1Mc; departmentethe American Speech-Language-Hearing Associ-ation, prepared statement 547

Lauritsen, Dr. Robert R.; division manager St. Paul Technical VocationalInstitute, St I' tail, Minn., and director, regional education program for deafstudents; and Dr. Thomas G. Bellamy, director, specialized training pro-gram, UniveiNity of Oregon, and assistant professor of the special educa-tion, and rehabilitation 310

Prepared sti.rernent 313

Supplemental statement 329

Mankowsky, Jean, executive director, Vermont Center for IndependentLiving; and Max J. Stark loff, president,-National Council of IndependentLiving Programs 146

Prepared statement 149

Marshall, Stan L. Williston, Vt., prepared statement 615Massachusetts Easter Seal Society, Mary' Ann Barbee, deputy director for

progranis, prepared statement 577

Mc Chord, Winfield, headmaster, AmeriCan School for the Deaf, West Hart-ford, Conn., on behalf of the Conference of Educational Administrators

e'serving thdeaf, and the Convention of American Instructors of the Deaf 297

Prepared statement 299

McDonough, P. J., Ed. D., associate executive vice president, American Asso d-ation for Counseling and Development, prepared statement 695

Moore, John II., Jr., president, Threshold Rehabilitation Services, Inc., Read-ing, Pu.. on behalf' of the National Association of Rehabilitation Facilities;

1166115and Judith Valuckas, president, Connecticut Council on Handicapped

Prepared statementNational Association ofCounties, prepared statement 612

National Association of Rehabilitation Facilities, prepared statement 517

National Association of Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers, JosephB. Moriarty,'Ph. D., on behalf of, prepared statement. 53

National Council on Rehabilitation Education, Kenneth Reagles, president-elect, prepared statement 237

National Easter Seal Society, prepared statement 580

National Recreation and Park Association, Viki S. Annand, president, Nation-al Therapeutic Recreation Society and Dr. Andrea H. Farbman, legislativechair, National Therapeutic Recreation Society, on behalf of, preparedstatement 466

National Rehabilitation Association, John Banks on behalf of. prepared state-ment

130

606Navaho Tribe for American Indian Rehabilitation Services, prepared state-state-ment

Nevada State Rehabilitation Division, Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation,Maine M. Smith, comprehensive services specialist for the severely dis-abled, prepared statement

Perlman, Leonard C., president, Rehabilitation Psychology Division, Ameri-can Psychological Association, prepared statement (with enclosure)

Randolph, Hon, Jennings, a U.S. Senator from the State from West Virginia,prepared statement, March 21, 1983 216

433Rogers, Dr. Terence, dean, school of medicine, University of Hawaii, preparedstatement

-395/11

Schloss, Irvin P,, director of governmental relations. American Foundation forthe Blind, prepared statement

Sailor, Wayne, Ph. D.. president, the Association for Severely Handicapped,prepared statement

Sanford, Anne R.. director, Chapel Hill Training-Outreach Project, preparedstatement 519

Smgin, Alice, chairman, governmental affairs committee. Association forChildren and Adults With Learning DisabilitieS, prepared statement

Stafford, Hon. Robert 'I'., a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont, prepared693

statement 267

Starkloff, Max J... president, National Council of' Independent Living Pro - '

grams, prepared statement 162

Stearns, Marian S., Ph. D., director, social sciences center, SRI International,prepared statement /.14:3

VII

Ten Comprehensive Rehahilitation Center Projects, prepared statement (withattachments) 181

United Cerebral Palsy Associations, Inc., prepared statement 494United States Student Association, prepared statement ...... ..... 491University of Kansas, prepared statement 446Verville, Richard E., counsel, American Council of Rehabilitative. Medicine,

American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Washington,D.C., and D. Kenneth Reagles, president-elect, National Council on Reha-bilitation Education, Department of Rehabilitation Education, SyracuseUniversity, New York 228,

Prepared statement ,' 231Valuckas, Judith, Watertown, Conn., prepared statement 177Wallenstein, R. Carol, Concord, N.11., prepared statement 513Ziegler, Martha H., coordinator, National Network of Parent Coalitions, pre-

pared statement 505

Paw,

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Questions and answers:Responses of George Conn, Acting. Assistant Secretary, Office of Special

Education and Rehabilitative Services, Rehabilitation Services Admin-istration to questions asked by Senator Weicker 226

Additional questions and responsesQuestions asked by Senator Stafford

:119

Responses of Edward Sontag, Acting Director, Special Education Pro-grams, Department of Education to questions asked by SenatorWeicker 273

Responses of Alan M. Hofmeister, associate vice president for research,Utah State University, to questions asked by Senator Weicker 294

Responses of G. Thomas Bellamy, Ph. D. director, Center on HumanDevelopment, University of Oregon, to questions asked by SenatorWeicker 598

Responses of Max J. Starkloff. president, National Council of Independ-ent Living Programs to questions asked by Senator Weicker 654

Responses of Martin A. Adler, MSW, ACSW, director, Hellen KellerNational Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults to questions asked

(i56by Senator Weicker.Responses of Ethan Ellis, deputy director, division of advocacy for the

developmentally disablied, New Jersey Department of Public Advocatesto questions asked by Senator Weicker 662

Responses of Joseph R. Gtdotti, commissioner, Department of EducationState of Connecticut, to questions asked by Senaior Weicker

Responses of John II. Moore, president, Threshold Rehabilitation Serv-ices, Inc., to questions asked by Senator Weicker (i73

Responses of Harry E. Blandford, -Jr., Advocacy Specialist. Division ofProtection and Advocney. Department of' Public Advocacy to questionsasked by Senator Weicker 676

Responses of Dr. Douglas Fenderson, director, National Institute ofHandicapped Research to questions asked by Senator Weicker 689

Miscellaneous:U.S. Department of Education information memorandum RSA-1M-82-41,

re report on "Caselonad Statistics, State Vocational RehabilitationAgencies, Fiscal Year 1981, September 14, 1982 23

OVERSIGHT OF THE VOCATIONAL REHABILITA-TION ACT AND THE EDUCATION OF THEHANDICAPPED ACT, 1983

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1983

U.S. SENATE,SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED,

COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES,Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:32 a.m., in roomSR-428, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Lowell P, Weicker,Jr. (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding..

Prermt: Senators Weicker, Hatch, Randolph, Hawkins, Stafford,and Eagleton.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR WEICKERSenator WEicxER. The hearing will come to order.Today, we begin the process of reviewing the principal Federal

program designed to assist disabled persons to obtain gainful em-ployment and to do so in an environment free of threats of repealof block grants or massive funding cuts. Indeed, through its 62years of existence, the vocational rehabilitation program has devel-oped into a national network of services which can point with prideto 6.4 million disabled Americans being successfully rehabilitated.

In 1982 alone, it is estimated that some 225,000 people were reha-bilitated, of which 129,000, or 57 percent, were severely disabled.Success, however, in rehabilitation cannot be thought of as static.The types and distribution of services provided under the Vocation-al Rehabilitation Act .must be continually fashioned and refash-ioned to meet the client need. Rehabilitation specialists do thiseach day they evaluate, design training programs and seek place-ment of each new client. We in Congress should expect to be noless dynamic in our approval and I look forward to hearing todayand on March 21 both hour our vocational rehabilitation servicesare succeeding and how they can be improved.

I look forward to hearing the opening remarks of my very dearfriend, ranking member, and former chairman, a man who has de-voted a 'lifetime of senatorial and congressional work to the needsof the handicapped, Senator Randolph.

(II

2

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR RANDOLPH

Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. This isa most important hearing. I wish the record to reflect my feelingon the manner in which you as chairman of our Subcommittee onthe Handicapped have carried forward in a knowledgeable mannerthat which has been done so on a strictly bipartisan, nonpartisanbasis throughout the years.

I shall be helped by testimony from witnesses on the reauthoriza-tion of the Rehabilitation Act, as amended. Overview of the pro-grams authorized under this act has been a most rewarding experi-ence. We know the programs authorized by the law are essentialfor assisting millions of disabled people in our country to achievemore productive lives within their families and within their com-munities.

The 35 million Americans who are categorized as disabled areperhaps our most vulnerable population. Approximately 10 millionof these Americans are severely disabled. Many of the severely dis-abled cannot function in regular employment but they do have acapacity for independent living. Comprehensive services to theseseverely disabled individuals must be increased. There must bemore supportive services tailored to their needs.

In these difficult economic times, with rising unemployment,achieving vocational goals and acquiring skills for employmentbecome vastly important to disabled Americans. In crucial timeslike these a program such as projects with industry should bereauthorized and funded at high levels. I understand that the activ-ities authorized and funded under this program are some of themore cost effective.

Basic to any major initiatives being undertaken in special reha-bilitation programs is the State/Federal program which providesthe funds for Federal assistance to all handicapped Americans. Weare aware that the most cost-effective program being funded forour disabled Americans is this State/Federal vocational rehabilita-tion program. For more than 60 years this effort has served mil-lions of disabled citizens. We are proud of a program which returns$10 for every $1 invested.

Mr. Chairman, I welcome Dr. Joseph Moriarty, director of theWest Virginia Rehabilitation Research and Training Center. He isan outstanding leader in the field of rehabilitation. In West Virgin-ia we are fortunate to have the benefit of his ability and we areproud of his efforts and achievements at the R&T center.

Mr. Chairman, I an very appreciative that you have given me,out of order, the opportunity to speak and also to welcome Dr. Mor-iarty.

Also, it is my desire, if agreeable with you, that certain questionsthat will be submitted to witnesses be made a part of the hearingrecord.

Senator WEickl.:a. Absolutely. Thank you very much, SenatorRandolph. Those questions will be submitted to the witnesses forresponse in the record.

Senator RAN DOLPH. 'Vila you very much.Senator WERam. Thank you.

3

I have a statement by Senator Stafford which I present for inclu-sion in the record at this point.

[The following was received for the record:]

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR STAFFORDSenator STAFFORD. The vocational rehabilitation program has

been in existence for 63 years. Many changes have occurred in thetotal act over the years but the main focus has remainedto reha-bilitate handicapped individuals so they may enter the competitivejob market.

Among the services the vocational rehabilitation program pro-vides are: Evaluation of rehabilitation potential; vocational counsel-ing, training, and placement; and physical restoration.

One of the new programs added in 1978 was comprehensive serv-ices for independent living. Currently there are about 150 centersfor independent living across the country. These centers provideservices such as peer counseling, independent living skills, housingand transportation referral assistance, and attendant care. Forthose handicapped individuals who are presently unable to be em-ployed this program provides the necessary services so a greaterlevel of independence can be achieved.

The moneys that are spent on the vocational rehabilitation pro-gram are an investment in the lives of handicapped individualsrather than just another "welfare" program.

For those persons who were rehabilitated in 1980, an estimated$280.4 million would have been paid to Federal, State, and localgovernments in taxes, as well as savings on public assistance. Atthis rate, the total governmental benefit will equal the total Feder-al, State, and third-party cost of rehabilitation for fiscal year 1980closures in 4 years.

Employment in this Nation for nonhandicapped as well as dis-abled individuals is of paramount concern to all of us. Therefore,these statistics prove overwhelmingly that this program continuesto be a sound financial investment for the Federal Government.

The task presently before this subcommittee is the reauthoriza-tion of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act. These hearings will pro-vide us with a vehicle for assessing the effectiveness of existingprograms in this act and a means to insure their continuing suc-cess in the future.

Senator WEICKER. Now, the first witness to appear before thecommittee is George Conn, Commissioner of Rehabilitation Serv-ices Administration, and Acting Assistant Secretary, Office of Spe-cial Education and Rehabilitative Services.

Mr. Conn, are you accompanied by others?

13,

4

STATEMENT GEORGE A. CONN, COMMISSIONER, REHABILITA-TION SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, AND ACTING ASSISTANTSECRETARY, OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILI-TATIVE SERVICES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; ACCOM-PANIED BY FRED SACHS, ASSOCIATE COMMISSIONER, REHA-BILITATION SERVICES, PROGRAM OPERATIONS, AND FREDWINDBECK, ASSOCIATE COMMISSIONER, REHABILITATIONSERVICES, DEVELOPMENTAL PROGRAMSMr. CONN. Yes, I am.Senator WEICKER. Why do you not proceed both in introducing

your colleagues and presenting your testimony?might add, for all those that appear before the committee here,

that your statements in their entirety will be included in therecord and you might proceed in some manner which would synop-size those statements.

Mr. CONN. Thank you, Senator. If I could beg your indulgence, Iwill hold the introductions of the other persons accompanying meuntil I finish my testimony.

Senator WEICKER. Right. You will have to speak up because it isa little difficult to hear in this room.

Mr. CONN. All right, fine.Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am pleased to

present testimony for the Department of Education on the subjectof reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.

The act presently authorizes programs of the RehabilitationServices Administration, the National Institute of Handicapped Re-search, and the activities of the National Council on the Handi-capped.

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, authorizes the allo-cation of Federal funds on a formula basis to States to provide serv-ices to assist disabled individuals to prepare for and engage in gain-ful occupations. Significant progress has been achieved over sixdecade to develop a service delivery system in the States to reha-bilitate disabled persons.

I would like to summarize recent trends and accomplishments inthe title I basic State grants program. In fiscal year 1982, 226,924disabled persons were rehabilitated in the State-Federal program,of which 57.2 percent, or 129,866, were severely disabled, which isan alltime high.

A total of 959,056 persons received rehabilitation services in1982, of which 59.6 percent were severely disabled. The number ofnew active cases in 1982 was 333,954, of which 60.1 percent wereseverely disabled. These services measures are, by and large, slight-ly lower than those for 1981, during which 138,380 severely dis-abled persons were rehabilitated, and a total of 1,038,232 individ-uals received rehabilitation services.

The decline is explained only partly by funding changes. Overthe last several years, the program has served an increasing pro-portion of severely disabled individuals. These persons tend to be,regardless of cost and budget levels, more difficult and time-con-suming to rehabilitate than those individuals with less severe im-pairments. If the proportion of severely disabled persons continuesto rise, and we think it will, the number of severely disabled reha-

5

bilitants may well decline regardless of budget allocation levelsunless, together, we can fire a way to reduce health care costs.

The challenge today for 0-tate VR agencies is to use limited re-sources in the most effective and efficient ways possible; to developnew and innovative methods of cost-effective rehabilitation; to keepa tight lid on administrative costs to maximize moneys devoted todirect services; and to pursue -:arefully other benefits for which cli-ents may extract the most from each rehabilitation dollar.

As one might expect, rehabilitation outcomes for severely dis-abled persons are not as favorable as those for non-severely dis-abled persons in terms of both work status and earnings at closure.There is, however, in outcomes for the severely handicapped con-siderable room for improvement.

For example, about three-quarters of all rehabilitants are placedin the competitive labor market. For those who are severely dis-abled, the proportion is about 65 percent. In fiscal year 1981, themean weekly earnings at closure of: those severely disabled reha-bilitants with earnings was $148; for those who were non-severelydisabled, approximately $168.

These figures understate the actual hourly wage rate, sincemany rehabilitated persons work only on a temporary or a part-time basis. Nonetheless, over one-half of the severely disabled reha-bilitants received less than the Federal minimum wage in 1981,while 21 percent received no wages at case closure. In the last 2years, increasing proportions of severely disabled individuals havebeen engaged as unpaid homemakers.

Several audits and evaluation reports have indicated thatchanges are needed in the current system to improve rehabilitationoutcomes for rehabilitation clients, especially for those who are themost severely disabled.

One of the main problems identified involves the current meas-ure of success. Counselors have traditionally been rated on thebasis of the number of persons they rehabilitated. In 1976, theGAO reported to the Senate Subcommittee on the Handicappedthat since the severely disabled are more costly to rehabilitate,counselors were apprehensive about utilizing larger sums of moneyfor services for severely disabled clients, thereby rehabilitating asmaller total number of clients and potentially subjecting them-selves to lower performance ratings.

GAO also noted that counselors reasoned that a system which ac-counted for the cost and difficulty of rehabilitating the severelyhandicapped would give added incentive to increasing services tothe severely disabled. The pressure to produce large total numbersof rehabilitations and the temptation to Eerve those easiest to reha-bilitate would thus be reduced.

In 1978, Berkeley Planning Associates conducted an analysis ofdata collected by the HEW Audit Agency for an evaluation of theimplementation of key provisions of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

The Berkeley study reported that the priority for services to se-verely disabled persons is principally being defined in the States asincreasing the numbers of people into the rehabilitation systemrather than providing more services or priority to such clients,once in the system.

fi

The report recommended that if the intent of Congress is that se-verely disabled persons receive improved services and increasetheir prospects for rehabilitation, much more effort is needed toinsure that the severely disabled receive priority in State agencybudget allocations and service delivery.

Another issue examined by Berkeley Associates was the effec-tiveness of rehabilitation services in securing the integration of thedisabled in the labor force. They reported that while the VR pro-gram demonstrates a considerable success in helping disabled per-sons achieve some type of competitive employment, clients wereoften placed in jobs that are low paying, unstable or not in con-formity with the original employment objective, notwithstandingother factors that negatively affect the employment of disabledAmericans.

They concluded that if successful rehabilitation is to be achievedfor more clients, an incentive must be provided for counselors topursue services which assure that clients achieve stable employ-ment with earnings of at least the minimum wage.

They suggested that the most promising approach to programimprovement would be the introduction of a performance measurethat directly appraises the quality of client services or client out-comes, such as the wage level and whether client benefits are re-tained over time. The report specifically recommended abandon-ment of the current rehabilitation success measure and the substi-tution of direct measures of quality such as wage level.

In 1982, GAO reviewed a sample of rehabilitated clients in fiveStates and found that in 35 percent of the cases, there was no ap-parent relationship between the client's job at closure a-ridthe-vo-cational rehabilitation services provided. In some cases, counselorsclosed clients' cases as unpaid homemakers when the clients failedto complete their vocational plans. Similar problems have been re-ported in 1973 and 1979 by the Department of Health and HumanServices' internal audit agency.

GAO recommended that the administration of the vocational re-habilitation program be strengthened to provide services to individ-uals who have substantial handicaps to employment and can rea-sonably be expected to become gainfully employed.

Under current law, regardless of performance, the States receivetheir funds primarily according to a formula based on populationand per capita income. By combining into a single category work inthe competitive job market, employment in sheltered workshops,the unpaid work of homemakers and the unpaid family work, thecurrent measure of success used by the program assigns credit onthe basis of an overly simple notion of rehabilitation.

To count as a successful rehabilitation, work must last only 60

days. Program requirements were not designed to give State incen-tives to provide services in ways which increase their accessibilityand acceptability to clients and their appropriateness and effective-ness in achieving client outcomes that promote functional and eco-nomic independence.

The Department recommends that the Congress consider changesto the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, that would advancethe following principles: One, reward the States for good perform-ance in rehabilitating severely disabled persons; two, establish a

/4

7

more meanint;Itif nieasure ()I' program success capable of influenc-ing the talents and energies of State vocational rehabilitation agen-cies which will promote greater functional and economic independ-ence for disabled clients; three, provide greater State flexibility inthe provision of services; four, promote stricter accountability toaudit standards in such areas as client eligibility and case closurestandards for successful rehabilitation.

The administration is now in the process of developing proposedlegislation that would advance these principles. The Departmentexpects to transmit proposed amendments to the RehabilitationAct to the Congress some time in March.

For the longer term, the administration proposes to turn backthe vocational rehabilitation program to the States. Very shortly,the administration will transmit proposed legislation to the Con-gress that would give States the option of designating a number ofprograms for turn-back during the period 1984 through 1988.

The vocational rehabilitation program has been included in thelist of programs that may be designated by participating States.While the administration believes that there are problems in thecurrent program that may be addressed through changes in theprogram, such as the improvements we will be proposing, the ad-ministration continues to believe that the ultimate responsibilityfor providing for rehabilitation of its disabled population is onethat appropriately is assumed by the States.

A number of discretionary activities are also supported under theRehabilitation Act. The focus of these activities is on strengtheningand improving service delivery in order to foster greater chances ofvocational rehabilitation and independence of the handicappedperson.

I would also like to address one of our special initiatives in thearea of discretionary programs. As Commissioner, I have empha-sized the need to create a vocational rehabilitation component inthe private sector. The vehicle exists at the present time; it is ,called projects with industry.

It is an effective bridge between the worlds of rehabilitation andwork for the purpose of providing disabled persons with training inrealistic work settings to prepare them for employment in the com-petitive labor market.

Recently, the program has focused on linkages between rehabili-tation facilities, foundations and associations with national and re-gional industries. The development of these linkages has expandedplacement potential and brought about cooperative agreements be-tween. business, industry and rehabilitation. Approximately 10,000persons were served in 65 projects in fiscal year 1982.

In fiscal year 1983, projects with industry will be directed tobroadening the program to cover more sections of the businesscommunity, including advanced technology projects, leading tohigher earnings potential for the disabled persons being served.

The emphasis on projects with industry is warranted by the pro-gram's highly visible results. In the past year alone, about 7,500disabled individuals obtained private competitive employmentthrough this program, with all of the revenue enhancement poten-tial in those outcomes.

8

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my remarks. I would be happy torespond to questions that you or members of the committee mighthave. I would like to ask at this time if I could be joined at thetable by Mr. Fred Sachs and Mr. Fred Windbeck, who are, respec-tively, the associate commissioners in rehab services for programoperations, in the case of Mr. Sachs, and developmental programsin the case of Mr. Windbeck.

Program operations relates primarily to the State-Federal grantprogram, and the development programs relate directly to the dis-cretionary programs.

[The prepared statement of Mr., Conn follows:]

9

Statement of

Mr. George A. Conn

Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration

and

Acting Assistant Secretary

Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services

before the

Committee on Labor and Human Resources

Subcommittee on the Handicapped

U.S. Senate

February 24, 1983

Mr. Conn is accompanied by:

Dr. Douglas A. Fenderson, Director, National Institute of Handicapped ResearchJoseph Dusenbury, Chairman, National Council on tbc

21 -974 0-8:3---2

10

Statement by the Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services

Administration and Acting Assistant Secretary for

Special Education and Rehabilitative Services

on

Reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Services Act

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:

I am pleased to present testimony for the Department of Education

on the subject of reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as

amended. The Act presently authorizes programs of the Rehabilitation

Services Administration (RSA), the National Institute of Handicapped

Research, and the activities of the National Council on the Handicapped.

Rehabilitation Services

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, authorizes the allocation

of Federal funds on a formula basis to States to provide services to

assist disabled individuals to prepare for and engage in gainful occupations.

Significant progress has been achieved over six decades to develop a

service delivery system in the States to rehabilitate disabled persons.

Program Trends and Outcomes

I would like to summarize recent trends and accomplishments in the

Title I Basic State Grants program.

In fiscal year 1982, 226,924 disabled persons were rehabilitated in

the State-Federal program, of which 57.2 percent (129,866) were severely dis-

abled, an all-time high. A total of 959,056 persons received rehabili-

tation services in 1982, of which 59.6 percent were severely disabled.

The number of new active cases in 1982 was 333,954, of which 60.1

percent were severely handicapped. These services measures are, by

1 S

11

and large, slightly lower than those for 1981, during which 138,380

severely disabled persons were rehabilitated and a total of 1,038,232

individuals received rehabilitation services. The decline is explained

only partly by fundirg changes. Over the laut several years, the

program has served an increasing p.oportion of severely disabled individuals.

These persons tend to be, regardlesl of coat and budget levels, more

difficult and timeconsuming to rehabilitate than those individuals

with less severe impairments. If the proportion of severely disabled of

persons served continues to rise, and we think it will, the number of

severely disabled rehabilitants may well decline, no matter what our

budget allocation.

The challenge today for State VR agencies is to use scarce re

sources in the most effective, efficient way possible; to develop new

and innovative methods of costeffective rehabilitation; to keep a tight

lid on administrative costs to maximize monies devoted to direct ser

v1fes; and to pursue carefully other benefits for which clients may be

li;'eligible to get the most out of each radhilitation dollar.

Rehabilitation outcomes for severely disabled persons are not as

favorable as those for nonseverely disabled persons in terms of both

work status and earnings at closure. This one might expect. There is,

however, room for improvement in outcomes provided the severely handi

capped.

For example, about threequarters of all rehabilitants are placed

in the competitive labor market; for the severely disabled the propor

tion is about 65 percent. In fiscal year 1981, the mean weekly earnings

at closure of those severely disabled rehabilitants with earnings was

$148; for the nonseverely disabled, $168. These figures understate the

12

actual hourly wage ratan since ninny rehabilitatd persona work only on a

parttime basis. Nonetheless, over onehalf of the severely disabled

rehabilitants received less than the Federal minimum wage in 1981, while

21 percent received no wages at all at case closure. In the last two

years, increasing proportions of the severely disabled have been engaged

as unpaid homemakers.

Improvements Needed

This Information sill that outlined below have led us to an in

escapable conclusion: current law simply does nut provide adequate

incentive!: for Gtate rehabilitation agencies and professionals to

provide :,ervicet that produce lasting fractional and economic indepen

dency at the highest possible levels to the most severely handicapped

clients,

Several aidits and evaluation reports have indicated that changes

are needed to the current system to improve rehabilitation outcomes

for rehabilitation clients, especially for the most severely disabled.

One of.the main problems identified involves the current measure of suc

cess. Counselors have traditionally been rated on the basis of the

number of persons they rehabilitated. In 1976 the General Accounting

Office (GAO) reported to the Senate Subcommittee on the Handicapped

that since the severely disabled are more costly to rehabilitate,

counselOrs were apprehensive about utilizing larger sums of money on

services for severely disabled clients thereby rehabilitating a

smaller total number of clients and potentially subjecting themselves

to lower performance ratings. GAO noted that counselors reasoned that

a system which accounted for the coat and difficulty of rehabilitating

13

the severely handkapped would give added incentive to increasing

services to tho severely disabled. fhe pressure to produce large

total numbers of rehabilitations and the tempt it ton to servo those

easiest to rehabilitate would thus be reduced.

In 1978 Berkeley Planning Associates conducted an analysis of.

data collected by the HEW Audit Agency for nn evaluation of the imple-

mentation of key provisions of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The

Berkeley study reported that the priority on the severely disabled is

principally being defined by the States as letting more people into

the rehabilitation system rather than providing them more services or

priority once in the system. The report recommended that if the intent

of the Congrecs is that the severely disabled receive improved services

and increase their prospects for rehabilitation, much more effort is

needed to insure that the severely disabled receive priority in State

agency budget allocations and service delivery.

Another issue examined by Berkeley Associaties Was the effective

ness of rehabilitation services in securing the integration of the

disabled in the labor force. They reported that while the VR program

demonstrates considerable success in helping disabled persons achieve

some kind of competitive employment, clients were often placed in jobs

that are low paying, unstable, or not in conformity with the original

employment objeztives. They concluded that if successful rehabilitation

is to be achieved for more clients, an incentive must be provided for

counselors to pursue services which assure that 'clients achieve stable

employment with earnings of at least the minimum wage. They suggested

14

that the most promising approach in program improvement would he the intro

duction of a performance measure that directly appraises the quality of

client services or client outcomes such as the wage level and whether

client benefits are retained over time. The report specifically recom

mended abandonment of the current "rehabilitation" success meneure and

the substitution of direct menatirea of quality such no wage level.

In 1982 the GAO reviewed a sample of rehabilitated clients in five

States and found that in 35 percent of the cases there was no apparent

relationship between the client's job at closure and the vocational

rehabilitation services provided. In some cases counselors closed

clients' cases as unpaid homemakers when the clients failed to complete

their vocational plans. Similar problems have been reported in 1973

and 1979 by the Department of Health and Human Services' internal

audit agency. GAO recommended that the administration of the Vocational

Rehabilitation program be strengthened to provide services to individuals

who have substantial handicaps to employment and can reasonably be expected

to become gainfully employed.

Under current law, regardless of performance, the States receive

their funds primarily according to a formula based on population and

per capita income. By combining into a single category work in the com

petitive job market, employment in sheltered workshops, the unpaid work

of homemakers, and unpaid family work, the current measure of success

used by the program assigns credit on the basis of an overly simple

notion of rehabilitation. To count as a successful rehabilitation,

work must last only 60 days. Program requirements are not designed

to give States incentives to provide services in ways which increase

15

their accenslhIlity and acceptability to 0110 all ,std that!' appropriateness

and effectiveness In achieving client outcomes Chet promote functional

,and economic independence.

The Department recommends that the Congress conalder chanwAs to

the Rehabilitation Act of 1971, an amended, that would advance the following

principles:

-- reward States for good performance In rehahllitattng the

severely disabled;

- - establish a more meaningful measure of program success capable of

influencing the talents and energies of State vocational rehabilitation

agencies which will promote greater functional and economic independence

for disabled clients;

- - provide greater State flexibility in the provision of services; and

-- promote stricter accountability to audit standards in such areas

as client eligibility and case closure standards for succesaful

rehabilitations.

The Administration is now in the process of developing proposed legislation

that would advance these principles. The Department expects to transmit

proposed amendments to the Rehabilitation Act to the Congress some time

in March.

For the longer term, the Administration proposes to turnback the

Vocational Rehabililtation program to the States. This week tha

Administration will transmit proposed legislation to the Congress that would

give States the option of designating a number of programs for turnback

during the period 1984 through 1988. The'Vocational Rehabilitation program

has been included in the list of programs that may be designated by

16

parti,,Ipating ;hates. While Iii Administration belleveu that there are

problems in the current orogram that may he addreemed through chaneos In the

. program, such is the improvements we will be proposing, the Adttanletration

runtimes to believe that the ultimate reepoutatallty for providing fur

rehabilitation of Lts disabled population is hole that eon appropriately

be anaumed by the Suites,

Tragpm Development Discretionary Projects

A number of dlacretionary activitieo are also supported under the

Rehabilitation Act. The howl of thee° activities lc on strengthening

and improving service delivery in order to foster grentet chances of

vocational rehabilitation and independence of the handicapped person.

Rehabilitation Service Projects expand assistance to disability

groups whn have been underserved in the past; developing new and Innovative

approaches to meeting the needs of severely disabled persons; developing

resources at the community level to provide comprehensive services required

by disabled residents; and providing special training and employment opportunities

for severely handicapped individuals.These activities include Projects with

Industry, Special Projects for the Severely Disabled, Migratory Workers

Projects, Services Grants to Indian Tribes, the Helen Keller National

Center for the Deaf-811nd, and Client Assistance Projects. In fiscal year

1981, support will be provided for 168 projects serving 21,800 clients.

Independent Living Projects fund the establishment and operation of

centers to provide services to assist severely disabled persons to live

more effectively in community settings or, where appropriate, to secure

and maintain employment. Centers for independent living are established

and operated in local communities and serve people with a broad range

0

a 41H4bilitios. 1,10.1-.thowly Sleets aro awarded to :;late agenotee or

to pobIL. or prtvato agenotes and ergonleations. In tlecal veer 1911..!

,cuter programa were supported, providing servi,es to lii,000 eeverely

perlen14,

!4r114111P4""tt,,4 PrtOliNtva training grams to assure Hutt it llied

workers are available to provide o broad aeope of vocational rehahilttation

aervloeo needed by handicapped individoala served by vocational rehabilltation

Agencies and facilities. Thu projects train qualified personnel in

such shortage dream as job placement, vocational evaluation, rehabilitation

medicine, prosthetics and orthoritics, and physical therapy. In fiscal

year 1983 approximately 329 projects will be funded providing training to about

11,900 persona, including 1,80 who are in the longterm training program.

12ecial Initiatives

I also would like to addreaa one of our special initiatives in

the area of discretionary programs. An Commissioner, I have emphasized

the need to create a vocational rehabilitation component within the

forprofit sector. The vehicle exists...it is called Projects with

Industry.

Projects with Industry is an effective bridge between the worlds of

rehabilitation and work for the purpose of providing disabled persons with

training in realistic work settings to prepare them for employment in

the competitive labor market. Recently, the program has expanded its

focus to rely on linkages between rehabilitation facilities and foundations

and associations with national and regional industries. The development

of these linkages has expanded placement potential, and brought about

cooperative efforts between business, industry and rehabilitation. Approximately

18

10,0110 pottom0 40F0 NOINOd to tt'l protooto In Racal year

to ftvdt yodr Vrotoota with twtodtry will he dtroetod to

brod400tog the program to ooyor morn doottooa dt Ills hootn000 vommoottY.

advanced tovhuolony proin,!ta, 144d15µ to higher atntnge

1141 for the dtodhlod poro000 bolog nerved. 1114 omphaoto on Protests

with lodootry la werrentod by the program's highly vielble restate.

In the pant rum. shuns., dhow /,')00 41.41.110 Individuals obtained

private competitive employment through thin program.

Mr. Chairman, that conclAide my remark*. I will now he glad to

respond to goo.ittoos you or member* of the Committ40. might have.

Senator WEICKER, WIT is something familiar about your state-ment here today. The statement seems to me to be somewhat closeto the block grant proposal that was originally pushed out there ayear or so ago that Congress rejected. Does this again come close tothat block grant, proposal?

Mr. ('(INN. Although I have not seen the proposed legis' lion,Senator, it is my understanding that it differs in that it is ,,ne of alist of 20 programs that would be, over a period of time urnedback to the States on a spendingformula basis, and ,t themoneys would be utiliwd for programs for disabled perse ad, infact, would give greater flexibility to the States in the ut n ofthose dollars.

Senator WEIcioat. Well, I think Congress has made it vi. y trthat in certain particular areas of need, it wits not very receptiveto the block grant proposal. These recommendations are the first Ihave seen about anything specific. When do you plan to send theseup to the Committee?

Mr. CONN. I cannot give you a precise time schedule on it rightnow, Senator. It is being considered within the Department andwithin the administration.

Senator WEICKER. Well, you know what is going to happen aswell as I do. You are going to get a lot of people in an uproar. Wehave already gone through the business of Public Law 94-142; westill are going through it. Also, it is my understanding that theremight be some proposed changes to 504.

Now, you indicate there are proposals coming forth for somechanges in the Rehabilitation Act. I think it is very unfair tocreate anxiety by a massive attack on all the programs for the re-tarded, disabled, and handicapped among people who have anxi-eties enough insofar as their futures are concerned.

You know, deregulation might have, and I am sure it does have,some place in terms of reviewing everything that sits out there onthe books. But it is also true that those regulations came to pass, asdid the legislation come to pass, because there was a specific needto be fulfilled.

Now, I think my State of Connecticut probably is typical amongmost States in the Union. We do not have more money in Connecti-

19

cut right now to do a bigger and better job; we have less money.Yet, the numbers increase; nobody is going to deny that. You donot deny it in your own statement. The numbers are on the in-crease; the money is less. Now we are going to go ahead andremove Federal oversight to some degree in this area.

I would like to know how all of this adds up to improved opportu-nities for the handicapped and disabled. Maybe you can explain ittome. I really do not understand; I really do not.

Mr. CONN. Senator, I would like to--.Senator WEICKER. You see, 1 went through this whole general ex-

ercise. As I recallI have got to reach back now 2 yearsthe Fed-eral Government was going to get out and what needed to be donewas going to be picked up by the private sector and by the Stategovernments and by volunteerism.

That philosophy has been thoroughly discredited in the 2 yearsthat it has dominated. Here it is, we are in the third year of thisadministration. Neither you nor I will dispute the numbers. I aminforming you, and I think I am correctly informing you, that thereis less money in the States to do any sort of a job.

Why is the job going to be better done by turning this over to theStates? Is it going to be picked up by the same volunteerism in theprivate sector that was suppose to have done so many other thingsin so many other areas?

Mr. CONN. May I respond?Senator WEICKER. Go ahead.Mr. CONN. Senator, you have covered an inordinate number of

subjects in your question. If I could go back and try to review thempiece by piece, I view the administration's proposal as a sincereone. I regret that we do not have something for you to look at atthis particular time, though that is something that is essentiallyout of my hands.

Senator WEICKER. Well, whose hands is it in?Mr. CONN. It is being discussed throughout the Department of

Education and in other sectors of the administration, but let me re-spond

First of all, I do not think that the proposal is made with theexpressed purpose of creating anxiety. There is a great deal ofanxiety in the world, generally speaking, on a variety of subjects.

When you talk about hearing things that we are going to turnthis over to industry, et cetera, or this over to volunteerism, etcetera, I think in the particular case of rehabilitation that, in fact,we. have had a considerable degree of success in that area.

Over the past 20 years that I have been involved in a variety ofactivities in disability issuesproblems, needs, activities, etceteraI have seen the amount of money that is contributedthrough volunteerism. Programs for disabled people have grown byincreasing numbers.

Whereas people were unwilling before to contribute moneys tosuch programs and relied almost essentially on the States them-selves to provide institutional care for disabled people, that haschanged quite a bit in an area that you are terribly concernedabout, special recreation, among many other areas.

We are finding that as corporations in the United States andmany franchise operations are finding that they have to pay in-

2,0

creasing sums of money for workmen's compensation outlays andfor thini-party insurance outlays, they are becoming self-insuringand they are coming to rehabilitation programs saying, "How canwe build a rehabilitation component into our self-insuring pro-gram." They have found that it is more cost-effective to build a re-habilitation program right into their own self-insurance program.That is what, among other things, we are trying to do with projectswith industry.

What we are simply saying is that in the overall effort to securethe defense of this country and resolve the economic woes of thecountry, in some cases we are going to have to look at some socialprograms and see where they appropriately should be adminis-tered.

For years, both as a staff member of RSA and as Commissionerof RSA, and working in liaison with the rehabilitation program inthe State of Illinois, I have heard the State directors of vocationalrehabilitation say repeatedly, "We administer the programs in theStates. We do not wish to have intrusions placed upon us, or con-trols placed upon us by the Federal Government.' What we aredoing is responding to that expressed- -

Senator WEICKER. I am sure there are many States that do notwant any controls put on them by the Federal Government.

Mr. CONN. Well, what we are trying to do, quite sincerely, Sena-tor, is to say perhaps the time has come to say, "Here is themoney; administer the program," and get the Federal Governmentout of the business of being involved in the administration of theprogram.Incidentally, the administrion is proposing no changes at all intitle V of the Rehabilitation Act in any forthcoming legislation.And in the matter of section 504, I have talked personally to Brad-ford Reynolds, the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights in the Jus-tice Department. His primary concern for 504 is redundancies, in-consistencies, and some ambiguities from department to depart-ment and agency to agency, not with the fundamental philosophi-cal concerns of section 504 of the Rehab Act.

Senator WEICKER. First of all, let me say that for those who arestanding in the back of the room, I think we have some extrachairs up here.

The fact remains that the Federal Government got into thisaspect of the national life because many of the States were notdoing right by the disabled population within their boundaries. Iwish I could say to you that human nature has changed and thatall 50 States are of a mood to make sure that that does not happen.That, unfortunately, is not the case.

To just say we are going to turn over the money and let theStates do itI cannot afford even a slight half-step backward aslong as one life is negatively impacted. Then, indeed, it seems tome that we have not performed our trust here in the United StatesSenate.

Mr. CoNN. Senator, may I 'address that point?Senator WEICKER. Of course you can; let me just finish.Now, No. 1, I would recommend that if, indeed, there are

changes to be made, that those be presented in specific form. Sincewe now have this statement on the record that there are changes

21

to be nuide, they ought to be presented at the earliest possible date.To say that there are not going to be anxietiesthere are going tobe anxieties.

To say there is anxiety in the worldyou know, I am not incharge of the world. I am in charge of this particular aspect of thelaw as it relates to this particular constituency.

I really mean it and I am very serious when I say that they justhave plenty to deal with in their lives without having to look overtheir shoulder at a bunch of people screwing around in Washing-ton, D.C., in a way that could negatively impact on them.

So, you have made your statement. You have indicated thatthere are changes being contemplated; you have given sort of abroad-brush description of what that change is. I want to see thosethings before this committee at the earliest possible date so, indeed,the entire handicapped community will have the opportunity toknow what it is that is being contemplated.

Mr. CONN. It is my urgent hope that you would have that as soonas possible, Senator./Senator WEICKER. And when do you feel that is going to be?

Mr. CONN. I cannot say when it is going to be, but I will carrythe information back to the Department and the administration.

Senator WEICKER. Good, then I can tell you what you can alsocarry back. Since the flag has been run up and there is no way weare going to be able to turn the clock back. Those changes shouldbe before this committee within the next month's time if, indeed,they are to get any hearing within this session of Congress.

Mr. CONN. I think the administration is cognizant of that, Sena-tor.

Senator WEICKER. If they are not, there is not going to be anyhearing. If there is no hearing, there is not going to be any legisla-tion. Now, it would be a closed mind on my part if I did not at leasthear what the administration has to offer, but we are going to dothat in the most timely fashion. The most timely fashion is not toleave something hanging month after month after month, whichcan only be a source of concern to the people that it affects.

One month; after 1 month, forget it. We might have to forget itanyway, but I am saying 1 month. It very well might be that thereis some good that will be proposed. I will say this: I think the gen-'eral block grant concept is not something that is going to fare toowell in the Congress.

I again have to repeat that nobody believes on this subcommitteeor full committee that the necessary job will be accomplished atthe State level. Nobody believes it, and I do not think they aregoing to believe it in the months ahead.

Is there anything further?Mr. CONN. Well, Senator, I would like to make one comment to

bring more balance to the discussion, and that is that in the 25-or-so years that I have been disabled, I have seen a difference on thepart of the actions, methods, manners of implementation, and sen-sitivity to the needs and problems of disabled persons on the partof the State directors.

At one time, I think your remark concerning the uneveness andthe compliance on the part of State directors might have had agreater degree of validity than it has now. Since I have been Com-

23

22

missioner over t he past 2 years and in, I would say, the fi yearsprior to that, there has been a dramatic change on the part of theperformance and the attitude of State directors in this country in

vocational rehabilitation.There has been excessive trimming of administrative costs. We

are still concerned about overall overhead. In terms of involvingthemselves in face-to-face discussions with constituent groups of

disabled people, regardless of the category or degree of disability,

or multiplicity of disability, the performance of the State directorshas been outstanding in the past decade.

I think that there is a very good chance that a proposal to turnback a program of administration of vocational rehabilitation to

the States would be in very, very good hands, if that were the deci-

sion of the Congress.Senator WEICKER. I am in fair shape to go ahead and handle any-

thing that comes my way, and I must confess that even I feel sortof a sense of deja vu and a sense of discouragement that we aregoing through the whole process that took, 2 years ago on Public

Law 94-142.First, there was going to be no change. Everybody said, 'Ve are

not contemplating any changes in Public Law 94-142; nobody isworking on it." Then all of a sudden, boom, out come all thechanges. We get revved up on that; we have the hearing and wemake it very clear as to the Congress position.

The Secretary goes back, and after a great outcry on the part of

not the Congress, but the people of this country, and pulls backmost of the changes. Do you realize what this puts people through?I can handle it, but the burden that you are putting on a lot ofother people that are just not quite in the same shape as this Sena-tor is in, I just do not think is fair. I think that is what bothers me;it really is not, with all that they have to put up with.

Well, in any event, I want included in the record an informationmemorandum, U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special

Education and Rehabilitative Services, information memorandumRSAIM-8241, dated September 14, 1982; subject: Transmittal of

Report, Caseload Statistics, State Vocational Rehabilitation Agen-

cies, Fiscal Year 1981. That should be included in the record in itsentirety at this point.

[The material referred to follows:]

23

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOFFICE OP SPECIAL EDUCATIONAND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES

REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRATIONWASR/NGTON, D.C. 20202

INFORMATION MEMORANDUMRSA-IM- 82 -61

September 14, 1982

TO : STATE mattrancti AGENCIES (GENERAL)STATE REHABILITATION AGENCIES (BLEND)RSA REGIONAL COMMISSIONERS

SUBJECT: Transmittal of Report "CaseloadStatistics, State Vocational

Rehabilitation Agencies, Fiscal. Year 1981"

The report presentsa statistical summary of caseload activityin the State-Federalprogram o: vocational rehabilitation duringFiscal Year 1981 with trends in the last decade.

In Fiscal Year 1981, the total number of persons served andrehabilitated declined from the year before, the former for thesixth consecutive year and the latter for the sixth time in sevenyears. The 255,881 persons rehabilitated

in Fiscal. Year 1981were the fewest in twelve years. For the second year in a row,declines were noted in the number of severely disabled personsserved and rehabilitated;however, their proportion among allactive cases increased for all measures.

For the first time in many years, caseload patterns in individualagencies are not well represented in the report. Only three agencytables appear; they relate to total and "severe" rehabilitations,and rehabilitation rates. Data processing problems have madethe presentation of more agency detail impossible. In additionto the three agency tables, there

are four others arranged byState (general and blind

agency data combined) which show thenumber of total and "severe"

cases rehabilitated and served per10,000 disabled population. The remaining 17 tables in this reportdisplay national trends only. A section of charts has been addedto this year's report.

We hope the report proves useful to you as a source for themeasurement of productivity in the State-Federal program in

cmmissicluer of Rehabilitation Services

recent yeas.

AtCarhm.nt

24

The Story at the State- Federal Program of Vocational

Rehabilitation as Seen in Caseload Trends Through

Fiscal Year 1981

SUMMARY

While there was some ambiguity in caseload trends in Fiscal Year 1980, the

patterns observed in Fiscal Year 1981 were most clear. New cases,

caseload levels and the number of parsons served and rehabilitated all

shrank to volumes last seen in the period from Fiscal. Year 1969 to

Fiscal Year 1971.

Even caseloads of severely disabled persons, the most important target group

singled out in the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, were not spared. Their

numbers, too, declined in Fiscal Year 1981 in terms of new cases, caseload

levels and cases served and rehabilitated. The rate of decline for the

severely disabled, however, was not as steep as for other clients, and

their proportions among all clients continued to rise,.

There were only two major caseload items for which increases in Fiscal

__Yea ,._1981 were noted. They were persons not accepted for vocational

rehabilitation services and persons not rehabilitated after having been

dee.lred eligible for services. These negative-outcome trends, combined

with continuing reductions in the number of persons accepted for services

and the number rehabilitated, served to produce the second lowest rate of

acceptance into the rehabilitation program ever recorded, and the lowest

rate of rehabilitation among active cases closed in thirty-five years.

Stated briefly, individualsreferred for services are now less likely to

be accepted for them,. and if accepted,. are lass likely to be rehabilitated.

NEW CASES

. New cases, however definec, dropped sharply in Fiscal Year 1981 from the

preceding year. Fiscal Year 1980 intakes, interestingly, were greater

than in Fiscal Year 1979. With Fiscal Year 1981, however, the earlier

declining trends did not merely resume,but were so extensive that,

except for the small group of extended evaluation cases, they represented

the lowest intakes is rae:ve years.

More specifically, new referrals to State agencies in Fiscal Year 1981

numbered 811,440, a loss of 100,000 from the prior year (down 10.1 percent)

and the smallest roc::: cohort since Fiscal Year 1969. At their height in

Fiscal Year 1975, new Is stood at 1,214,300.

Persons newly applying forrehabilitation services in Fiscal Year 1981

totalled 638,500, a loss of 86,000 from the year before (down 11.7 percent),

also the smallest such cumber since Fiscal Year 1969. The all-time high

is new applicants wasrecorded in Fiscal Year 1975 with 885,700 cases.

25

Applicants accepted for vocational rehabilitation services in Fiscal Year1981numberad 373,300 decrease of 39,000 from the prior year (down 9.5percent), also the smallest such intake since Fiscal Isar 1969. Stateagencies accepted 534,500 persona for services in Fiscal Year 1975, thehistorical high for this caseload.

Even the typically amallnumber of parsons selected for extended evaluationto determine eligibility for basic services fell by 6,000 to 35,200, adecline of 15.0 percent. This minor caseload measure had seemed to berelatively impervious to change in recent years until the Fiscal Year 1981experience which represented the lowest such intake in seven years.

CASELOAD LEVELS

With new cases entering State agency caseloads in heavily reduced volumes,it is not surprising that the numbers of persona in various stages ofthe rehabilitation process on the Last day of the fiscal year have lsodecreased.

For example, the number of persons whose application for services had notyet been processed as of September 30, 1981 stood it 257,600, a loss of40,000 from the same date year earlier, sr 13.3 percent. This was thesmallest end-of-year balance for applicants since Fiscal Year 1969.In comparision, there were 357,700 persons in the applicant states onJune 30, 1975 (the end of Fiscal Year 1975), the highest such figurerecorded.

In addition, some 624,700 persons were in the active statuses onSeptember 30. 1981, a loss of/40-,000-from the same date one year earlier,or 6.1 percent. This was th smallest active caseload balance since theend of Fiscal Year 1971. On June 30, 1975, some 778,400 persons wereactively being provided rehabilitation services, the all-time high level.

Even cases in receipt of extended evaluation services on September 30, 1981,declined to 27,200, a loss of 5,000 from the year before, or 15.6 percent,the lowest such level in seven years.

CASES SERVED

The number of persons spending SOWS time in the active statuses duringFiscal Year 19E1, whether or not their cases were closed out, was 1,038,200,a loss of 57).7.00, or 5.2 percent from the previous year. This was thelowest trral 5::Z=e Fiscal Year 1971, and it marked the sixth consecutiveyear of a decline from the all-time high figure of 1,244,300 persons servedin Fiscal Year 1975.

If the number cf persons accepted for services in Fiscal Year 1982 does notequal the 373,:20 accepted in Fiscal Year 1981 (losses in this measure haveoccurred in fi.:e of the last 3IM years), then the number of persons servedin Fiscal Year 1982 will fall below one million for the first time intwelve years.

21-974 O -83 - -3,74

3

26

00TCUmf3 OF T111 RERAIALLITATICti PROCESS

While the number of persons accepted for services dropped by 9.5 percent

to 373,300 in Fiscal Year 1981, as observed earlier, the number of persons

turned down for services was 492,500, an Lacrosse of 0.4 percept from

Fiscal Year 1980. This meant that the acceptance rata (i.e. the percent

'of case!' processed for eligibility that were accepted for services) fell

'to 43.1 percent in Fiscal Year 1981 compared to 45.7 percent the year

before. At 43.1 percent, Fiscal Year 1981's acceptance rate was the second

lowest in the 39 years for which this statistic has been available with

the previous Low of 42.2 percent recorded five years earlier. For

approximately twenir.years from the mid-19508a to the mid- 1970'e the

acceptance rate hovered around the fifty percent mark, but Fiscal Year

1981 wits the ninth year in a row below that level.

The number of persons successfully rehabilitated in Fiscal Year 1981 was

255,900 a lose of more than 21,000 from the preceding year, or 7.7 percent.

This was simultaneously the fewest number of rehebilitationseinee Fiscal

Year 1969 and second greatest one-year decline in the history of the program

which began in Fiscal Year 1921. During this sixty -year time span declines

in persons rehabilitated for three or more consecutive years have occurred

only four times and two of those streaks were experienced within the last

Seven years. Although Josses were registered in five consecutive years

from Fiscal Year 1926 through Fiscal Year 1930, there never before has been

a seven-year period when the number of persons rehabilitated has declined

in as many as six of those seven years.

The number of persons whose cases were closed nor rehabilitated in Fiscal

--Year-1981-was 157,800 representing an increase of 3.3 percent from the year

before, one of only two key caseload statistics showing a rise. This

increase, combined with the decrease in rehabilitetions,led to a lowered

rehabilitation rate of 61.9 percent in Fiscal Year 1981. That is, 61.9

percent of the active cases closed that year were of rehabilitated persons

(and 38.1 percent of persons not rehabilitated). The rehabilitation rate

in the four prior years ranged narrowly from 64.0 percent to 64.9 percent.

Thus, the Fiscal Year 1981 experience represented adistinct break with the

recent past for this measure. The last time that the rehabilitation rate

fell below 62 percent was in Fiscal Year 1946.

CASELOADS OF SEVERELY DISABLED PERSONS

The declines noted above also affected that portion of the caseload made up

of severely disabled persons; however, these declines were much less

pronounced. For era:rola, 138,400 severely disabled persons were rehabilitated

in Fiscal. Year :981, a ...Dag of more than 4,000 persons from the preceding

year, or 2.9 percent ( compared to 7.7 percent decrease overall). This was

the second year in a row of a decrease in this key target group and the

fewest rehabilitations since Fiscal Year 1977. The severely disabled

accounted for 54.1 percent of all persons rehabilitated in Fiscal Year 1981,

the highest proportion observed in the eight years for which this statistic

has been available.

The number of severely disabled clients provided rehabilitation services in

Fiscal Year 198:, vas 600,700, a lass or more than five thousand from the

year before, or 0.9 perrent. This was the second consecutiveyearly decrease.

The severely disable pd comprised 57.9 percent ff all persons served in

III F,,,kgaa(.1.1"1°'0'41=Jaik.O.L....2s'the six years during which

3.4

27

this series has been available.

The number of severely disabled persons newly accepted for services inFiscal Year 1981 WO 224,300, a decrease of only 400 from the prior year,or 0.2 percent. Nr, severe cases have been fairly consistent in thesix years of available data, ranging narrowly from 224,300 to 226,300for five of those years. (The intake in Fiscal Year 1977 was 214,800)Of all persons newly accepted for services in Fiscal Year 1981, 10.1percent were severely disabled. This was the highest percentage yetrecorded.

As with the total caseload, an increase in severely disabled individualsnet rehabilitated in Fiscal Year 1981 was noted. This °umber was 95,500,a gain of 4,000 over the year before, or 4.5 percent and the highestfigure yet recorded. The increase in nln-rehabilitations and the decreasein rehabilitations produced a lowered rehabilitation rate among the severelydisabled of 59.2 percent. This was the first time the rate has dippedbelow 60 percent in the six years that this measure NO been computed.

Co September 30, 1981, there were 366,900 severely disabled persona inreceipt of rehabilitation services. This was some 5,000 persons lessthan on the same date in the previous yea; a decline of 1.4 percent.It marked the second consecutive decline in this end-of-year caseloadmeasure and the smallest such volume in four years. Of all cases inthe active statuses on September 30, 1981, 58.9 percent were of severelydisabled persons, the highest such percentage enumerated in the sixyears of available data.

WHAT WILL TEE FCTURE 81=7

All indications are that caseload will contimae their relentless contractionin Tiscal Year 1982. On September 30, 1981, there were about 45,000 fewerapplIcants and extended rvaluation cases awaiting determination of theireligibility for services than on the same date one year earlier.Additionally, 40,000 fewer clients were in the active statuses undergoingrehabilitation an September 30, 1981 than was the case exactly one yearbefore. When this reduction in the cumber-of cases carried over intoFiscal Year 1982 is combined with a highly likely reduction of new casesthat will enter State agency caseloads, outcomes in terms of persons whoare served and rehabilitated will be further depressed.

he presumed continued reduction in zew cases is arrived at by comparisonsberwaen the decline in the purctas=t ;:wer of the rehabilitation dollarin recent'years and similar declines in various caseload statistics. Thepurchasing power of rehabilitation M=i33 reached its zenith in Fiscal Year1975. Thereafter, effectively less coney has been spent in each year inthe rehabilitation program after due alimance for inflationary trendsis made. From Fiscal Year 1975 to Fi5cf.1 Year 1981, the loss in purchasing;sower has been 30.9 percent. (The ca:::Llated purchasing power in FiscalYear 1981 is almost equal to that in Fiscal Year 1969) Cancurrept losses

28

in rehabilitation and calms served over the same period of time have

not been as great as the decline in purchasing power, only 21.0 percent

in rehabilitations an 16,6 percent in cases served. Decree.., in new

cases, however, have men much more sensitive to the lose in purchasing

power. New applicant., have fallen in numbers by 27.9 percent and new

accepted cases by 30.2 percent. From these results, it is inferred that

budgetary restrictions of whatever origin most quickly and heavily affect

the influx of new cases, while priority is given to cease already in the

caseload. It is then assumed that declines in new cases will occur again

in Fiscal Year 1982 because a) 9114 million in monies from the SocialSecurity Administration spent in Fiscal Year 1981, will not be available

in Fiscal Year 1982, b) Basic Support manias will, at best, be equal to

those in Fiscal Year 1981, and may be considerably less, c) continued

emphasis on the more expensive severely disabled case will occur, and

d) inflationary trends J.11 continue, although quite possibly at a

lower rate. Therefore, the purchasing power of the rehabilitation dollar

will necessarily decline in Fiscal Year 1982 and will probably impact

moat immediately on new cases as has been the trend in recent years.

The combination of a reduced carryover of cases and reduced new cases

means fever cases served and, most likely, fever rehabilitations.

Caseloads of severely disabled persons have, until recently, been Largely

shialdud from the effects of declines in the purchasing power of therehabilitation dollar and various economy measures, because increasingState agency efforts were focussed on this important group. However, their

numbers too, have shrunk in the last two years, albeit at modest rates.

Were State agencies to target ever higher proportions of their diminishing

resources toward the severely disabled in Fiscal Year 1982, this would likely

moderate the expected decline in such cases..

Senator WEICKER. Mr. Conn, thank you very much. I very muchappreciate your testimony.

Mr. CONN. Thank you, Senator. Would you have any objection ifI remained at the table during the testimony of Dr. Fenderson andMr. Dusenbury?

Senator WEICKER. No, not at all. Can you just swing around tothe other side so the witnesses can use the center portion?

Mr. CONN. Thank you, sir.Senator WEICKER. The next witness is Mr. Joseph Dusenbury,

Chairman of the National Council on the Handicapped. Mr. Dusen-bury, it is nice to have you before the committee.

STATEMENT OF JOE S. DUSENBURY, CHAIRMAN, NATIONALCOUNCIL ON THE HANDICAPPED

Mr. DUSENBURY. Thank you very much, Senator Weicker. It is areal pleasure for me to be here and meet you after such a longtime.

I first want to say that I bring greetings from the Deep South,which has not always had the greatest affinity for your State. Inthis instance, I would like to say that you have a lot of strong sup-porters in the State, and people who feel like you are doing a tre-mendous job for disabled people, and never before have the Statesbeen closer together.

Senator WEICKER. Thank you very much; I appreciate it.Mr. DUSENBURY. I am an avid supporter of the civil rights of dis-

abled persons in America. I firmly believe that our country cannotafford to lose the productivity potential of millions of able disabledwho eagerly seek the opportunity to work and become taxpayers,

3o

29

nor C111 we overlook t111' 11111111111 aspects Of their individual tit'll.4111-1111111CW,

I am here today Its t he Chairman of the National Colmcil on theHandicapped. I want to praise you and the other members of Con-gress for establishing the Council, and the President. of the UnitedStates and the Senate for allowing me to serve as Chairman. I

pledge to you the forceful effort of myself' and the other membersof the Council.

The National Council on the Handicapped plays an importantrole for the literally millions of handicapped citizens of this coun-try. First, and perhaps foremost, the Council serves as a tangiblereminder to handicapped Americans that their concerns and needsand unique situations are important to the Congress, the adminis-tration, and indeed to the countryimportant enough to warrant anational council dealing exclusively with their situation.

The Council brings additional recognition to issues of concern tohandicapped persons because of the membership of the Councilitself. The diversity of experiences, professional background, andcompetency of the members appointed to the Council are trulyoutstanding.

The selection process is designed to create a Council reflective ofour Nation, from a variety of regions and with a rich backgroundin handicapped issues. The process has, again, worked well as areview of the membership will verify. The members of the Councilare competent, enthusiastic, and dedicated individuals who possessa wealth of knowledge about disability, and they also acknowledgethe need to support cost-effective methods to promote independenceand reduce dependence.

Since confirmation in October, the members of the Council havebecome acquainted with the expertise of each other and haveadopted a vigorous agenda in the hopes of being able to provide atleast a preliminary report by the usual deadline. We want to makea record.

Some of us have been deluged by organizations interested in theconcerns of the disabled; by colleagues, and by members of the dis-abled community themselves who look to the Council for leadershipand inspiration.

There has been considerable anxiety among the disabled commu-nity, as you indicated, caused by rumors of lack of interest or con-cern by their Government in programs for the handicapped. But Ihope and believe that the special efforts of this Council have beeneffective in reassuring them of our Governments concern.

In October, I appointed a special ad hoc committee, chaired byJustin Dart, Jr., of Texas, for the purpose of identifying the specialconcerns of the SSDI recipients, which was given considerable at-tention by the media, in the hopes that the Council could commu-nicate those concerns directly to the Commissioner of Social cu-rity.

That effort was accepted and appreciated by both the discommunity, who recognized Justin for his long history of h nestand effective communications, and by the leadership of Social ecu-rity, whom I would like to commend here for responding so qui lyk.nd in such a manner that it gave assurance to those who felt souncomfortable about their future.

3

We are certain that the interest shown by this Council, which issupported by 1 his Congress and t his administration, gave hope tothose who participated in thnt effort,

The Council is also important from tin' standpoint of being ableto point out and/or to respond to a variety of situations and issuesthat are under consideration either by legislation or regulation.The opportunity to share the perceptions and reactions of handi-capped Americans to such proposals should serve as a valuablesounding board for the Government,

This opportunity to preview possible reaction by the handicappedcommunity to matters of concern has a valuable and mutuallybeneficial role. If properly informed of the problems and proposedactions forthcoming from Washington, the Council would be in abetter position to understand and explain the intent of proposals.

Likewise, the Council could also react, respond to, seek furtherclarification, or perhaps make suggestions to strengthen the ac-tions being considered prior to those same questions or reactionsbeing raised publicly. It must be realized that questions are inevita-bly going to be raised on any proposals. Thus, it is logical andhighly appropriate to utilize the Council for such input as may bepossibl

The Council also has the unique opportunity to bring aboutdialog between various units or organizations of government. Inter-agency efforts are often less than finely tuned for maximum coop-eration. At times, those efforts are directly at odds with those ofother agencies.

The opportunity, via the National Council on the Handicapped,to explore areas of mutual interest should not be underestimatedand, in fact, should be expanded. The first meeting of the Councilserves as a prime example of the use of the Council as a forum forinteragency discussions.

We have identified a number of priorities that the Council wouldlike to address which are in addition to the responsibility concern-ing RSA and NIHR, which is explicitly identified in the legislationcreating the Council. They will be enumerated and ranked in theannual report, but I think I should say here that there is a tremen-dous interest and desire of the Council to see the private sector asa partner with government in the prevention of disability, in thereduction of dependency, and in the promotion of full accessibilityof the disabled community into the mainstream of American life.

In light of such interest by this administration and this Council,initial efforts have been made to recruit the loan of a professionalstaff member from one of the large corporations to work with theCouncil in the months ahead.

In summary, the National Council could play a major role in thedevelopment of a unified, consistent national policy for our handi-capped 'citizens.. We !lave the expertise, the interest and the com-mitment to translate this opportunity into reality.

I would be glad to try to answer any questions.Senator WEICKER. Thank you very much, Mr. Dusenbury. We

greatly appreciate your testimony, and also your efforts as chair-man of the Council. I only have one question. What has been thecommunication so far between the Administration and the Council

3

1rds I in-q. prupPit.ii rhltnges in OH' 16'11111)0H ation Act of

Mr, DtisENauttY. Very limited.Senator liVElekvit, I could not agree with that portion Of

your stotement where you say:111011'

If proporly inforong1 411' I In, proldnins ur propostql oflioos torlitominIt from Wonknoon, Ih Connell winild In, Ina honor pnnillun lu niolorslond and oxpInin thuiinot proionsnls. Likowiso, Illy Council could tibio maul, roipund In, P401.k. furtherclarificolion, or pvrhapn inolso ringgo.,1 low, to slrongllinn DIP net ions hying consid.ori,(1 prior III !how slow, qunsIionn Ilr rilk"

What I would gather from what you are saying is that it mightbe very helpful, if indeed changes are being contemplated in theDepartment at the present time, to have consultation with yourCouncil.

Mr. DusENauttY. We have offered that opportunity, I think thething that I would like to say here about this Council is, as I triedto say in the statenumt, they are a very effective group of peoplewho under: total rehabilitation. They also understand the plight ofthe disableo community. They have the confidence, in general, ofthe disabled community.

We have been deluged with information and we have tried towork with them in a way to identify the fact that we did want towork with the administration and with the Congress in the processof alleviating some of the fears. We think we are uniquely qualifiedto know about some of the duplications and some of the cost-effec-tive things that we could do or that we could recommend. We wantto do that because we know that there are areas that can be im-proved.

The Council stands ready to support the administration and theCongress in any effort which you would like to call on us to do.

Senator WEICKER. Well, now, you asked, Mr. Conn, to be presentwhile these next witnesses testified. Here is an unparalleled oppor-tunity to have some input from Mr. Dusenbury's Council as youevolve these proposals. Do you think that might make some sense?

Mr. CONN. Yes, Senator.Senator WICKER. Thank you very much, Mr. Dusenbury.The next witnesses are, from the National Institute of Handi-

capped Research. Dr. Douglas Fenderson; in addition, we have Mr.Joseph Moriarty, whom I gather is from West Virginia. We arelooking forward to your testimony, also. So, gentlemen, you proceedin any way you deem fit.

STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS A. FENDERSON, DIRECTOR, NATIONALINSTITUTE OF HANDICAPPED RESEARCH; AND JOSEPH 13. MOR-IARTY, DIRECTOR, WEST VIRGINIA REHABILITATION RE-SEARCH AND TRAINING CENTER, ON BEHALF OF TIIE NATION-AL ASSOCIATION OF REHABILITATION RESEARCH AND TRAIN-ING CENTERS

Dr. FENDERSON. Thank. you, Mr. Chairman, and members of thecommittee. Thank you for this opportunity to present something ofthe exciting progress of the National Institute of Handicapped Re-search

As you know, approximately one in six Americans of workingage has some limitation of function or disability. The mission of

:12

NUM is to study the linialiclipping consequences of those distibil.sties 111111, 011111101 I'MW111111 nncl 1101114111M 11111011 Ht11litit'HI to OPPIYnew knowledge nod technology to O1110110111t0

111111(liCIIIM.I would like to respond, to three questions this morning. No 1,

how have we used our 11182 appropriation? No. 2, how are we usingadditional funds included in the 198:1 budget? And, finally, In whatways are disabled persons actually benefiting from these efforts?

Thorp is (Midi In three tables following page 5, and rather thanread the statement here, I would like to simply refer to thosetables, in which we show that 83 percent of Our budget is taken upwith research and training centers mid the rehabilitation engineer-ing centers. There is a total of 13 such centers; 11 of them are com-prehensive/medical; 15 are speciality oriented, including such 11111111411/4 vocational, mental retardation, deafness, hearing impairments,blindness, and so forth. There are 17 centers oriented around engi'leering subjects.

As you can see, some 55 percent of our budget is with these com-prehensive and medically oriented and speciality oriented researchand training centers; 21) percent of the budget is in the 17 engineer-ing centers.

We have a relatively small amount of money in discrete researchand demonstration projects, and that does represent a problem, itseems to me, in the overall management of our portfolio of activi-ties. A larger proportion of our budget should be allocated to inves-tigator-initiated research.

I would like to return now to the statement in the middle of page2. flow are we using the additional funds that were made availablefor the 198:3 year? Because of the intense competition for the fund-ing that was available, highly qualified applicants ended up in anapproved but unfunded category. This really placed in jeopardysome of the most established and productive rehabilitation re-search groups in the country.

As a result, we used something over $:3 million to support themost meritorious of these approved but otherwise unfunded pro-grams. We have reserved $300,000 to begin an authorized but asyet unused program of rehabilitation ,:esearch fellowships, throughwhich young and midcareer research leaders may develop new ini-tiatives and stimulate their own professional development in areascalled for in the Rehabilitation Act.

In what ways are disabled persons actually benefiting from theseprograms? Brain injuries resulting from traumatic accidents,stroke and other events result in serious and perplexing physical,intellectual and emotion deficits. Four major research center pro-grams will coordinate studies on ways in which these refractoryproblems can be resolved. An important byproduct of this is a pri-mary prevention campaign to reduce the incidence of such injuries.

Disabled children are benefiting from a major pediatric researchand training center in which early treatment and followup is usedto prevent subsequent disabling consequences.

Burn patients will benefit from the new programmatic activitylooking at the long term consequences of severe burns, and at-tempting to limit these through advanced methods of care.

40

33

Recent advances largely supported through NTH in heart diseasehave raised questions about the role of rehabilitative measureswith this important disease entity. We are supporting a majorstudy of cardiac rehabilitation which takes into account the recentmedical developments in this important area.

In the field of engineering and technology, exciting progress istaking place in the application of computer technology to neuro-muscular and sensory impairments, including various kinds of com-munication aids, robotic assistance and wheelchair control systemsfor the severely disabled. Computer-controlled functional electricalstimulation is being used to aid and control movement, to correctspinal curvature, to alleviate pain, and experimentally now inhelping to control bladder function.

There are some problems that I would simply like to allude towith regard to applications of technology. As you know, there arenot great incentives to manfucturers to commercially produce someof these. There are problems with the rigorous testing for them.

Some of the disabled persons who most need them are least ableto pay for them, and third-party payment is often not available forsuch devices. We are undertaking a major project called stimula-tion of industry which will seek to remove barriers to the testingand commercial production of these devices, but the troublesomeeconomic problems with regard to their purchase and distributionwill remain.

Regarding personal, economic and employment problems, obvi-ously one of the most important problems in this country has to dowith the 'disability provisions of the social security system. Throughearly intervention, we hope that one of our major demonstrationprojects this year will help to prevent unnecessary or untimely eco-nomic dependency. We understand, also, that social security will besupporting perhaps three contracts in this area. And through theInteragency Committee which, by law, I am required to chair, wehope that these efforts will be coordinated with our own.

Continued study of community and vocational needs of retardedpersons has improved prospects for many of them.

Regarding special populations that are represented in our long-range plan, several are receiving special attention this year. Weexpect to support centers to study the particular problems ofNative Americans, disabled residents of the Pacific Trust Terrri-tory, and of disabled elderly.

There are two components with the disabled elderly. One is thepopulation of disabled persons who, as they are living longer, findincreasing difficulty in maintaining their relative degree ofindependence. The other one would include all of as who, as weage, live closer to our limits and may need the kind of rehabilita-tive treatments, guidance and aids that would prevent unnecessaryand premature dependency.

Finally, a special population, those with multiple sclerosis andsimilar neuropathies, are the subject of one of these center grantsthat will, among other things, examine the value of various reha-bilitative methods.

Certainly, the utilization of the results of these efforts is an im-portant objective of NIHR. One of our important accomplishmentswas to establish a National Rehabilitation Information Center,

4k

34 /NARIC, which now includes some 7,500 completed research studieswhich are available by computer indexing throughout the UnitedStates, and information on some 5,000 technological devices andaids designed to assist handicapped people. Last year, the Centerresponded to some 12,000 requests.

A networ of private self-help groups and community organiza-tions for thu disabled has been identified, through which these andother information resources of the Institute and the clearinghousecan be communicated.

Thank you for the opportunity to present this important work.[The prepared statement of Dr. Fenderson follows:]

35

TESTIMONY OF DOUGLAS A. FENDERSON, DIRECTOR

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF HANDICAPPED RESEARCH

Mr. Chairman:

It is a pleasure and honor to be here today to discuss with you the

activities of the National Institute of Handicapped Research (NIHR).

As you know, nearly one in four Americans of working age has .some limitation

of function or some disability. The mission of the NIHR is to study the handi-

capping consequences of these disabilities and, through research and demonstration

studies, to apply new knowledge and technology to prevent, stabilize and ameliorate

such disabilities and handicaps. Just as the basic and applied bio-medical sciences

have as their mission to add years to life, our mission is, through research to add

life to years.

I would like to address three major questions this morning:

I. How have we used our 1982 appropriation of $28,560,000?

II. How are we using the additional $3.6 million above the President's

1983 budget request of $26,491,000? and,

III. In what tangible ways are disabled persons able to function more

adequately in their personal lives as a result of these efforts?

The FY 1982 appropriation of $28,560,000 was distributed as follows:

Dollars

Research & Training Centers $16,229,000 54%

Rehabilitation Engineering Centers 8,154,000 27%

Research and Demonstration Projects 2,009,000, 6.7%

Research Utilization 2,091,000 7%

International 77,000 0.3%

$28,560,000

36

he largest proportion of our budget (82'.) isconnitted to long-term studies,

nvolving a wide variety of disabling conditions and teams of medical technical

nd allied profesionals. The various types of Centers are further described by

ype and expenditure as follows:

Centers No Amount

Comprehensive Rehabilitation and. 10 $ 8,613,423

Medical Centers

Vocational Rehabilitation 5 2,875,342

Mental Retardation 3 1,862,291

Aging 3 843,262

Blind 2 651,924

Mental IFIness 2 .490,467

Deafness and Hearing Impaired 2 642,764

Independent Living, 1 295.000

Functional Electrical Stimulation 2 912,000

Sensory and Communicative Systems 4 1,4E0,335

Spinal Cord Injury I 561,141'.

Technology 8 4,391,573

Total43 523,508,522

Another way of examil

stated in the legally [Ram

I. To minimize disal

38

II. How are we using the $3.6 million increase over our planned 1983

spending plan?

All of our major R&T center programs were up for competitive funding

review for FY 1983. The Long Range Plan and 35 published priority areas

formed the basis of this competitive process. Because of the tntense com-

petition for limited funds, some of the most productive, established research

groups in this field ended up in an "approved, but not funded" category.

Nearly $3 million of the additional funds are being used to preserve this

irreplaceable research capacity by funding the most meritorious of these

"approved, but not funded" center programs.

Through some reallotment of funds, we expect to have from $500,000 to

$1,000,000 additional funds to support small investigator-initiated grants.

In addition, $300,000 has been reserved to begin an authorized and badly

needed program for rehabilitation research fellowships. These fellowships will

permit us to develop new research initiatives and stimulate both young, as well

as mid career investigators, who can make important contributions to rehabili-

tation research.

III. How are the results helping persons with disabilities?

Recent results and areas of rapid advancement are summarized briefly under

the categories of (a) comprehensive rehabilitation and thedical programs;

(b) engineering and technology programs; (c) personal achievement, economic

and employment programs; (d) programs for special groups of disabled persons;

(e) programs to apply what we are learning; and (f) international programs.

39

Comprehensive Rehabilitation and Medical Programs.

o Brain injuries resulting from traumatic accidents or stroke often result

in serious and perplexing physical, intellectual and emotional defects. These

problems are among the most refractory in terms of self-care, independent living

and vocational adjustment. Four major research center programs will coordinate

studies of ways in which these problems can be resolved. An important by-product

is a primary prevention campaign, supported by cooperating media. to reduce the

number of such injuries.

0 Disabled children are benefiting from a program of studies on early treat-

ment and followup which aim to anticipate and prevent possible complications in

subsequent years.

o Spinal cord treatment centers have agreed to a new, streamlined data

collection and pooling project to assure more uniform treatments and results.

o Burn patients will benefit from studies examining the long term consequences

of severe burns, and attempts to limit these through advanced methods of team

care in the acute phase.

o New methods are available to study the structure and function relation-

ships of the spine. Prevention of chronic back pain and improved early

treatment and intervention to this common and expensive problem are expected

results.

o Recent advances in medical and surgical treatment of heart disease have

raised new questions about remaining limitations of function and the effective-

ness-of-secondary-OriWaiOn and rehabilitative measures. A five-year study

of cardiac rehabilitation in this new area of improved medical-surgical

treatments will provide valuable, clinically useful information.

40

o Continuing debate over the nature and extent of benefits derived from

various physical methods of treatment such as ultra-sound, heat, and exercise

requires continuing study of the appropriate use and limits of these methods.

These studies continue.

Engineering and Technology

o Exciting progress is being made in the application of computer chip

technology to neuromuscular and sensory impairments, This technology is also

being used for: communication aids such as synthesized speech, adapted com-

puter controls, electronic environments, robotic aids, and wheelchair control

systems. Computer controlled functional electrical stimulation is being used

to aid movement, strengthen spinal curvature, ameliorate pain, help control

bladder function.

o Computer design of special shoes for the handicapped will soon be

possible. In addition, video-computer analysis of normal and abnormal patterns .

of movement is leading to the design of more useful artificial limbs.

o Computer analysis of back movements is helping to identify abnormal

conditions which may lead to prevention, or at least reduction, of disabling

pain and loss of functional capacity. New methods to quantify objective measure-

ments of loss of motion and strength through the use of the computer are improving

the evaluation of disabled persons for improving estimates of permanent partial

disability under Workers Compensation and for guiding and evaluating progress in

the physical restoration of disabled persons:

o A research and training center (yet to be selected) will apply new tech-

nology to the design of a new generation of hearing aids and devices which are

expected to overcome objections many users have of existing devices.

41

Several problems with moolli atlon of rehabilitation engineering to the

needs of disabled individuals need to be resolved. One, similar to the

economics of the so-called "orphan drugs," is the limited economic incentives

to manufacturers to produce such devices for such specialized markets.

Another, is the lack of rigorous testing of prototype models before they are

released. Also, there is simply lack of knowledge among prospective

manufacturers of the need to manufacture such devices. Finally, the disabled

persons who most need specialized adaptive equipment often are the least able

to pay for it, and Insurance and other third party sources usually exclude

such unique devices from coverage.

We are supporting a major "stimulation of industry" study to remove the

harriers to the testing and commercial production of many new devices. This

will aid part of the problem, but the troublesome economic problem is likely

to persist

The vocational rehabilitation process is also benefiting from the computer

revolution. Standardized assessment methods and records, readily accessible

information and automated case management methods are under development and

study.

Although disabled people have used specially adapted vehicles for many

years, serious safety and convenience problems yet remain. We have called

together the leading experts on this subject in the United States in a research

conference to develop a series of "next steps" to resolve the remaining problems.

4

21-974 0 -N:1

42

Resolviu_Personal, Economics and Employment Problems

o Surely one of the most important problems of disability in the United

States relates to the disability provisions of the Social Security program.

There are data to suggest that, to some degree, unnecessary economic dependency

has been encouraged by these provsions. Attempts to correct some of these

errors have resulted in well publicized "horror stories" of Severely disabled

persons, no longer capable of substantial gainful employment being cut off

from their only source of support.

o Attempts at vocational rehabilitation have had limited success. We

have proposed a major, long-term programmatic study aimed at early intervention,

to prevent unnecessary economic dependency. The Social Security Administration

also will be supporting additional studies which we expect will be coordinated

thrugh our Interagency Committee on Handicapped Research.

o Recent studies of life stages in adults have helped many of us understand

and cope with our changing circumstances as we grow older. This work has not

been extended in a systematic way to the various disability groups. One such

major study will help disabled persons understand these adult developmental

stages in relation to the special circumstances associated with their dis-

abilities.

43

Job placement with disabled persons has always been a difficult challenge,

but great progress has been made. Studies of how people actually get jobs,

development of job-seeking skills, formation of "job clubs" and other net-

work methods are improving placement success and giving the client d sense of

participation and commitment.

' Continuing study of the community living needs and vocational problems

of retarded persons are the subJects of research and development in these cen-

ters, Tangible progress has improved the prospects for many retarded citizens

as a result of these ongoing studies and demonstrations.

An innovative program to teach retarded deaf persons "street survival

skills" has reported good success.

Special Populations

' Our 1983 appropriations Included a note of intent regarding the special

employment problems of Autistic persons. We are meeting with rehabilitation

experts from around the country who are experienced with this problem as a

basis for planning a suitable response to the appropriations language.

' Native Americans have had limited access to rehabilitation services, al-

though their needs for these are higher than the poet. large. A

special center will study ways of overcoming the barriers J. restora-

tion and other rehabilitative services for this group.

' Another special population in which our efforts are developing is the

elderly disabled. Two groups in this population are of interest. One is

the group of disabled persons who, as they age, experience increasing diffi-

culty in maintaining their relative independence. The other group, which

will eventually include all of us, are those, who as they age, live closer

44

and Jowl' t. Himr linul, of plic.iaa ,apaaiii And Moy mind rehabilitation

guI4Ano, and Aid', to proiont ornowtorn and unno(.ey.ary dependence. We are

WOOIWI In rril, area (of the rehabilitation needs of the aged) and are colhbo-

t4t1r1,1 with Cho AdmiwAlation on Aqino In OM efforts.

Ihave already outiltioned the ,,pocial poplikition of di,,abled children and

the attempts to prevent and ameliorate Chu lung tom consequences of their

disabilities, but a particularly challenging set of rehabilitation concerns

Is with the disabled adolescent. the disabled adolescent is struggling, not

only with this difficult stage of life, but the special complications often

attendant to handicap. We hope one or more of our rehabilitation fellowships

will be used to study additional rehabilitation needs of this particular group.

'Finally, we have just approved for funding a major study of the handicap-

ping consequences of patients with Multiple Sclerosis and similar neuro-

pathies. Although exciting progress is being made in understanding the

nature of this disease, some 500,000 individuals are living with disabling

consequences,

Results of this work should improve care for this group and help answer

Questions about the value of various rehabilitative theories now being used.

Applyila What We Know

' NIHR has developed a National Rehabilitation Information

Center (NARIC) which provides access to the results of some 7,500 research

studies and other information about some 5,000 technologic aids and devices. Last

year'NARIC received more than 12,000 requests for information. It will soon

include access to information in all current, research projects supported

by the some 32 federal agencies known to have some research effort in this

subject.

45

Information 'wapiti,. living applied to develop grnops of

citizen voli.otoors In rota! arel% who will deninw.ti Ito the potential ot

rural network% of shorIng/i:aring in the resolution of the special PtHblom

ot the ipilated rural disabled.

We have published 1 very popular "Piaket Guide to federal Help for

the Dicabled".

We are reactivating the legislatively mandated Interagency Committee

on Handicapped Research to assure an orderly flow of informationhetween

and among the federal agencies involved in programs for the disabled.

' A network of private self-help groups and other coomnity organizations

of the disabled has been identified through which the informational re-

sources of NIHR and the Clearinghouse on the Handicapped can be comnuni-

cated.

International Programs

We are following 30 projects in eight countries. These include co-

operative studies on the rehabilitative aspects of neurological, neuromuscular,

orthopaedic cardiovascular and sensory disorders, among others.

About $110,000 in foreign currency funds were used in 1982. However,

in the past 20 years the international program (previously RSA) has supported

250 research projects in 14 foreign countries for approximately $50,000,000

authorized under the special currency funds.

' This year some 50 American and foreign rehabilitation experts will be

exchanged through our program. We are developing a bilateral agreement on a

national rehabilitation advancement program in India.

' We also collaborate with other well known groups such as Partners of

the Americas, Rehabilitation International and the World Rehabilitation Fund.

46

Mutually bonoticial result,. are apparent, including advances in

functional electrical stimulation, prosthetic dovicos and development

of "apprnerlato technology" which fits into local situations.

Although the special foreign currency program is now very limited,

we will continue to participate In scientific and technical exchanges which

have done so much to lessen the Impact of disability both In this country

and abroad.

Thank you for this opportunity to present some of the exciting and

forward looking developments on the status of our disabled citizens.

54

Allocation of NIHR Program Funds for FY 1983

FTPA IDS

1.9% .31

Total Appropriation - $30,060,000

Research and Training (Rr) - $14,205,000Rehabilitation Engineering (RE) - 7,550,000Research and Demonatration (RD) - 4,930,000

sd_

Utilization and Dissemination (UD)International Domestic Support (IDG)Fellowships, Technical and Dam

Professional Aapivanoe

$2,675,000100,000.

600,000.

I

49

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH oF DOUGLAS A. FENDERSON, PH.D.

On January 21, 1983, Douglas A. Fenderson, Ph.D., was sworn in asDirector of the National Institute of Handicapped Research, a partof the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.

Dr. Fenderson was nominated by the President on October 6 andconfirmed by the Senate on December 16, 1982.

Prior to his appointment, Dr. Fenderson was for the last 10 yearsDirector of the Office of Continuing Medical Education at theUniversity of Minnesota's Medical School. At the same time, he wasa professor at the University's School of Public Health and, since1977, a scientist at the School's Center for Health Services Research.Dr. Fenderson has also been Executive Secretary of the Clinical FellowsProgram of the Bush Foundation, St. Paul, Minnesota. Dr. Fenderson'sFederal service includes his tenure from 1972-73 as Director ofSpecial Programs at the National Institutes of Health's Bureau ofHealth Manpower Education and from 1969-71 as Branch Chief at theCenter for Health Services Research.

Dr. Fenderson's extensive experience in the field of rehabilitationincludes his positions as Education Director of the American Rehabilita-tion Foundation from 1966-69; as Chief of Rehabilitation Services forthe Minnesota Division of Vocational Rehabilitation from 1958 to 1963;and as Director of Vocational Services of the Kenny Institute inMinneapolis from 1955 to 1958. In addition, he has served as a memberand consultant on some 50 committees and task forces related to reha-bilitation and medical education, as well as in various positions withState and national rehabilitation associations. Also, he has publishednearly 50 articles on the topic.

Dr. Fenderson holds a Bachelor of Science degree in industrialengineering and master and doctoral degrees in psychology from theUniversity of Minnesota.

50

Senator WEICIMIL Thank you very much, Mr. Fenderson. Now,we have Professor M(wiarty. Professor, you proceed with yourstatement.

Dr. MoittARTv. Mr. Chairman, my oral testimony represents thefirst several pages of my full written testimony, which I respectful-ly submit for the record.

Mr. Chairriam, it is an honor for me to appear before this con-mittee. 1 come here wearing three hats: first, as director of theWest Virginia Rehabilitation Research and Training Center;second, as a spokesperson for the National Association of Rehabili-tation Research and Training Centers, a program authorized, asyou know, Mr. Chairman, and funded through the RehabilitationAct under NIHR; third. as one interested in the broad field of reha-bilitation researchclinical, medical, engineering, vocational, psy-chosocial and biomedical.

A hat that 1 will not. don today is my consumer advocacy hat,being the father of two children, one born with orthopedic birth de-fects and another an insulin-dependent diabetic. I alsO serve aspresident, of a local chapter of the American Diabetes Association.

My first hat is one of a person interested in rehabilitation re-search. Let me make no bones about the fact that I do represent aspecial interest group, to use that invidious termthose Americanswith physical, mental, or emotional impairments that limit or pre-vent them from working or living independently. While a groupwith special needs and problems, is it too bold of me to point outthat the extent and impact of this group is considerable?

Approximately 13.2 percent of those 18 to 64 have a work disabil-ity according to the Census Bureau; th..,` is more than 10 millionindividuals. The Chamber of Commerce, in 1982, published a reportstating that employers pay out $20 billion a year in workers' com-pensation insurance to cover the costs of work-related disability.This $20 billion, of course, gets incorporated and added to the costsof goods and services.

Social Security, in 1981, paid out $21 billion just in disabilitybenefits under SSI and SSDI. This amount excludes costs of admin-istration. Some economists at Rutgers University estimate the costof disability is as high as 8 percent of the GNP.

Chart 1 attempts to show how the disability dollar, public andprivate combined, is spent. Only 3 cents out of that dollar goes forremediation, rehabilitation, and special education.

Why does not this pie chart show how much money is spent onrehabilitation research to improve these services? Well, becausethis amount is so small that regardless of how small a sliver of thatpie we would draw, it would distort and exaggerate the relativeproportion of that amount. For every $100 spent on disability, only1 cent is spent for research on remediation and rehabilitation, or a1,000-to-1 ratio.'

A chronological point of view helps to clearly demonstrate thispoint. If you would please go to the next page, charts 2, 3, and 4show dollars spent. over time for SSDI and SSI disability payments;that is the top chart. Funding for NIH is in the middle chart, and,for NIHR, chart 4.

Now, I must point out that the scale shifts from billions of dol-lars in the top chart to hundreds of millions of dollars in the

51

middle, and finally to millions of dollars in the bottom chart. So,each unit in the top chart is equal to a hundred units in chart 2,the middle one, and a thousand units in the bottom chart.

Note the trend over time; the real growththat is, in inflation-corrected termsin SSI and SSDI has been considerable. For NIH,the growth has kept pace with inflation, with room to spare. In thecase of NIHR, the funding in 1982, in real terms, is two-thirds lessthan it was in 1969.

In the case of the West Virginia Research and Training Center,in the last 3 years we have seen a real decline of 30 percent due toboth funding cuts and inflation.

But, of course, a case can be made that in this age of large Feder-al deficits, the huge erosion of rehabilitation research dollars, whileregrettable, is unfortunately necessary. Now, I respectfully submitthat a private business could not operate the way the Federal Gov-ernment keeps its books. Accounting principles in the privatesector make a sharp differentiation between borrowing for capitalimprovement and investment versus borrowing to meet operatingor recurring expenses.

'['he lattet is an invariant sign of financial peril. The former canrepresent a prudent and wise action. The Federal 'budget makes nosuch differentiation. As a result, a dollar is a dollar is a dollar.However, it appears that the Congress has at least implicitly madethis differentiation in the case of NIH, NSF, and other Govern-.ment-supported research and training activities. These, quite prop-erly, are being regarded more in the nature of investments thanoperating or recurring expenses.

I submit that a convincing case can be made, one, to treat NIHRas other research programs. Two, I submit further that a convinc-ing case can be made that the development of methods, procedures,devices and programs that return disabled persons to maximum vo-cational and personal independence makes good economic as wellas humanitarian sense.

Three, such a policy embodies and furthers the national interest,not just some, particular special interest. Also, failure to supportsuch a policy has contributed, in part, to the steady rise of disabil:ity payments, be they cash or in-kind, in the form of foodstamps,subsidized housing, medical benefits, and the like.

To make this case, I will now take off my hat of one interested inrehabilitation research generally, and put on the one of director ofthe West Virginia Research and Training Center.

Our center is cosponsored by West Virginia University, a com-prehensive, mission-oriented land grant university, and the WestVirginia Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, an agency that is ofsimilarly comprehensive scope in its delivery of rehabilitation serv-ices, featuring a residential Multidisability rehabilitation centerwith a resident capacity of 400.

This center, with 12 acres under roof, provides the entiice rangeof rehabilitation servicestherapeutic; occupational; physical;speech; medical treatment, including plvsical medicine as well asall the specialities; vocational evaluation and work adjustment; vo-cational counseling and guidance; and psychotherapeutic services.

In addition, this center conducts vocational training in almost 20areas, plus remedial and special education as necessary. This

52

unique facility, plus its satellite minicenters throughout the State,combined with the community-based field program of WVDVR,constitutes a unique laboratory for our research center.

Despite its location in West Virginia, in its 13-plus years of oper-ation the research, center has emerged as, as Senator Randolph in-dicated earlier, a national one. The map below shows the numberof continental States, shaded, in which the R&T center has con-ducted programs, seminars, workshops and symposia. To this mustbe added Alaska and Hawaii.

Our center's particular mission is the edhancement of the reha-bilitation process, from referral and acceptance on to evaluation,vocational goal selection, and formulation of a plan of services toplacement and followup. Because this process cuts across disabil-ities, the .focus of WVRTC's energies is not disability-specific.

The rest of my written testimony, Mr. Chairman, tries to do es-sentially two things: one, to present specific, concrete examples ofhow research conducted within the R&T center bears in a verypractical way on the effectiveness, efficiency, coverage and impactof the State-Federal program of vocational rehabilitation; two, tosuggest some considerations for reauthorization language.

Thank you.[The prepared statement of Dr. Moriarty follows:]

53

PRY:PASEO ST ATF,M FNT I IN JOSF.Ill II MORIARTY, PH. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF14:11A IIII.ITATIoN RESEARCH AN!) TRAINING CENTERS

Biographical Sketch of Dr. Joseph 8. Moriarty

Joseph B. .'oriarty, Ph.D., is a past President of the Research andTraining Center Association. He has been with the West VirginiaResearch and Training Center since 1967, first as its Research Directorand, since 1969, as its overall Director. He is on the faculty of WestVirginia University holding joint appointments as Professor of ClinicalStudies and Clinical Associate Professor in Behavioral Medicine andPsychiatry. He holds a doctorate in Clinical Psychology and is amember of the National,Registry of Health Care Providers in Psychologyand licensed to practice psychology in the State of West Virginia. Heis a member of the American Psychological Association-Division 12,Clinical Psychology and Division 22, Rehabilitation Psychology. He hasbeen the.recipient of the Louis Ortel lectureship in vocationalevaluation and the !'ary Switzer Fello..iship in disability. He hasauthored articles and texts in the field of rehabilitation with a majoremphasis on met,iodologies for measuring functional capacities ofdisabled persons and application of information systems technology torehaoilitation.

Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of this Sub-Committee. It isa privilege fcr me to appear before you. I come here wearing threehats.

First as Director of the West Virginia Rehaoilitation Research andTraining Center.

Second as a spokesperson for the National Association ofRehabilitation Research and Training Centers, a program authorized andfunded through the Renabilitation Act.

Third as one interested in the broad field of rehabilitationresearch--clinical, medical, engineering, vocational, psychosocial andbiomedical.

A hat that I will not don today is my consumer adv9dacy hat beingthe father of two children--one born with birth defect, another aninsulin-dependent diabetic. I also serve as Presidedt of a localchapter of the Americal Diabetic Association.

The first hat is the one of a person interested in rehabilitationresearch. Let me make no Lones about the fact that I represent 1special interest group--those Americans with physical, mental oremotional impairments that limit or preveht than from working or livingindependently. While a group with special needs and problems, is ittoo bold of me to point out the extent'and impact of this group isconsiderable?

* 13.2 percent of those 18 to 64 have a work diSability accordingto the Census aureau,i.e., more than 10 million citizens

The Chamber, of C9MMerce in 1932 published a report stating thatemployers pay. out 20 billion dollars a year in workerscompensation insurance to cover the costs of work-relateddisability. This twenty billion of course gets incorporated inthe costs of goods and services.

6

* Social Security in 19b1 paid out $21 billion just in disability

benefits under SSI and SM. This amount excludes costs of

administration.

* Economists at Rutgers University estimate the ccsts of

disability at Or. of GNP.

Chart 1 depicts how the disability dollar--public and private

combined--is spent. Only 3 cents out of that dollar goes forremediation--rehabilitation and special education.

Why poesn't the cnart show how lucr' money s spent on

rehabilitation research to improve those services. 3ecause this

rehabilitation amount is so small that regaruless of how small a sliver

cf the pie we would Craw, it .;.ould cistort ana exaggerate the relative

proportion this amount represents.

For every 5100 spent on disability only 1 cent is spent for

research on remediation/renapilitation or a 1000:1 ratio.

A chronological perspective helps cemcnstrate this point more

clearly. Charts 2, 3 and 4 sro.v col:ars spent over time for S17I ancSSI disability payments (Chart :;, funcing for %IN Chart 3) and WIHR

(Chart 4). The scale shifts from billion collar units in Chart 2 to

100 million units in Chart 3, to units of one million dollars in Chart

4. So each unit in Chart 2 is _dual to 133 units Chart : one :COO

units in Chart 4.

0

25

20

55

UnindexedDollars

1969 Indexed Dollars

1969 71 73 75 77 79 81 82Year

Combined SS1 Disability plusSSDI Payments

40

35

30

25

20

15

10 .1982 '71 '75 '77 '82

Y011f

Annual Appropriations for NIH, 1969-82

Urau

%INS 04.10 OeUes

30

20

10

Unindeaod Dollies

/1169 lockovied0o11444 o

1 1 1 1 L1969 '71 '73 '75 '77 '79 '81 '82

Year

Annual Appropriations for NIHA, 1969-82

56

Note the trend uver time. The real growth (i.e., inflation

corrected) in SSI-DI has been considerable.For NIH, the growth has

kept pace with inflation with room to spare. In the case of NIPR the

funding for 1982 in real terms is tiro-thirds less that In 1969!

In the case of the West Virginia RV Center in the last three

years has seen a real decline of 30 percent due to funding cuts and

inflation.

But the case can be made that in this age of large federal

deficits the huge erosion of rehabilitationresearch dollars while

regrettable is necessary. A private business could not operate the way

the federal government keeps its books. Accounting priqciples in the

private sector mace a sharp distinction between borrow far capital

improvement and investment versus borrowing to meet operating or

recurring expenses. The latter is an invariant sign of financial

peril. The former can represent a prudent and wise action. The

federal budget makes no such oistinction. As a result a dollar is a

dollar is a dollar. However, it appears that the Congress has, at

least implicityly, made that distinction with NIH, NSF and other

government supported research regarding these, quite properly, as being

more in the nature of investments and capital expenditures than

operating expenses.

A convincing case can be made: (1) to treat NIHR as other

research programs and institutions; (2) the development of methods,

procedures, devices and programs that return disabled persons to

maximum vocational and personalindependence makes good economic as

well as humanitarian sense; (3) Such a policy embodies and. furthers

the national interest not just some special interest; (4) failure to

support such a policy has contributed in part to the steady rise of

disability payments--be they casn or in-kind in the form of food stamps

subsidized housing, medical benefits and the like.

To make this case Iwill now take off the hat of one interested in

rehabilitation research generally and put on the one of the Director of

the West Virginia Research and Training Center.

West Virginia Research and Training Center

Our Center is co-sponsored by West Virginia University (WM, a

comprehensive, mission oriented land grant university and the West

Virginia Division of Vocatinal Rehabilitation (WVDVR ), an agency that

is of similarly comprehensive in its delivery of rehabilitation

services, featuring a residential multi-disability rehabilitation

center with a capacity of 400. This Center, with 12 acres under roof,

provides the entire range of rehabilitation services: the

therapeutic--occupational, physical, speech--medical treatment

including physical medicine and all the specialties, plus dentistry,

vocational evaluation and work adjustment, vocational counseling and

guidance and psychotherapeutic services.

57

In addition this Center conducts vocational training in almost 20areas plus remedial and special education as necessary. This uniquefacility plus its satellite mini centers throughout the state combinedwith the community-based field program of WVDVR constitute a uniquelaboratory for WVRTC.

Despite its location in West Virginia, in its 13 plus years ofoperation, WVRTC has emerged as a national center. The map below showsthe number of continental states (shaded) in which the R&T Center hasconducted programs, seminars, workshops and symposia. To this must beaaded Alaska and Hawaii.

The Center's mission is enhancement of the rehabilitation process 'remreferral and acceptance on to evaluation, vocational goal sele:tion andformulation of a plan of s,rvices, to placement and follow-up. TiecaLse

this process cuts across disabilities the focus of WVRTC's energies isnot disability specific.

Ultimate Goal: WVRTC's ultimate strategic goal is i'provecrehaoTTifiETEnFhandicappeci persons for employment and inaeoencentliving. The Center seeks to achieve this goal through improving thedecision-making capacity at three levels:

* policy formulation and modification

58

* program design and management to implement

* development enhancement of rehabilitation practices.

Intermediate Goal. The Center seeks to achieve its ultimate goalthrough the intermediate tactical goal of enhancing the servicedelivery :lstems that apply the rehabilitation process to disabled.The rationale here is that is a system even if improved by smallamounts can bring large dividends through the spread of effect. The

primary system we devote ourselves to is the state-federal program ofvocational rehabilitation as authorized under the Rehabilitation Act.A secondary system is Worker's Compensation and a tertiary system isthe Veterans' Administration rehabilitation program. We seek toennance rehabilitation systems through increased:

* effectiveness: near-term vocational effectiveness isrehabilitation of a disabled person into employment; or

getting a job; mid-term effectiveness in keeping a job andlong-term effectiveness in, to the extent feasible, assisting adisabled advance in employment

* efficiency: dollar efficiency is seeing to it thatrehabilitation outcomes occur at a cost that is no higher than

they have to be; timeliness is that efficiency when tnesystems minimize delays in the rehabilitation process

* coverage: is having the systems rehabilitate the largest numoerof persons that resources will allow

* impact: is the reduction in welfare and related income transferassistance that can come about as a result of a disabled persontieing renabilitated.

Inner foal. The immediate operational goal of WVRTC is to

operate a r en that has four prongs:

* rese,,,,:h: conduct of relevant and sound research

* development: creating products--manuals, training packages,television programs etc.--that the user (disabled Gerson,counselor, VR administrator, legislator, rehabilitationeducators) can understand and so apply the research

* dissemination: WVRTC conducts live national, regional, state

and local seminars. In addition, it has recently entered intoarrangements with cabli companies for oroadcasting selectaudiovisual programs of the Center. The Center has alsodeveloped a "narrow-casting" alternative by creating theRehabilitation Services Network, a satellite-baseddissemination effort that will be discussed shortly. Through

these efforts the Center has reached an estimated 250,000persons.

66

59

utilization: The final prong in our operational goal is that ofproviding technical assistance and support to users of ourproducts. We maintain a toll-free number that disabled personsand other users can use for receiving such assistance orinquiring about our products and services. We also doextensive on-site consultation and assistance to rehabilitationagencies. facilities and consumer groups.

The reason for maintaining an aggresive program of research,development, dissemination and utillztion Is two-fold:

* to achieve the ultimate goal of improved renabilitat4on it isnot sufficient to do research. If the lives of disabledpersons are to be benefited research must find its way intopractice.

* contrary to the popular saying, simply inventing a bettermousetrap is no guarantee that the world will beat a path toyour aoor. Rather an integrated program is needed.

There follows a brief overview of selected WVRTC initiatives in theabove-referenced areas of policy analysis, program development, anoimprovement of rehabilitation practice.

Policy Analysis

1. National Data Base on Disability.

WVRTC has developed a Computer Application Group (CAD). Thisgroup seeks to exploit the potJncial of the computer as adecision-aiding device. One such example is the developmentof national data base. The core of this data base is recordsof the 12 million clients which constitutes the entirepopulation of those served in the state-federal program from1971 to 1982. To protect privacy and confidentiality allidentifying characteristics have been stripped from the files.This mammouth data base coupled with substantial analyticalcomputer power (hardware and software) available to WVRTC,plus the knowledge of our interdisciplinary staff combine toprovide a resource that is, as far as we know, the only one ofits kind in the country. In addition to demographicdescriptors (age, Sex, disability, education, marital status,source of Support), the data contain a description of the typeand cost of services provided, the length of the various stepsin the process for each client, whether the outcome ofrehabilitation was successful, the earnings and jobclassification of successful rehabilitants, welfare. andrelated assistance was reduced is also recorded as well as bywhat amount. WVRTC has conaucted numerous analyses with thesedata for other R&T centers, public agencies and researchers.We have developeo profiles of successful and unsuccessfulrehabilitants, analyzed the nature of labor marketparticipation of VR clients overall and can do so by

6 I

60

disability, ago, ,,ex and by any of these over time, We can

spot regional and state patterns and, thank; to supplementarydata bases provided by the Department of Labor and Bureau ofthe Census, can assess the influence of factors likeunemployment on effectiveness and efficiency of rehabilitationprograms, plus pinpoint external factors that limit theability of VR programs to achieve the coverage and impact

achieved above. Due to funding cutbacks, we have had tocurtail our data service to outside users and are in theprocess of developing a user fee arrangement to handle whatprivieusly was Center supported activity.

Z. Disincentives.

The above referenced data base gave us some clues that theeffectiveness of rehabilitation programs was being constrainedby Social Security and other cash or cash-equivalent programs.The nub of the problem is that unanployed disabled may receivebenefits that terminate when the individual returns to workeven though his/her earnings are far below the market

equivalent of wnat they had been receiving. We decided to

follow-up our hypothesis with a longitudinal study over timestarting 4ith 300 clients referred to VR and then followingthem up to examine whether they were successfullyrehabilitated. We admitted clients as they came to VR buttook pains to get representation from large urban, small town

and rural rehabilitation settings.

\Nike others, we found that those who hadurieqployment-contingent benefits did less well in

rehaNitation. What we discovered beyond this was that the

number of benefits figured prominently.

Chart 5 summarizes these findings.

ori We.P...M.O.M M 3.0111.11v1

C. CSowes

a .3 we

The chart indicates that as the number of benefits a client

receives at referral increases, the likihood of competitiveemployment decreases and becomes zero when the number of

61

benefits exceeds two. (Food stamps would count as onebenefit, as would suosidized housing or cash assistance.)These findings suggest a need to integrate disability policyinto a coherent whole so that one set of policies does notundermine another. The findings also indicate how theeffectiveness of rehabilitation programs can be constrained bystructural features of other programs with which it mustinteract. Caution should be exercised in interreting thesefindings as evidence for slashing benefits. Behind our chartsand numbers there is a quiet but no less serious AmericanTragedy. Occasionally it flashes before is in dramatic formas the cisaalec wcman in California who upon securingemployment comittea suicide when her Social Security tenefitswere terminateu.She left behind an audio cassette of her lastmoments that was aired on CBS 60 Minutes. Or, the case weuncovered of a man who deliberately his badlylacerated leg turn gangrenous so that it would De amputated.This way his sick wife and children would be guaranteed thehealth care and subsistance he could not provide.

3. Benefit/Cost (B/C) Analysis.

WVRTC has developed and distributed a method wnerebyrehabilitation managers can apply this technique to componentsof their program. Heretofore, 6/C analysis was an exoticprocedure reserved for economists. What the Center did wastranslate this into rehabilitation terms. With the assistanceof West Virginia University's Economics Department the Centerdeveloped a computationally straight-forward procedure forprogram use. A computerized version developed by the Centerallows B/C to be applied to program components e.g. comparingthe relative B/C performance of service pattern A to that ofB. In tnis procedure rehabilitation has an additional decisionanalystic tool that is objective, quantitative: one thatassists in assessing reasonableness of costs, aids in goalsetting, planning and related resource allocation oecisions.This way enhanced efficiency can be realized.

4. RADAR--Resources Allocation Decision Applied toRehabilitation.

This is a computer based decision support system developed bythe Center's Computer Application Group. It has applicabilityto state VR agencies as well as to workshops and facilities.It takes routinely collected information and arranges'it sothat factors that contribute to effective and efficientprogram performance can be detected. The system producesgraphic output to make interpretation easier.

5. IRI (Institute on Rehafo'litation Issues).

Each year the RV r,r,nr. conducts an institute devoted to anissue which the reh:,:i 'tation service community nas

62

identified as requiring development. A study group consistingof experts in the topic is assembled. This group spends ayear research and developing the topic, the result being abook length publication. Selected titles in the IRI seriesinclude:

Measurement of Outcomes

Rehabilitation of Persons with Mental Illness

Program Evaluation: A Beginning Statement

functional Assessment of Persons with Disabilities

Computer Assisted Rehabilitation Service Delivery

The IRI concept is based on a timely response to expressedinformational needs.

'rogram Development

1. RSN (Rehabilitation Services Net..lork)

Within the Center a telecommunication application group hasbeen formed. The access symool pictured here has becomealmost synonomous with barrier removal and rehabilitation.

In this, the Information Age, making sure disabled persons andthose who serve them have access to information in a timelycost-effective manner may to as important as access tobuildings. Ignorance may te,the biggest barrier of all. With

this in mind, the Center's telecommunication application groupformed' a television satellite network, RSN. RSN has

successfully ended its first experimental phase consisting oftwo television programs that was sent simultaneously to 14sites (1st program) and 35 sites (2nd program). The map Belowshows the states that participated in the first and secondprograms.

63

The first two programs, geared to rehabilitationpractitioners, demonstrated that training via satellite isboth technologically and economincally feasible. The abilityto call in questions live to the instructor from around thecountry was particularly appreciated. The technologicalchanges in the next three years will make it possible fordirect satellite reception in homes, hospitals, andrehabilitation facilities. This will open up significantopportunities for delivery of services to homeboundparticularly in rural areas (e.g. training, disability, selfmanagement). In anticipation of such changes, WV- 7C and theAmerican Hospital Association have begun discussions towarddelivering rehabilitation training to physicians, nurses andother hospital affiliatea professionals -itio typically nowlittle about rehabilitation concepts and techniques.

2 Employer Development ?rogram.

A perennial problem in the state-federal VR program has been a

gap between rehabilitation system and the world of work. GAOas well as internal audits have consistently revealed suchfindings as: job goals being set for disabled persons in jobsthat are obsolete; job stereotyping (e.g. deaf make goodprinters); placement of disabled persons in secondary labormarket jobs marked by salaries at or close toothe minimum wageand limited opportunity for promotion.

In order to enhance VR system effectiveness in this regard,WVRTC has developed the Employer Development Program. Thisrepresents a comprehensive approach whereby the agencydevelops the employer or intermediate client so that theultimate client, the disabled client, can adequately beserved. This program, with videotape and print manuals,trains VR staff in how to become consultants to in developingrelationships with employers. In developing this relationshipthe VR agency extends its coverage to employees who are or whoare at high risk of becoming disabled. The goal of this"preventive rehabilitation" approach is to enhance VRefficiency by closing the barn door before the horse getsloose. VR offers technical assistance in disabilitymanagement, job accommodation and/or reengineering fordisabled workers, re-entry assistance for the returninginjured worker. An additional component in this program inconsultation centering on more effective management of theindustrially injured worker, timely initiation ofrehabilitation with that worker so as to prevent work"de-conditioning" from setting. As more and more agenciesinitiate the Center's employer development system it isexpected to have a positive effect on reducing or at leastcutting down the growth rate of what has become the S20billion per year tab that employers must pay for worker'scompensation insurance. The payoff of Employer DevelopmentProgram for VR is better understanding of labor market needs.

64

Map Depicting States Participating in RehabilitationServices Network - Shaded States Indicate Participation

65

This proves the .vay to more effective vocational counselingand job goal selection, and enhancing VR's ability to providework-ready rehabilitants to industry. As ,a result of havingrelationship with reciprocal benefit to VR and employer, thelatter is more inclined to give favorable consideration to VRrequests for on tre job training and placement for VR clients.The relationship with employers also enhances theeffectiveness of 'JR in placing the disabled person, seeing toit that s(he) stays employed and, where feasible, pursuesupward mobility on the job:

3. job Club.

As the employer cevelopment focuses on employer so to doesthe job club meth000logy. The Job Club, is a structureaprogram aesignea to ennance skills of client in job seekingana tinning, interviewing and "marketing" themselves. s a

group centered retro°, the Club concept creates a socialnetv.ork that provices the source of most job leans fornon-6isabled and cisabled alike. The WVRTC version 3f jobClub -etnoaology r. as been found to increase placementssignl'icantly rove that which otherwise would prevail,

Rancolph-Sheppara ?rooram.

Establisned in 193E the blind vending stand program nasincesed to provioe a quarter of a billion dollars in yearlynccT...a to blind venaing stand programs. Under a supplemental

WVRTC is ceveloping a series of educational mocules foreach Jf the state representatives who have responsibility forthis program. These modules are designed to strengthen skillsof these key persons in consulting in the management of smallbusiness enterprise :,.:. that they can enhance the revenueproducing potential 3f the program while at the same timemaintaining its renaoilitation cnaracter.

nabilitation ?ractice.

1. Functional Assessrent.

Throughout its history VR has made a distinction betweenmeaical impairment on the one hand and employability on theother. The former influences but does not cetermine thelatter. A host of non-medical factors (e.g., motivation,education, ace) mediate the effect of impairment onemoloauility. Two persons might have identical impairmentsbut totally ai-ferent employability prospects. While this hasbeen conceced conceptually, 'JR has lacked the appropriatemethocology for operationally defining that distinction at thepolicy, program anc practice levels. WVRTC has developed apractitioner - oriented instrument that solve some of thisproblem.

66

2. Preliminary Diagnostic Ouestionnhire (P00).

The POO Is designed for use by the field rehabilitationworker. What the general medical examination is to thepractice of medicine, POO is to the practice of rehabilitation

case work. It provides a structured, objective andquantitative assessment of a VR applicant in nine areas

pivotal to employability. It reliably and validly positions

the disabled on a scale showing how far the person is from

employability. The development of this meth000logy,particularly when combined with benefit/cost analysisreferenced above, can provide more realistic assessment T7VR's efficiency ano effectiveness, afford more appropriatebases for projecting amounts of resources required to achieve

a particular outcome and the like.

Over :CCU counselors from Z4 states have been trained in POO.

One states initial experience indicates that:

* an average of S50 has been saved per case in unnecessarydiagnostic costs

* timeliness of services have been enhanced with POOproviding more rapid movement to development of client

inclividualipea plans

* a "new pride of professionalism" on the part of

renatilitation counselors has been experienced as a result

of being trainee in POO use

* agencies are anticipating an increse in programeffectiveness cue to a reduction in inappropriate service

plans.

From an analysis of 1000 clients wno have been interviewee

Nith the P00, ART7, through application of the statistical

procedure of factor analysis, has identified three major

non-mecical factors that appear to explain much cf whyindividuals with the same disaoility may have differentemployaoility prosoects.

3. Computer - Assisted rehabilitation.

The explosion of computer technology has spawned a revolution.

The WVRTC thinks that this revolution will have major

implication or ennancing the efficiency and effectiveness of

VR services. Access to information is a key to bettermanagement of disaoled persons o' their own lives, ofrehabilitation workers as they participate in aiding this self

management. The 'usion of computers and telecommunicationstecnnology will make it possible to rethink the entire notion

of homebound and cottage industries. Training and other

services can to celivered through telecomputing. The WVRTC

7.4

67

has begun tile wal/%1., or VR ystems from the standpoint ofits delivery enhantement potential via this new technology.

Research and Training Center Program Overall

Aat ii-, It?

In 1962, Congress established the Research and TrainingCenter program, which is currently funded under ?04(b)(1) ofthe Rehabilitation Act. Congress mandates that Centersoperate as "distinct organizational and physical entities tobe cperateu in collaboration with instiUtions of highereducation which nave the expertise and dell-developedresources for concucting multidisciplinary research andtraining activities. The Centers also operate in associationwith clinical services considered essential for carrying out acomprehensive program of patient/client care andrehabilitation services."

Now gas it measured up?

,(2,-,carch and Training Center program v.as subjected toan intensive evaluation ender an independent contract betweenRSA and Apt Associates.

7e following is from the final report of this evaluationwhich was completed in 1977.

°e conclude that the RTC program deserves continued ariaelevated support. This conclusion is based on four importantobservations:

The RTC Program has a sound conceptual base. The designfeatures of the program that are especially attractive are:(1) tne attacnments of RTCs to universities; (2) thegeographic -:ecentralization of the RTCs; (3) the synergistric relationship of RTC research, training, and service;and (I) the emphasis on programmatic research.

The 3TC Prccram is exceptionally active. In examiningthe activities cf the RTCs for a single reoorting period(1975-1976) we observed that: (1) there has been 295 researchprojects uncer aay; and (2) there were 569 different trainingevents conducted in wnicn over 46,000 trainees participated.

"Tie 377. Program is an effective resource magnet. Fcr

the 1975-1t,76 reporting period, the RTC Program was able toattract an acditional 75 cents from other sources for every1ollar which 1SA contributed in the form of basic grants toCenters. This constitutes a very enviable return andtestifies to the confAncL or Ulmer funding sources in theProgram. Furthermore, the universities which host therespective Centers contributed almost 175 professional

68

full-time equivalent (FIE) staff. This means that in addition

to financial dividends, RSA received a dividend of

approximately 47 percent over and above its staff investment

of 363 FTEs.

"The RTC Program has supplied many noteworthy innovations

to the field of rehabilitation. These accomplishments are

related to cardiac Care; renal failure; orthopedic medicine;

biomedical engineering; employment placement; program

evaluation; and the psychological and social aspects of

disability."

An 1980 update

In fiscal year 1980 the Centers' program conaucted:

"295 research projects which dealt with removing or

reducing functional limitation, decreasing dependency andpromoting vocational functioning.

i-,25 training programs for 41,106 individuals who are

involved in all phases of the rehabilitation process. These

programs included: (1) Univiersity courses ofinternship/residency programs geared toward increasing the

supply of skill rehabilitation professionals. These courses

stimulate the development of rehabilitation related courses

within the university, attracting new students to the field.

(2) Short term inservice/continuing education training

designed to disseminate research, build skills of

rehaoilitationists and respond to an identified need.

1 have addended to my testimony a brief description of

selected projects to provide a flavor of the kind of research

that goes on in R&T Centers. Each Center is not represented

oue to the constraints of time that were involved in preparing

the testimony.

RTC distinguishing properties

While these individual research projects in the amendum

are impressive, they do not tell the unique story of what R&T

Centers are about. The argument can be made that these

projects could nave been conaucted as discrete projects

independent of MAT Centers. As the Abt evaluation noted,

there are aistinguisnied features to the R&T Centers' program:

Syneraistic relationshio of R&T Centers' research,

education and service: Thus service neeas provide the problem

Or researcn LU ctuul "A

fed back to improve services through training and education.

ti9

r',t.ii it.ii n,ii ,.00ViltInt: the '',l Centers have :en,fact, partnersnips between .iniversuties, the cunsumercc"runitY, and federal government-it national and regionalkro.;, To indersc,re its institutional character, Congres,-.'stipulates that R&T Centers ue distinct organizationalident,t),!s, tnereLy guarding against fonds not beingdissipateu. As evidence of the institutional committmentconsider the ALt findings that 47 percent of the manpowerassigned to ?&T Centers come from host university support.

Prlrimmatio charictr,stirs n' V,T renters: R&T rynt,,rsare :ist!r;Aisred .3y there intes,rit;v,, rap:Tna(51t;)

roraoi!itaton. Eacn Center is rraw.!ated by Corgressspan '.he above-flentioned four-fold steps Of: knowledgodeveooment translation of technology, dissemination ofknowle,!';e, and tocroology application.

9ost government supoorten proj,!ct research stops at tr

first.or second steps and that is Illy trere is so muchcriticism of research not 'ettinc, into use. The RC. Centermhael :.nice Congress has 7,undated is ...;eginning to be studied

'XVorY, inOlee(ce as an example ofsuccesstal Atilization. I unerstand a recent study completecit tre ,n!vprsity of South Florida (unafciliated with the 7)E,Tnetwor< ,hind that rehabilitation eoucators reported thenumber :ne ',uarce of new information for course revision and

development to be the material that comes 'arm R&TCenters. I know the same would be true if you polled staterehatilitation agencies.

The programmatic character of R&T Center research is alsoevident 'n tne long term, sequential nature in which broadproblem areas are addressed over years. This broad bardapproach contrasts with the narrow band, time limited natureproject researcn.

It is not my intention to say That programmatic researchis :ood and project researcn bad. They represent twodifferent tools to approach research needs. In fact, most R&TCenters are engaged in project research. What I want toempnasize nere is that Congress has mandated R&T Centers to beprogrammatic efforts, responsible not just for knowledge, butfor use if same, not just for researching a slice of theproblem. but for dealing with broad problem areas requiringmany ...iscrete studies.

,;&T :enters as. a network: The R&T Centers have evolvedinto a regionally distributed network with balance betweenmedical, vocational, psycho-social and other special Centers,each representing important aspects of the renabili tationenterprise. Inter-Center collatoratior is evident in numerousprglects tnAs avoiding needless duplication.

70

Capacity bul'ano: Fran the inception, Congress has naueclear that d sTFTTicant component of R&T Centers' mission wasbuilding regional dna national rehabilitation capacity inservice delivery Ina research. Though progress has been made,

a great deal runains to be done to develop a national caure of

practitioners and researchers knowledgeable in rehabilitation

and disability. Again, a clear distinction is seen betweenCongressional mandate for programmatic research versus project

research which presumes rather than develops capacity.CONCERNS ABOUT R &T CENTER PROGRAM

ilF,T Center prcgrn has been subject to sweeping .rangesin the feaeral role from the standpoint of accountability.

The R&T Center Association has nothing but all outendorsement for effective management from the federal side.

Also, 1endorses completely the notion that the MT 'center

must be totally accountable for every cent of taxpayer Funds

to which Centers are entrusted. The Association is clear that

assurances must to built into the management of the program sothat both the substance and the appearance of responsibleaccountable stewardship of public funds be scrupulously

maintained.

The point needs to be emphasized, however, that the 'orm

management and accountability takes must consider both what is

being managed, and the goals of the management process. As ins

architecture, form should follow function.

(1) Automatic termination of all Centers: All Centersmust terminate within 60 months of initial award regardless of

how productive they are and regardless of their impact on the

field. The Association feels that continuation or terminationshould be based not on the elapse of time but on performance.

First of all, as taxpayers we feel that Centers .:ften cyanan 'should be terminated much earlier than 60 months flen

reasonable progress has not been demonstrated. Also, as

taxpayers we think such an approach is wasteful when the loneyinvested in an institution in equipment, personnel ancinstructional resources is shut down simply because somearbitrary date has been reached.

As researchers we can expect a 60 month deadline :hien we

are dealing :Mtn project research. The focus of proiec:

research is narrow and the goal is typically to develop or

adapt new knowledge or technology, but Congress has mancateaR&T Centers to do programmatic research and to become agentsof change when the research is completed.

The Association again feels that such an ambitious

mandate does not Fit into 60 month planning horizons.

71

1 cili .0.4,t to that in our oval Center ....hereright now we aro rt 1119 fur trchnical assistance onresearch that was Cone ;even years ago. A h0 month Limhorizon mayao sufficient if the goal is to do prOjectresearch. It is likely to be inadequate if the goal irclueosdevelel,ont, ei.,somination and utilization initiativesnecessary 13 Lridge the gap between research and adoption ofresearch into practice.

It is not realistic to eXpect that a Center carve outmajor areas 4 programatic research, conduct complex seriesof inio2stlgations arouno thes. core areas, develop tiefindings into practical applications, educate appropriategroups as to the use of the results and provide technicalassistance to the users-and do it all in 60 months. Theuncritical ipplication of this 60 month termination cycle willde facto change the nature of the program from Congressionalmandate. The arogran will migrate toward project research,toward research that is more narrow in scope, away from thebroad programmatic areas of investigation and away from beingavnts of change and capacity builders.

C2, ree procurement model: The federal approach to R&TCenters nave shifted to cne of procurement with bidding beinga central component of the process. In this way of doingbusiness, the fie'eral government is viewed as a purchaser asit is a purchaser of, say, pencils. It publishes wnat itsrequirements are and then lets the marketplace come up withthe "best" bid.

(3) Cost consequences: Shifting the R&T Center's role tothat cf project and its relationship to federal government tothat of vendor will greatly decrease the amount of fundsavailable for actual program performance. There will be ashifting toward overhead and indirect costs. In the past amaximum of 15 percent nas been allowed for indirect costs. Wehave taken a -'asare of satisfac tion that very little of theresearch and training dollar goes for other than directeffort. EDGAR rules that will now be applied, that amountcould increase to E0 percent or even higher. In the contextof a procurer-vendor relationship indirect cost cnarges inthat order of magnitude are understandable. What we submit,however is that in the context of the Congressional definitionof what the role and the relationship ought to be, suchindirect costs are unnecessarily high. We are informed thatallowing for these higher fees are required to to in

compliance with Cl.18 regulations. If this is so, the Researchand Training Center Association recommends that statutorylanguage be introduced to fix the indirect cost rate at 15percent. This way the taxpayer will know that all but amodest amount of the research and training funds will godirectly to the purpose intended.

Legislative Proposals

72

The RtAf Center A.sociation recommends the following:

(1) Renewal of N1HR authorization at 40, 50, and 60million dollar levels.

(2) Language that would specifically authorizecomprehensive multi-disability R&T Centers not just those witha disabilitiy-specific focus.

(3) Provision that would not automatically force thetermination of R&T Center grant after a fixed time period suchas 60 months. The option of contimation of a Center pendingcomprehensive peer review and on site visitation should beexpressly permitted.

(4) A cap on this amount of indirect costs oninstitutional sponsor of an MT Center can charge. A return

to a 15 percent figure is suggested.

(5) Language in the R&T Center reauthorization shouldexpressly authorize training of rehabilitation personnel as alegitimate activity for R&T Center including faculty supportfor credit bearing and in-service educational support.

(6) The program of research training should be emphasizedin addition to the fellowship program. Specific amountsshould be se.; aside for this purpose.

(7) Specific authorization should be created to extendand enhance the conduct of a program in spinal cord injury(SCI) including projects, Research and Training Centers, modelSCI Service Systems Research and Evaluation.

73

I A Al 1.1.1J411 OE 14111A 10:11 PROJE(711i

Tures UNIVERSITY RICatARClI AND TRANINH CENTER

IS OW leading 18(1811 a death and permanent physical disability for chilMen in Ilie United States The New England Medical Center has recently entilialinti, a pant venture with the [(Miami's Foundation of New England to form the

New England HegIl iii Pediritiic hislitute. %%then it opellil inPIM I, it will be the first of its kind Vim pt meet iliVolveH the development o1 n rum,puler tacos( trauma regally that tisaews c(.11,11tebP,e rehu,iWuluut issues,III well as firma medical suigical ones in mile! to develop better iiwintaierei of theopi Moan and most snit etfective techniques of managing the severely trammilizedchild Im liar, with the aid of this data base we will lie able to identify the mostcolt ellective and optimum levels of medical and rehabilitative set vices to not onlypie,ent disability and its consequences, but minimize the cost and long term impactof 11111111in Iii children

The payoffs from the study are expected to be; t II Methods to prevent impairmentleading to disability; 121 reduce the cost of trauma in children; and (3) improve likeli-hood of vocational/social adjut.tmeld in adulthod.

NEW YORK UNIVERSITY RESEARCH AND THANINO (ENTER

Rehabilitation indicators consist of asseminent instruments designed to describethe functional conlielptcliecti of physical and mental impairment both in terms ofpatterns of daily lives at home, at work and ill the community and in terms of theskills needed to achieve client goals Such functional information is intended to en-tail'. c accountability Ifor example, what impact does rehabilitation have on the(herd), case nionitgenient, iesearch and Progiain planning An example relevant topiegrani planning- lehabilitation indicators data obtained from out patient bean-legics m(11,111141 sliirlIjug 105(.1s of inactivity find isolation; this evidence was listed

by teseattlicin nl New V", k University to develop an experimental proglimi to nibdis:i those priddoina Rehm, indicators presently are being demonstrated in :In set-tings to In states.

The payoff for this research Ur 11) Better diagnosis of functional 14114104)11;12) lesswaste in improper services; and (3) better annlyaiti of cost/effectiveness of services.

UNIVERSITY or miNNrsoTA RESEARCH AND THANINU CENTER

The Research 1111(1 Training ('enter, 1('1' -2, at the University of N1innesola, hasconducted a longitudinal study on patients who have had spinal cord injuries. Thestudy shows that renal failure need not be a significant problem of health nor causeal death it once was. When this study was initiated in 1964, medical literature cowtamed assertations that life expectancy after spinal cord injury was only :1 years. fil90 percent of the cases death would be due to urinary tract infections lending to

'allure. This study on ;tilt) spinal cord injury patients, many of whom havebeen lollowed 16 years. has shown that available good care preserves renal function-ing within the normal range of that period of time and that the days in the hospitalbecallae of urinary infection or decubiti Ibed sores) decreased from 19 days in thefirst years to 6 days after the 5th year. Appropriate rehabilitation and managmentmakes it isissible fur these patients to anticipate that lust time from usual activitiesbecause of illness rich year will be nut much grouter than the general population.Moreover, sit V now consider lre expectancy of these pialivntil will nisi be lip-plov !mat (Ay that or Ihr general populat ion

I he 1.1 0111 this tesoarch is' 111 Major elviligc is lilt. expei Ito personswill' void injuries, (21 It -Vs now off the job for those returning to %%mit; and COchange in the way vve ROM. about persona with cord injury nut as close to death butas individuals likely to enjoy a full life that should be planned for

UNIVERSITY OE litiSroN ar,sCAllett AND TRAININU VENTER

And b114',01 inereatred the numbers of psvelliatiirally persons returning home I listio kally. families have felt d by

2 1 'l-s I I

74

prolinuotinin, tiowevet, in it out tines tlar faintly la ginning lecognition an a INNOtive ,}1. the 'IVY'', tclY Iaeliirelly III Ilan Ill 1111111111(1101 with piiitessionid Iliactires, families have Mimed tad( help gawps A "I'anillyy l'io))ect" la ilenigimil lu 'vain

Whitt !Irv(' lit di alt( to 11111110VP 11111111y Ills 'I hill thin knowledge willbe itnoteininitted omit iliteresteil professionals Ity Immoving bundles, pmfessional alliiincs, treatment it improved urthermore,, such on ideal his coo cm.clive ;since (mullion ;emote no payment for training attain to become littler handyciomitkera

payolf lAsui dejsmilciice tin outside' bitten tiiiK supirottetli help inthe inanagenimit ol u pni Matta dombled Ill110 till till` job lor(taste who iniller uvula Ilu,lutbnnlr Moir employed, and C,11 less disi option to familyhie

Unit' tilt Pi ii "i'.AIf171 ANIi 11641P1 111r11

In the list 11)61, ho the Hy-a-m."1 mid Training Center lit IIIC University oil %Yettimalii established a field !also metropolitan riarionioilv Ir, Intelltioditt.pioldmila of seriously families fat whom the .1141,i ing kWh talk11.)1 ineulnl Phildlit hill And ul her IhsnhdUV C1111111111,1iS ul I !Old tiCt'ClopliiClit Altten.41% epaliiiii,doitiv v ey rihoweil that it imlior mimic of P11,1111111 conk' be

taigetial to families she the mental ti was %.11,111 skill, Inv i'11,,11 minlith wire nut Ism, irlarded. hut declined in intellectual pvilormanee withincreasing ago It was found )but the cause of this decline was the family micru tinvuonment, which if mitigated far as depressing effects, prevented mental retardsIlan Each family was 111Voit'Cti ill tt program of comprehensive rehabilitation, which

tot titiolial mitt( talon NOM' 11111llagellltill training and a lologr01 ofiulanl cognitive stimulation This led lu increased earnings and more ;stable employ-ment for the motheis, while causing significant positive changen in the way theyvoted fur their family The children are now performing at nottmil intellectunllevels in IOC.' been placed trl Npecial programs tit less than half the rateof a much issue, iietforming peer control group These results have shown (etherthat the anistitian must be based tin targeting certain problem

found to t 1,10 i 14 an elaborated community serreningiii 1l dui' to III tIVollclitl 'Tills pi hits slICurss

Willi tut Id !NNW ,in,' 1/1111.1 01.1114,0 grOliV" 'Ind as well its dt'llionsIntlodthe e.dolitishial cooiduiltion through linkages of communityitc.i n ruin socloi S.

NO' OWES! RN UNIVERS!' V IIVSEARCH AND TRAINING CEN

I cifetOiNiastfl of the reclining wheelchair- -The adaptation of the wheelchairto re,lim was introdured to allow severely disabled individuals la rest and relievepleasure on tba skull, improving chAll Sitting/working (Mei [ince and preventingAin pi,,sure Meets The reclitil tin vi,1 the electric wheelchair, which is sell con-h d led, $2.000 to. }2.5011, oft. !Hwy it benpfith id the recliner justifies rntit,matched pair sample of re( liner lilies and nousers was Cluililiffed several yearsfollowing rehabilitation discharge t'4 ei quadriplegics using the recliner had signifi-cantly fewer _pressure ulcers and fewer hospital days than Ilolltlisent The expectedpayback penis] for the reelin,?r is about eighteen months. The recliner units are costeffective

Anticipated payifT: Iteduced hospital costs over the life the cord injured; 12)iedmd tune off the job for those who lure employed, and impr"ved health of theperson

LINIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN hi-V(11,T RESEARCH AND TtlAININ I cEN' Sit

project tVCIIHOlotty and learning CI1r.t, O. 4rill to de-liwtholi for eilliancisi proliel loll of %motional capie-ity This meth 'ail,

olop.iiial to current in mitt c 'I he Inihlioulal assessment method overevt.ii.ro, d allhe liem's abilities arid IS percent of the 1 limits had an inaile-imite vocatiomil den

Henry Coloittitiately the )taming cula,e amity:as is vets time eialsoming and 'hoe,not (Alen adopted nor well understood by pactitionets Currently field testing isbeing conducted of a low-cost microprocessor with a complete program to train rehbit (union personnel in the learning curve analysis, plus hardware for direct record-ing of client, performance and a software package that not only performs the learn-ing corv sealyies, but also provides for different modes of feedback to the client Inaddition, the counselor mid the cliptit revolve printcnits of perform-ince trends forcounseling and Career guidance 1,1111140.111.

75

The poYolf exIK:,Ir 1 is I I1 Moro upliropi nits vocational and career planning withdisabled, decreuae witatu iii time mid money on training fur (nuppropriute wca.lingual goals; and 13) better success rate in returning disabled to work.

UNIYRUaITY or ilintANEAll RESEARCII AND TRAINING CENTER

perwmul rchir tumult skills (PAS).program by Arkansas Rehabilitation Po:-Sea rch uric! Training Gmter has had significant personal and international impact.Thu research usaistancu documental its effectiveness in helping rehabilitation clientaldiscover what they really want to du with the rest of their lives and then gat starteddoing it. The Arkansas Center's practice of training the trainers, who then trainfellow practitioners to conduct the program, has benefited over 7,00 hanclie..;4411clients. In addition, it iv offered at numuroua universities, colleges std cource.iters in thie and other countries. The program has been reproduced h brain e endcassette tape format for blind end visually impaired persons.

The payoff from the pleject hi: (I) Improved timelines in beginning a rehabilttion plan; (2) better diugnoeis of client's needs; and (3) reduced coat and delay inachieving rehabilitat,un.

UNIVERSITY or cotortetio RiatILARCU AND TRAINING CENTER

One of th 3 commonly used drugs in heart disease, proprunolol, blocks activityportion of the sympathetic nervous system. Investitgators at the Research and Trionbig Center in Cardiuc Rehabilitation at the University of Colorado, studied theeffect of the drug on the response to exercise Cunditionlng, a basic activity In cardiacrehabilitation programs The study showed that modurut&y high doses of proprenolel markedly attereiate the aortic conditioning response. The significance of thestudy is two fold On a basic level, it i.,ppeure that one must have an intact sympa.thetic nervous system in order to obtain conditioning response. Secondly, the er .,..-ticul importatice of this finding is that munY persons enrolls '1 in cardiac rohubil,LI-tion ',migraine who mu taking the drug, may not be obtuitting the desired and ex-pected benefits of exercise, Therefore, substantial money may be spent unneceesarily in rehabilitation ograine in individuals who are on prepranoloi.

Thu ,payoff is (1) Identifies a barrier to cardiac rehabilitation that is potentiallyremovable; (2) pinpoints possible waste in using preeious rehabilitation dollars; 4,

(3) can hasten return to work fur patients whose lack of progress is pharmacologic.l.ly reduced.

TEXAS Tb.Cii Unit/Ear:TIC AND TRAINING CENTER

Developing work tolerance in the severely retarded in two sheltered workehopeThe perg.exie of this research was to find coat elf': -live ways of improving generalwork skills of severely retarded adults sufficiently to be able to be enrolled in a rug.ular sheltered work program. Thu research worked with groups of severely retard2dadult clients who had been dropped from sheltered work programs because theycould not concentrate un work tasks for more then fi minutes, required exe%esive 1on 1 supervision and disrupted with work of other clients. By tieing such modifica.t ion to the wor1i envirunmunl as signal lights, awl/dive devices which were gradual.ly moved us training progressed, and a realistic reinforcement eyetein tied directlyto the desired general work habits, uninterrupted time spent on the jai) was in-cveueed from o niinotes to :in minuted. This was uccompunied by a 301)91,111 (.1 lictivity. Working with grouts of clients proved to be a feasible method of train.mg work habits, and much more coat effective than 1 on 1 programiiihvg.

Payoff (I) Decreased drop -out rate front rehabilitation program; (2) decreased costin providing rehabilitation; and (31 substantial improvement in the productivity ofseverely retarded.

uNIVxBHITY Dr PENNSYLVANIA kilisEARcit AND TRAINiNU CENTER

The Rehabilitation Research and Training Center in Agin at the Ilaiversity ofPennsylvania lath us its broad research orientation the interaction of medical andpsycho-social processes in increasing the likelihood of independent living among theimpaired geriatric population. A focus of RT -27 is the activation and efficient use ofthe family as u primary rehabilitation inechunient. This will contr)bute to the ri_sluc-lien of inappropriate titilizetion by the impaired elderly of hospitals, rehabilitationcenters, and longterm cure Institutions.

The expected payoff is. it r Reduce the likelihood of admissions for primarily aricialruttier than medic:ill reasons, 12) facilitate the relialtditirtion process; and (3)

76

tain the rehabilitation goals achieved so. as to Improve the quality of life of the Mei'paired kited and their families.

111101031 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY RERRARCH AND TRAINING CgrITRR

At olo ileortiu Washington Univernity Medical Rehabilitation Reeeurch and Truitt.Ing Ce., it RT-9, the research project entitled "Job Development and EnhancedProductibiiy fur Severely Disabled Persona" demonstrated the feasibility of compre.-wilily, employment for most persons with severe disabilities receiving public linen-

-al support. The financial benefite to the client and to thenation's economy wererally sIgnalcant. The average starting Bala fur 79 clients placed in jobs was

it3,566 annually. The placement coat averaged 1,827 per client. Many of these re-search clients were formerly considered unemp oyable and for the fine time manyof them began to contribute to the nation.* economy through payment of state andfederal lase.. As a result of these findings a research project entitled "Comprellen-s1Ve Job Placement for State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies" was Initiated. Themodels are now being Implemented in five states.

The payoff is: (I) reduced public assistance cat: (2) Increaae in productivity andtaxes paid by disabled persona; (3) a cost-effective return on money spent in rehabili-tation.

UNIVERSITY OW ALABAMA aiessacts AND TRAINING CZNTSR

A new drug, etidrunate disodium, was studied to determine !'e effectiveness inpreventing the Millet fo-:.:mtion and post-operative recurrence of abnormal bone inpatients with spinal curd injury and other severe neurological conditions. In wellcontrolled studies, etidronate disudium was proven to be effective in preventing theformation of the abnormal bone. This Research and Training Center study provideda major portion of the data presented in FDA (Food and Drug Administrution) hear-Inge which revolted in the drug being upproved for use to prevent and treut Atterteal bone formation. Etidronute disodium remains as the only theruutic agentavuiluble to prevent this serious medical complication of neurologic injury and die -

ease.Anticipated payoff: (1) decreuse in functional limitations resulting from abnormal

bone formation; (2) prevention of a post- rehabilitation decline in adjustment due toabnormal bone growth; (3) decreed: coat of poet-rehabilitation adjustment of retie.bilitante.

UNIVERSITY or ORLOON RISEARCH AND TRAINING CINTYR

A major outcome of the deinetittaiunelization movement in the field of mental re-tardation has been the placement of severely and profoundly retarded adults incommunity residential settings. In order for these placements ultimately to be oucciawful, it is necessary that residents learn and perform regulurly a minimal reprotoire of self-care and domestic skills. Very little Instructional assistance is presentlyavailuble to service providers who want to teach such skills to severely and pro-roundly retarded udui.e. Accurdingly the Reeearc.% and Training Center ut the (ha-m-bay of Oregon is presently implementing such a project.

The eximx:ted payoff is: (I) better diagnostic means of evaluating these skills inseverely and profoundly retarded adults; (2) more efficient procedures for remedial-lag the deficits that are identified during assessment, and 131 the availability of highquality assestoment curriculum materials for wide spread dissemination and utiliza-tion.

The project will be finished in August, 1982.

CAXI.OR UNIVILIttiiTT Ii16.4RARCH AND TRAINING CENTER

The Herrington procedure is a surgical method for correcting scoliosis (curvatureof the spine) that was developed ut the Baylor Research and Training Center by [)r.Paul H Herrington. Systematic fellow-up studies of more than 2,500 operated pe-bents have documented the efficiency in stopping this otherwise progressive deferitii-ty, providing a sustained improvement and spine alignment, increasing ptitient'sworking capacity by improving their cardiopulmonary function, and reducing treat-ment cotes by shortening their duration of hospitalization. This surgical method hasbeen extended to the treatment of spinal fractures with coi;:.,:derable success.

The payoff here is: (1) impuuvcq vocational out'..ek for those affected by seeliesis;12) reduced health ca.: costs through reduced eespitaliziation and attendant expenises; ond 13) ie smile cases pre Will ion of disability fn in occurring at ell.

84

Sch,111)r WI, 0 10 I( you very 11111C11, Moriarty.Fender,,n, on c,r Prof(-, or Nloriari might want to com-

ment on the record it mone,s investe,nt in the senseof the ;ictivitis of the National Institute of Ilandicapped Research.

The out authorizes the Institute in the sense of dissemination ofintormatIon acquired through research funded by the Institute.The National Institute of Handicapped Research no.y enter intogrants and contracts with States and public and private agencies tocarry out research programs.

In your te,tiniony, 111. enderson, you indicated some of thematters that are being worked On by the Institute. In ProfessorMoiarty's statement, he indicates the very valid distinction be-tween investment insofar as capital improvements are concernedand that which is just required for operating expenses.

I would say that in the case of NIIIR, we are talking about aninvestment. In 1980, the alit 110riZat W1:; .;.,;"") million; it was $90million in fiscal year 1981, and there has been $35 million author-ized for the last 2 fiscal years, with an actual appropriation of $28million in fiscal year 1982 and $30 million in fiscal year 1983.

Now, that is quite a decrease from the $7; and $90 million au-,oized. It is about level insofar as the appropriations are con-

cecned Rut I want to know whether you feel that those levels areadequate in terms of the mission that has been given to NIFIR.

f). MoRimry, If' I could refer back to my chart, Mr. Chairman,just to 'maintain, if: real terms, what our level was in 1969 wouldrequire-it is somewhat of a coincidence--$90 million, which wasthe authorization level at-one time.

Senator WEICK ER. That would be to maintain---Dr. MomARY. The level of effort where we were in 1969.Senator WEickt:n. 1969.

NloitimcrY. That is no real increase; that is just maintainingin real terms. I can tell you what the profound et eect of the extra

million-some-odd was in this fiscal year, I guess.As small as that amount is, it has a profound effect. You are

talking about Another 10 percent as far as the National Institute ofhandicapped Re c,:rch is concerned. It has a profound effect on thewhole business ,etting people interested in this area within theacademic community.

I cannot put into words what a profound effect. relatively trivialamounts of money have on this program

Senator WFacKEn. Would you. care to comment, Mr. Fenderson?Dr. FENDER5ON. Specifically, we were able to salvage nine estab-

lished rehabilitation research' groups that would have gone out ofbusiness entirely had it not been for the additional $3.8 million inour appropriat ion.

Dr. MORIARTY. And sonic of these have been around for 0 yearsand have an enviable track record.

Senator WEIC K ER. So, what is your recommemlation as we put to-gether the appropriations for fiscal year 19.+'.'

Dr. Mokinicry, I would like to suggest ;hilt. at the very least, au-thorization levels in 1984 of $0 and, in the 2 subsequent years, of$:",0 and ..fif) million be considered. Even at that, we would be two-thirds of \\liene we were in 19(19,

7S

tiettaitot Watt kilt I Ililt l lilt' point III11 I would like to Make,which is a pooh I are well ilW;Ile el, is 1.11:11, in tile!-'eareas of research, c.veu though t lie bottom-line budgets might lookimproved in the sense Or the cutbacks, there isc going to be a terriJib pricy to be paid in the out t'eat's ter 111-

VetillnellIS now.In vour area of science, investments made now do not really

show anything until '2, or I years from now.MeitIARTY.

Senate(' WKICKI.:1{. And if you have !II(' invest Merit, nei-ther is that going to show in human terms until :'.. or .1 yearsout. At that juncture, those that did no' receive the help thatwould have been available are elealy behind and unable to catch

Dr. MeRIAUTY. EXil(.1y.Dr. FEN1q:USON. In fact, Mr. Chairman, one of the reasons for re-

serving the small amount of $;i00,o00 to support, we hope, 1(1 reha-bilitation research fellows is that we need seed corn for the nextgeneration of leadership in rehabilitation research. It is a smallthing, but it is an importa nt. way that we can help to stimulate theintercs' of %ey highly qualified rehabilitation eacach people whoare on the 'Nay up..

Dr. MouimcrY. I would also like t,, empi,asize that we really donot have a ,:zalre of lined researchers of any size in this field, I

suspect. in part ber,e,.-- Dimes like ba:;ic science and NII-I kinds ofthings tend to he mare excitiog. The rind of work that we get in=volved in tends to he bloat. ine, and tackling r'asic kindE.,, ofpractical sorts of research..

I do not think there are 2Tin to scientists in the I!nited States\vim really have any solid grounding in rehabilitation research; Ido riot think that there is even that many. I ;nean, 'hey just ceallyare not out there.

Senator Eft. I have no further questions.Senator Hatch. who is the chairman of Our committee.Senator II,\Teit. No questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.Senator WEick it. (:cait lemen, I thank you crry, very much; I ap-

preciate it.Dr.,1\101{1AI{TY. It was my pleasure. Thank .V1r. Chairman.Senator Wi.ackydn. Maybe this lovely la'iv uar here who has been

standing on tier feet and doing yeoman s service would like to sitdown for a minute. We will take a break or a few nUnutes.

[Whereupon; a brief recess was taken.]Senator WEickFat..I tint fitting to beg the indulgence of' our next

panel, including the commissioner of our Depatmer, .f- Educationin Connecticut. We have the chairman with us; I know he has an-othe appointment to go to and I would like to accommodate him,and I might add. willingly so for all the help that he has given meon this subcommittee over time years.

Senator Hatch has been a great friend of the disabled and thehandicapped of this Nation. The next panel will relate to the clientassistance program and includes Neva Rae Cruz, Mr. EthanEllis, and Mr. Hank Blandford. Now, I know Senator Hatch has afew words to say.

1 l A t i 1 1 W r i t I \ I t i l d likr to i l l ti t take a lew minutes .adclmo man i,I this sulicoimnittee I do not

of ,,noose who serves in the U.S. Senate or anyvhere in this cct who has a deeper commitment. or Feeling for the hUndiCapili

Senttor Weicker, and he has certainly been a tremendous in-and has really been my closest friend in this area,

it d I feel deepl committed as well.It is also (irk )1t`gf. h) welcornt and introduce Ms. Neva Cruz

Front Illy 110t,40 .itzite of (hall. Ms. Cruz firings at keen insight.,Lowell, into It "lient assistance in-ograms which are funded underthe Rehabilitation Act because of her position as the project direc-tor at the Utah Department of Rehabilitation. So, I am verypleased, Neva, that you could be with us here today.

: \t this time, I would like to extend my appreciation' one step fur-the and thank Neva for her efforts as a member of my advisory.conunittee on the handicapped, hecause she also has had a tremen-dous influence on me as well as the other members of that commit-te. This committee has been extremely productive and has helpedOs over the last number of years to bring some of the effectuatedchanges that have occurred and some of the helps that have oc-curred from )11r COMInittee to t he handicapped.

I might that Ms. Cruz plays an active and crucial part as amember r,t that advisory committee, and I would like to welcomeher here to our committee today.

Neva, I am due in the litalget Committee to question Mr. PaulVolcker, so I am going to have to leave. lint I will read your re-marks. and you could not have a more friendly friend than LowellWeicker, the chairman of this subcommittee. I just want you toknow that we are really happy to have you here. Thank you.

'The prepared statement of Senator Hatch follows:I

PREPARED STATEMENT oc SENATOR HATCH

Senator IIATett. It is my privilege to welcome and introduce Ms.Neva. Cru/.. from Inv home State of Utah. Ms. Cruz brings a keeninsight 'he clint assistance programs which are funded underthe Reh ration Act bicause of her position as project director atthe Utal. iiepartment of Rehabilitation. I am pleased she could joinus today. At this time I would lik, :u extend my appreciation onestep further and thank her for her efforts as a member of my advi-sory committee on the handicapped. This committee has been- ex-tremely productive. and Ms. Cruz plays ,kr. active and crucial part.as a member. I welcome Ms. Cruz and look f,,ward to hearing hertestimony as well as the others testifying today.

l tun pleased to participate in this hearing as a Member of Con-gress who is keenly interested in reauthorization of the Rehabilita-tion Act. A Federal categorical program since 1920, this act reha-bilitated approximately 225,900 handicapped individuals duringfiscal year under the basic State grant program.

The department of rehabilitation has computed that $10,90 hasbeen returned for every dollar invested by the Federal Governmentfor rehabilitation of our disabled employees. This represents an ad-ditional million which might otherwise have been lost to oureconomy last year.

SII

Not only ha the vocational rehahilitiition program benefited dis-abled people by incre;edtir the lifetime earnings by approximately

viich but it also has allowed them the opportunity tobecome taxpaying citizens and has decreased their need for otherforms of public :ISSitil Wil.' and institutional care by approximately$Gs 9 million.

In its fiscal year 191 report to 'Congress, the RehabilitationServices Administration said that in the first year after case clo-sure, people rehabilitated in fiscal year 1980 are expected to pay toFederal, State, and local goverments an estimated $211.5 millionmore in income, payroll, and sales taxes than they would have paidhad they not been rehabilitated. That is a healthy return on ourinvestment that can't be found from any other savings or moneymarket fund.

Although this program has an impressive track record, 7.7 per-cent fewer people were rehabilitated under the basic State grantpr( ,.tin in 19S2 than in 1973, It is the sixth decline in the last 7years and the fewest number rehabilitated in the past 12 years.

Unfortunately, this tr( gal will probably continue. In addition tothe State grant portion, other vocational rehabilitation programiorapunents also have their share of problems and imperfections.I lowever, by conducting hearings such as the one being held heretoday, we can examine vocational rehabilitation's current strengthsand weaknesses to determine what factors have contributed to theprogram's success. Because of its impressive track record, I urgemy colleagues to work diligently to reauthorize an improved ver-sion of the current Rehabilitation Act at sufficient funding levelsto assure high quality programs.

It is through the efforts of witnesses bere today, including onefrom my home State, and hundreds of other experts throughout theNation that we continue to improve the quality of life for over;i6,000,000 handicapped citizens. Benefiting our disabled constituen-cy not only assists them, but also provides an investment in Amer-ica that dollars cannot measure.

Senator WtAKtat. 11 I have any problems with you, then I go toNeva'?

Senator HATCH. You go to Neva and 1` : ;.traighten meout, Laughter.]

That is the problem. You cannot really tight because he hasso many hooks into me, you know. Well, I. it.:o; I Neil; we appre-ciate all you do.

Ms. CRUZ. Notice that we do have Senate!. hatch using a canethese days, too. [Laughter.]

Senator Wt.:lei-mt. Fine.Mr. ELLis. Neva, why do you not go ahead'?

sTATEmENT OF' NEVA RAE CRUZ. PROJECT DIRECTOR, CLIENTASSISTANCE PROJECTS, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH; DANK PI AND-FORD, DIVISION OF PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY STATE OFKENTU('KY: ,1N1) ETIIAN ELLIS, DEPUTY DIRECTG'',AVJERSEY DEPARTMENT OF' PUBLIC ADVOCACYMs. CRUZ. Thank you, Senator Hatch, and thank you, .7 .nator

Weicker.

About III vii Ago when congressional hearings for the Rehabili-tation Act were held, Om Mit ion's hiltnliciiPPd citizens Wereliegtmong ceilition movement to make themselves heard as a po-litical force. Recent technology had opened I he doors for the severely to participate in our communities mid the Nation. Wewere no longer willing to stay at home and let someone else decidewhit a, be Con us. The Rehahilitation Act of 1973 res,,)nded toHu, handicapped consumer movement in many linpOtailland oi crf ihpst, Was the provision for client assistance .projects, orCAP's, ns we call them.

CAP', were established to provide an informational resource forill vocational rehabilitation, or VR, clients and client applicants,particularly the severely disabled, and to advise them of all availa-hie benefits through the Rehabilitation Act. They were to commu-nicate to clients in clear terms regarding how the VR program op-erates and to assist anyone who had difficulties in Obtaining hebenefits of the program.

A substantial part of the ('Al' work is providing infOrmation andreferral services to handicapped people. In Utah, we try to handlethese calls when they conic in even though they may not be strictlyrelated to the N,'It prograir. It can he very frustrating to an individ-ual who calls number aft number without getting any help. So,we try to prevent further referrals if there is any way that we canprovide the necessziry information.

('AP's were established to 1-ovide ombudsmen to resolve commu-nication problems between clients and rehabilitation personnel,and to resolve them at the lowest possible level My experiencewith the ('Al program has shown that most of the problems are amatter of communication failure between client and counselor andcan he quite easily resolved by opening those lines of communica-tion.

The cases (I() not really seem to be really big matters that comebefore the CAP on it regular basis, but to the client or applicantwho finds himself in a situation where he feels that his needs atenot being met ancl he does not know how he can get. them mv . iItali he quite tin important process.

VIZ clients. particularly the severely disabled, lace enough 11 isration in getting out and becoming productive citizens that the vfl

process should help to smooth the way rather than putting up Lnbiac.'10:-; for theni.

SIO10,1111u-s, counselors have taken an excessive amount of timeto get the ca.,e accepted, or they have not been prompt in their fol-loup with clients. I believe that just having a CAP in the Stateencourages counselors to be more effective and efficient in theirwork. The counselor-CAP relationship is such that counselors dobetter work iii order to prevent the need for CAP intervention be-cause of any hti kin' on the Far,: of the counselor.

Some problems are more serious in terms of the client's satisfac-tion and t he co-t of the VR program. These are situations where aclient r feel that his counselor is pushing him into a vocationalgoal which he has no interest. In these cases the CAP worker,who is outside of the VR administrative system, can provide an im-partia l. third-paty review of the situation. This can be valuable tohot h clients and counselors. Helping clients receive appropriate vo-

8')

ctittowd t ruining not only increases client satisfaction, but it. saves!none,/ that would have been spent on inappropriate training andequipment and reduces the chances that clients will return to VUfor retraining.

('Alt's also inform clients of the administrative appeals processand assist them through the process on request. Another functionof ('Alt's is to print client handbooks and brochures that inform cli-ents about the VR process, about CAI' services, client rights andresponsibilities, and the appeals process.

The Utah (.AP sponsored a seriesaf town meetings in the sum-mers of 19K0 and 19 I that took the VR administrative staffthroughout the State, providing information on the VR and CAPservices and opportunities for citizens to provide input into thesystem. These meetings resulted in changes to the State VR pro-gram, in response to the citizen input.

I feel that Congress acted wisely when they included client as-sistance projects as part of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and thatit is very important that these projects be continued with adequat-funding in the 1983 Rehabilitation Act.

VR has more than a 60-year record as a proven cost-effective pro-grim. It ha-, provided and will continue to provide better service tohandicapped citizens who are aware of .:heir rights and are activeparticipants in their VR programs; Issuring that clients aretrained for appropriate, satisfying work within their capacity willbring an even greater return fur the VR cloth' .

Thank v,! hwr providing me this opportunity.(The prepared statement of Ms. Cruz follows:(

83

,T., It t 4N, ri I lo. II iI'll icp...I

Neva Rae CrucIlk'

ci o" o 11 .t. o .1 ,,Ae. 1 I 11,o; ! the Ited..11,1 II tat itrti At

, H,.' I, 11. H ,c; It .0 t 111:i ;kit 1,11 were Ill tilt' deginnings

1 1 - r 1 if, 1,..1r01.1 1 ,116,. t hvm,,Ivo vat Ii ,s a political force,

1 tde doors so that f billy the severely disabled

r, t . tai i 111 1;, 1 ,11:1,ni t Its and the tilt on We were no longer

at.d et,. di,. id, what was best for us. The

R.:habil:tailor, Act 4 Ii I rencendid to this handicapped consumer movoment

Isanv iiIpertaat Otle 11' 1i10,1C will the prov Is t on. for Client Assistance

c, AC

'roil..' an Informational resource for all vocational

1 1 0 , 1 r A : 1 1 I . 1 it it and client applicants, particularly the severely

disabled, and to advinc them et all available benefits through the Rehabilitation

A. t. were to .o.mmunl, A. tO Cli eta,: in clear terms regarding how the VR pro-

cs and ro i. i,t ,n,,n, who had di f ficulties in obtaining the benefits

of tit g I' am.

ln:r'ru,lti,ti loll referral tvoo calls Are a substantial part of the CAP work.

`tanv people have heard :Thew: It and cal: abeet the eligibility criteria and the

N 4 the VR of f 1, e in their area. Cl lents , counselors and staff "rout

et I er As.'., Ion PAP as An int ermationali,scurce on Section 504 and our

state civil rights law for the handicapped. Sinco most CAPs have working rela-

ti...:nsni-,s with other agencies and organiLtions ser%ing the handicapped, we

;f

.11 r 1, 'Ii.' I' ahoot Social Services, Social Security or other, agencies

And A th.m .0,A; wo . In to get through the red tape. Even calls that

ar. n4 AirIAt le ;elated to VR Are handled whenever possible by the Utah CAP.

I I lo 1 .1 1, I i 11.g, .'t t it I

t t..,11.iit 1,, 'wt, try to 114,111r t Ect 1: it

t At _et o : J. . 11 .1t ,1 lir., lot wecti tliit,

4,1,1 tat Iii 1,r9onm..I ant) I Ow% dr Li ;4,, levv:

11,1t- ,rviei)r levv1. 1.e y,, A, 0,,Ampl, ,f a Ley. a A

.irr ii A, Into tip 11ti.e aft or t .1 Ikini; with ii Vit ci,woit,lor. ',he

t ' t , e ; i t I'd I. t ci ) , fit , 1 1 1 ! wit cit t o h, ii .11;ti

tiia iii. .r iii it :1111W. to I L'Ilo 11 I t h t he

exp 'dined that t he hd.1 tuclirni her app ii I,,,, ,t to till.

:. 1 II al ...na.tIt,int. bt!t Ore a< t1 tUg the ,,rte fir lho c,a1CelUr

.It )04 1,11 'ors too,: that to he .1e..i,;,ted Litore

1", ii:Ider,ti .,1

1 1 I . , 1 t ) app I I de.: cd rip Iii To,1 t) 7`1".1.2P., until Who t't?

ru ii ' t..4 15 40, IC whit Wit .1,1

'14 it .1r cr 11,, ,e ti.dt

k :11,,:,i ; to Ie skirt" he 11.1!, 1-1,7"-MU7 tilc t: ,1.7011,te iv with

it

r , ' I

S5

t !,11. I I do, t I .', 'tell

ail i .1 I

I:t t

It ( t.1 r t t I t

t...liAllt i

e , c es s I v t Amow, I . I I ( M t t 0 F,et..

AI their : 11.v -up with el Lents,

, Al't in the state st, \odrage, eorgvielor, to be more

mst of t I test I, thel r w,d t. , II. , Insitidr -CAP relat. t ,hip is such

dveot (Le need tot ('Al Intervention

pdit tIe dot'

pr dr, of the client's future job sails-t dot b n t:..1 :h, VS pr.,,Irdr. One hlndicdpped woman was rehabilitated

- to

t,,,wir,; cconselor t.nr,isted that she 51,1 training

ed1 evdri d ene-batIded typewriter. She `t -td no ,_trirc, to

r ssed her typewriter; hat at that t Utah

t .;te.: wbe -111,1 'relp her with her problem. The could

tc, her od; tt ler's stgrer:tdor bet ,hc was unaware of that. Then, tee,

r. teddy who feel Ilsit the are

,'Late l c,tl .,-t1 ,:nn call CAP. l;e hive

81;

..1 11 . 1 1 1 I 1 . 1 1 1 , 1 1 ' 1 , 1 1 : , 1 1,, ,1 I 1 .1 1 111 1 etittt flit totK1,-

114 4. 1 14. .t. :1110 V11 t .o t tttitt ,til

iii AP u t ,1,0 .611 :!1.1,.11t 1,1 11,11'd 1 if t', I ....Pl.,. Ite1It , :.t', to receive

H 1111/11 11,111, 'Ill( :,11 :A 111 Je ,ptott 11 11,1pi rPiir trali.Ircg and

e,ot tn . t ,e bao, hit o N 11 1101'11 1, 1,1.11f11 1.11 VII fur

it ratul,g.

,siuu '1' os 'id,. 1st toy, It tnt 0 ot the aboduIt, t rat lye

e . I 10 .. I 1 (!lr, ti,;1, the 1,1:: I ,Vvi .2.f the pet at

!h. r t ;,11, .t :lout s have tbo hf 11,1 11,11 1. H,,w thu f 0111101/1'r /I, Islirns

with thtV are net sat tst hut, an orderly sync ors hr apve.il I he. the

.1, 1..1,1 hot oen est ,th 11,411,1,

ti iii, ii wt.!! m Inv ut her stato, has pt toted a client handbook that

:Iv f ot In .1 n,soner and ittforess .1 tents of their

t t and e sift 1 1 t I t o . . atld It /en, we have printed brochures telling ah:t1t.

CAP, VR pro tttratn 'vi,? o !tent t lght s and re T.),,,IJA II ties, or VP administrator

his 'fit,' t ted ,t1I VR oonselors to 'tee th it evetvoto receives a copy of the client

haodhot k ant; :AP the f trot i,rit t o tic' of f lee or at the time of

apt. t Ion. st-ne Indlv11u,11 t ten 1203.11,111:at 1on Program also llsts the CAP

telep't tut:-1erh , if 011,,nt9 are .1ware, of CAP at the beg1nntIg of the VP process,

thew t , 1 -.1 1 'Ho ,i111:-,.; CAI' when thew feel that a problem is present

Ioro est,th1 /shed pr.". . ror rosolvtng problems.

there Is a C./ P Advisory Iloard. This

hea'rd r ',,sr,, and f,--,or clients rto,- stnt log several regions of

the tt tie, ti, desf, tw,ert, tns, and 111sp e. At quarterly meetings

tot 't-N ,n of t In',, the rehabi 1 i tat ion

4

t

Si

PI 'I' .4 1 I , I i ,t 11 H0,11110 h01,1

I ..,, .11 .t11.1 .al I

I Igl I Ir rItrrl, Inn VI+, ....cit. es .1v kMille

I I,i I. III ui.l I 1,,p0t1, 1 , There

. . , i h e t r . WI I I r. It ,d In v... h area and

,,, it .1.0 it o talk wl I h Vii thu ill t rat Ion

c.1 .1 m t, h 1,1.1 I, .twat roes,. the VR

ogh ss.t Iott thr .nch sch line lnvlt.rt. Icti and

t ,et. 111 1

holl.: Clint An., I ,r.in.a. :t part

of Rel. Cni li t ..1 I, and Lint I hal thine pts.lert s

are 11:1....1 with h ade.Inat undIng In t he l9R Rhab I I it ar ion Act. Vocat tonal

Itch II It at h rs than .1 6(1 ;,..u' reccra as :1 proven il -of fact ive prO-

Rut VE p,.1 ant! Witt ,:orrt In,r to provide bet ter service to our

n it I ,rp's t.,utill .,1 , t t the:e (11 izens are .1wIre of their rights

and a:e act Eve p .1, I. I pant s r rOvibilltati,m programs, Clients who

are trathed I or rpprcpr iat , s,tt Hying work within their rapacity will bring

rrl into great er etrn the rehabi I I tat Ion dui

Senator WEICKER. Thank you very, very much. Let me remind allof the remaining witnesses that statements in their entirety will beincluded in the record. I suggest that in order that all might be

4 heard, it might be wise to synopsize some of these statements.Please proceed, Mr. Blandford.Mr. BLANDFoRn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and membership.

Perhaps in the interest of synopsis, let me say that a client assist-ance program certainly can work well, but I really must make acase for a strong and independent project performing the client as-sistance function. Let me tell yc-ti why.

In my work with the proiection and advocacy system in Ken-tucky, we very often deal la .informal, administrative, and legalremedies for persons with .levelopmental disabilities. Very similarlanguage is involved in the assistance function of a client assist-ance project. We work very frequently with and for, and sometimesacross the table from, the Bureau for Rehabilitation Services ClientAssistance Program.

I want to underttctire that I have verified much of what I will sayabout the progr.ini in my State with the original four staff mem-bersby the way, none of whom still functions within the program.I think there is something significant therein as well.

The Kentucky Client Assistance Office was opened in Februaryof 19SO and has always been a part of the central office of Voca-tional Rehabilitation Services. Its role has always been seen as anombudsman's office to expedite problem solution. A CAP wasplaced within the BRS agency in order to keep the control function

tih

ohowelneol, nl the v1)111,, of former staff member, "channeledilool4;11 the superintendrol':,,,ollice

The role of CAP wits tfik011 out of the prOVHS

101111 1 he /WrInning !'rpject staff were instructed to it IMI') or torole, cheats for help. Presence at supervisory reviews, administ

tviw 14aritigs could only IR., in the words of a pre-,tatt ineinher, "at( a third party, a monitor or a referee."

To nirlhor quote a f.111101' 1)1.(111';-i11)1111 :Mill member:

Th lots agcncy by CAP It cmild1,,r I 11.0 l ii ttii iirticv. Irul hu tt nulntiun CAP only had ro'uni

voker A1tprw.,1,0»,111 Le madp to rodp, people to l'tutoinnutlir Agncip,'Ior dup prucp,is ipprp,pntatinn, II roquired

d u c t l y wptc,,opd . 1 1 I y Client ill supervisory rvvw, uclrninl rrnnce rcvlow

wi Add like to discuss a hit its organizationii evolution withinmy State. CAP initially enjoyed both physical and organizationalseparation from the Bureau fO Rehab Services; it was originallylocated, indeed, in a different office building in our capital city ofFrankfort, Ky It was completely autonomous. although its directordid report directly through the top administrative position, the su-perintendent for Rehab Services.

The first problem occurred when one professional staff personwas hired w,,,,ay by the general agency and was not replaced. In the

second year of operation, a second professional member was lost,again "hind aw,ay" by the major agency. In a cost-cutting move,the ('Al' staff was moved into. the same building,.with the samemailing address and the Saint' phone number as the central agency,and the clerical sum)°, c was lost in July of last year.

At that point in time, the function was broken away from directcontact with the superintendent's office and was reorganized be-neath a division director. Also, at this point we had a change ins derintendent while the CAP itself had lost staff and lost access tothe top office. It also lost participation on the agency policy com-

mittee.1 feel like program function suffered with the loss of this auton-

om,., to include such typical managerial things n.s approvals. Oneresearch function, a form and a client satisfactn evaluation, wasnot approvedan artifact of CAP's position in the new organiza-tion.

The current status is such that carryover funds are only plannedthrough May of 198:1. The CAP exists, in my State only as a part-time function assigned to a long-term BRS employee, who is alsothe fair hearings officer.

I think, illustrative of the diminished role of CAP, is that the ob-Vious conflict of interest, that is, the fair hearings officer providingthe client assistance role, has never occurred since the time she as-sumed both part -time functions.

The evaluative reports filed with Commissioner Conn's officewould show 251 contacts in its initial year, fiscal 1980; 466 in198Iinterestingly, 63 percent required 1 day of service; and infiscal 1952, only 102 contacts. which is less than 25 percent of theperformance in the previous year. Of course, with there being nowa part-time function of another long-term employee, I feel sure that

89

there will be a further diminished evaluation report at the end ofthis year.

In terms of interagency relationships, I do think it is most inter-esting that we have never had a referral from the client assistanceproject that has gone to a fair hearing. Something of the fire wasput out prior to our discovery of the case.

We have attempted to refer some folks to the CAP program inour State. One declined when he realized that the addresses of hiscounselors and their supervisors were the very same as the clientassistance project. That man, by the way, has needs beyond thetypical vocational ones and we still have an active pursuit ofremedy for him in our office.

One woman applicant requested the monitoring assistance ofCAP priOr to her own supervisory review. We directly representedher. The CAP project did not contact her prior to the review andcommented only when we asked them to; the outcome of the meet-ing was to grant a change in counselor. She complained to CAPthat her cooperation from that counselor was no better thanbefore. She was told, "That was the solution; you are stuck withthe newly assigned counselor."

Again, I feel like a case can be made for some separation of theassistance-remedy function. Even on a systems level, we had madean agreement with the project to identify common problems. Thevery first time we did so was quite a landmark situation, however.

Our previously accepted authorization forms from clients were atthis point ruled no longer applicable. We had to go through a 2-page, notarized form. In the interim, strangely, two of the clientsdropped their claims against rehabilitation, and we are currentlyworking on the nonvocational needs of the third.

In summary, I think a client assistance program for vocationalrehabilitation applicants and clients is a very honorable and, infact, necessary venture. It can do a great deal of good, but it mustbe independent. Lack of program autonomy creates problems thatcan restrict client-centered advocacy, and it can limit effective rep-resentation. At that point, remedy falls short of the intent of theVocational Rehabilitation Act and its amendments.

I do firmly believe that persons seeking vocational rehabilitationservices need a comprehensive advocacy system which can be bothclient-centered and independent.

[The prepared statement and additional material of Mr. Bland-ford follow:J

21-97.1 -N$ --7

90

THE 'CLIENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

Prepared by Mr. Hank BlandfordKentucky Protection and Advocacy Division

for Subcommittee on the Handicapped10 B Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

The Protection and Advocacy System in Kentucky serves peoplewith developmental disabilities and is part of the PublicProtection and Regulation Cabinet. We have contact with othermajor advocacy organs in the state, to include the Bureau forRehabilitation Services' Client Assistance Program. (CAP)

In the past two years, I have provided over 450 people withinformation or referral help with their requests. An additional112 people desired assistance beyond information and referraldirection. 35 of those complaints were directly related to theBureau of Rehabilitation Services. Many of these were identifiedby the CAP. The exact number is elusive because,the two agenciesdid not compare referrals in the interest of confidentiality.There are also five full/time, advocacy specialists in my

Division, each with some inter-agency involvement to a varyingdegree.

Although none of the original four CAP staff remains, I have

retained a very close relationship with two of the one/timeOmbudsman and have an amiable professional relationship with theothers. I have discussed and verified this report with formerCAP employees.

CLIENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (CAP)

The Kentucky Client Assistance Office was opened in

February, 1980. It has e]. ways been a part of the VocationalRehabilitation Service Providing Agency. Its role was seen as anOmbudsman's office within the agency to expedite problemsolution.

The CAP was placed within the BRS agency in order to keepthe control function of management, in the words of a formerstaff member, "channeled through the Superintendent's Office."No state regulation or statute governed the project. It wasn'tmentioned in the federally approved BRS State Plan. Its onlygoverning document was its initial grant,

91

Chief functions included research, investigation of gaps inservices, publicity, policy recommendations, and virtuallyanything on behalf of clients. However, the role of the CAP wastaken out of the direct grievance process. Project staff wereinstructed to inform or refer clients for help. Presence atsnporvisory reviews, administrative reviews, and fair hearingscould only be, in the words of the previous CAP staff member, as"a third party; a monitor, a referee." Invitation by the clientwas required although no complainant to my agehcy ever mentionedbeing we informed by Rehabilitation Services. A priorprofessional project staff member further explained:

The BPS Agency wanted to avoid adversarial relationshipby the CAP. It could work not for the client or theagency but for resolution...CAP only had recommendationpower anyway. Attempts would be made to refer peopleto P G A and other agencies for due processrepresentation, if required. CAP never directlyrepresenten any client in the supervisory review,tdministrwLive review, or fair hearing. .

The Kentucky Bureau of Rehabilitation Services Clientc' :;' dandhook informs the client that:

If you decide to have the Administrative Review, youcar: reitiest a client advisor from the Client AssistanceOffice to sit in on the review as a third-partyoir.erver of the proceedings.

ORGANIZATIONAL EVOLUTION

The CAP init'aly enjoyed both physical and organizationseparation from the general BPS Agency. The original grant hadstressed the separation as essential. As both physical andorganizational control increased, the CAP was diminished in itsability co perform its functions.

Located in a different office building, in Frankfort,Kentucky, the CAP originally functioned with autonomy; itsdirector reported directly to the Superintendent forRehabilitation Services, BRS's top administrator. The firstproblem occurred when one professional staff was "hired away" bythe General BPS Agency. There was no replacement. In theProject's second year of operation, a second professional wastransferred to another position within the general agency. In acost-cutting move, the CAP staff of two moved into the samebuilding as the central office staff. In July, 1982, the CAPlost its own.clerical support and was moved on to the same floorat the same address and phone mintier as the central agency.

92

Soon, the function w.is hrelyn away from the Superintendent's .

office and reorganized Dneatil ,t Divinion Director, The

Superintendent had again changed and the CAP had lost staff,access; to the top off ice, and prtneipation on Lhe agency PolicyCornitice.

Program functions suffered with the loan of autonomy.

Former staff report that at least one research. project, a

fecdOack form and letter, rout not approved for' use with project

clients. Client represent/at/nen continued on the limited basiswhich had always been permitted within the Project.

"Carry-over" fund!: are certain only through Nay, 1983. As a

restilL, tft, only vestige of the C41' which remain:; in Kentucky is

e part-time function assigned to a long-term state agency

employee. The same person is the agency assigned Fair Hearings

Officer. Accommodations would have to he made to avoid conflictoi interest if any CAP initiated complaint went to a hearing.

That this has not occurred since the reassignment of October,ltot2, is an indicator of the diminished role of the current. CAP.

IdTER-AtIFJ:CY RELATIODSHIPS

of the representations made by the Protection and AdvocacyDiVif-:ion which have gone to tire Administrative Review or' Fair-

Hearings level since P & A's inception, none has come from

referral by the CAP.

One client contacted us less than one week prior to a

Supervisory Review with a frantic request for representation.She had never been informed of the CAP by her counselo or agency

brochure. A friend had informed her of our agency based on the

agency's representation in educational cases. Her service

problem was resolved following rtpresentation at it Supervisory

Review and subsechient request for an Administrative Review to

formalize the change in her Individualized Work RehabilitationPlan. The adjustment came without the formal administrativenegotiation and 'with no CAP contact.

We attempted to refer several clients to CAP. One declined

contact when he realized that thc; Projecit.'s phone and mailing

address were the same an his counselors' supervisors.

FurthermOre, he needed iv,Ip with educaftional, dental, and

residential services which were beyond the scope of the

Vocational Rehabilitation and, hence, the CAP. ';;e are still at

work in assisting this young gentle/14,71'S pursuit of a

93

satisfactory eempr,h,nsiv, r,mdy. Vocational Rehabilitationoptions are still open.

One woman applicant requested the monitoring assistance ofthe CAP through our agency prior to her Supervisory Review. Wedirectly represented her. The CAP did not contact her prior tothe'review. The CAP representative only commented at the reviewwhen we requested it. BPS granted a change in counselorassignment and set up standards of achievement which she had toobtain prior to sponsorship. bhe had two or three subsequentphone calls from the cAP where she expressed problems with hernew counselor. :III, reports:

I as: told !her was nothing 1 could do, that. I wanstuclf with the n,wly assigned couns,lor.

:;h tAthscqu,otlY moved to a different district jorisdictionand in so,kIng remd through In, Coam;unity Mental. Health/MentalPetardat.en Center senile.- sistm-m under Title XIX MedicalAssistance Coverage. She will reappl for Vocationalk,habilit.ation services this spring.

On th system's level, our Advisory Board met oith policy-,d:1,1m1:-;rLiVO CHICihi'itatiOn -staff over a change in

policy regarding sponsorship for sheltered-workshop services. Thepolicy .,'timed to r:xclude 50MC "lower functioning'' peoplethus, away from the population described as developmenta_lydisabled. No change in policy ft a-- forthcoming, but an enhanced.relationship with the CAP w,if; promised. AL first, IfilS wanted alln'imes and all correspondence pertinent to our complaints with anyrehabilitation problem. This was modified in the interest ofclient confidentiLllitY and respect for clients' direction of thescope of intervention.

The first sot of complaints which was handled under the newcooperative agreement was a landmark. With client permission,the CAP was initially notified of potential disagreements with11115 counselors. We were subsequently notified that our agency'sforerly adequate release forms would no longer be honored. Eachof the three referals to GAP was returned for notarized, two-pdgd -documentation of representation. In the interim,. oneclient (.ocided to back down on his complaint, oho decided Lofocus on residential aspects of her problem and not to proceedwith vocational rehabilitation, and a third claim is stillpending resolution. The CAP had become a virtual "171telliot.nce"network aiding the agency to prepare itself for prohlems.

94

.mAky

A Client, Ass is tar:ce Proglam for Voca Li or al Hehabi i tit ti on

app I i can and c 1 Tents ir, an honorable venture ..a,d greatly neededby posons wrth d i sabi liti eL- . . Lack of p:'ogram autonomy createsprohlow:.; which restrict i ent -con tc:r.d advocacy and 1 ini ts

cIIort rey)resontatior Hem,: dy thus fall: short of the intentof th service prov s i orr, of th Vocat i on, 1 itehabilitaLion AcLand its ammendm, , . ,:rsore.; inn Voci, Lona I RehabilitationServices need a comprehons v, advoc..acy sv:. tom which can be bothclient- cantered and indoprndeiL,

95

ictervtews of 2/11/83 and 2/14/83with foiler Client Assistance Project staff

The original grant specified four major functions of theclient assistance

1. Information aim Referral Services of the office for interestedpeople to call in.

2. Investigation, they hal investigative powers.

3. Recommendation, which mpant recommending to the state agencyhea' any changes in policy or systems.

4. Publicizing client assistance office.

One of the four major functions was publicizing. We did that bymass mail outs. In the beginning we mailed out notification toall counselors and put in the counselor's manual to get the agencystaff notified and then we mailed to every active client a letterexplaining what client assistance was and how they availthemselve:, to the office. That is how we primarily got out. Wemailed also to some forty handicapped organizations, both privateand public, notifying them of our services for people needing suchservices.

Question: When was the origination dare?

Answer: February, 1980.

Question: Tell me something about how you were organized in thoseearly days. (number of people and to whom CAP would report)

Answer: The organization in the beginning was that the directorrfr?ported directly to Mr. Hopkins, the State Agency Bureau Head.His title was Assistant Superintendent of Public Instruction incharge of the agency.

Question: How large was the staff of the original project?

Answer: Four, a project manager and t..ro client advisors and thenwe split the state up into two regions, east and west, and one wasassigned to clients in the eastern part and one to the west andthen we, of course, had the secretary.

Question: All four folks would have come from the originalFederal grant money?

Answer: Yes, all four.

Question: Can you give me in your own words a bit of a history ofhow you went from that organization and that staff size to whatevolved through September of last year?

I 0 j

96

Answer: We tirst had a separate office located in a separatefacility and had four personnel. They came on board, I think, the

last one in April of 1980. We located the office and outfittedit. I believe it was in September of 1980, they had an opening inCentral Office ail(' Mr. Hopkins asked if there was any way that onecould he relieved of duty from client assistance and hold that

position open to see woether CAP could function with three

personnel and get the job done. So one staff accepted a positionwith Re-Hab and CAP was down to three. The position was not

filled at that time because there was a state hiring freeze.Later, CAP moved. to the Towers I think in February of 1981. The

central BRS offices were on a different floor of the Towers

building. CAP was informed that due to reduction in personnel anddue to the program the Governor had in effect that another staffperson should look around for another job because probably as ofthe beginning the fistat year in the fall that there would not he

the option of looking around. The cutbacks also applied to theCAP program a:; well. At the same time CAP was scheduled to bebrought to the first floor with Re-Hab and share secretarial help

and that sort of thing. In July of that year, a re-organization

came about and the client assistance office and function was

placed under a division in Rehabilitation and no longs. was

orunizationally seen as before. Staffing was down and the secondclient advisor had been transferred out of the program. So, thatLeft. a project director and the secretarial help. Reorganizationcame about in July, that placed the client assistance and thewhole function under a division in Rehabilitation. There werr, at

that time, three divisions and client assistance was placed underthe Division of Program Planning or Planning and Program

Development, I think it was, and no longer reported directly tothe agency head nor did it have any voice or the ability to sit inon the.policy committee of Rehabilitation. So, that's kind of theprogress of it and what happened. Later the original director left

in September/82, and the function was further delegated to

existing people in Rehabilitation with the Affirmative Action

Officer. IT had been switched from the division of Program

Planning to the new office that they formed, the Office of Public

Awareness.

Question: I am interested in how the function of the project wasaffected by that re-organization, whether it was able to continuewith its original purposes, as well?

Answer: An attempt, under that reorganization, was Made to

continue to function as best as could be, however, when you take

an Ombudsman function that primarily should he autonomous and youplace it under sot:1 layers of bureaucracy that are agency oriented

and you report through those people, you can see how that mighthave a tendency to take away the effectiveness of the client

assistance program. Now it has been assigned as a part-time

fu:Ictiou. Naturally, it cannot have the impact it did when it had

the staff of four people. When it has its time allotted to partof a person, it strictly limits what you can do. You have to thenreduce what you want to do with it to that of nearly, i would say,

10.4

97

working out the problems on a much lower level for clients thatcall in. Naturally_ it limits youbecause manpower is limited andorganizationally you are subject to being mandated to do differentthings under the Division Program and Planning. Basically theclient assistance function, I don't believe, should be under that.Now you take an agency person' who is doing a great job, but due totime limiting factors .it is very difficult to carry out on thescale originally intended.

Question: You had said that it now is a part-time function. Whatother duties has the person who is now the Client AssistanceProj9ct Coordinator have?

Answer: I understand that the position the function has beenjoined with the individual who does Affirmative Action and is theAffirmative Action officer and I think that the person is the FairHearing Officer delegated by the state agency he-d at fairHearings. Su, you are dealing with similar problems, clientcomplaints and that sort of things but it still limits her veryseverely to what she is able to do. I think they had a back upindividual over there who is a Division Director who stands in asOmbudsman. So the function has been changed out of a strictclient assistance project function as outlined in the originalgrant and split up. The function may still be there but theoriginal purpose is not being met at all.

Question: Was the original director hired from within theRehabilitation Agency to begin the CAP?

Answer: No, from without. He came to work from the Departmentfor Human Resources and was an Assistant Ombudsman for thedepartment before being hired as the Client Assistance ProjectManager.

Question: Wasn't the successor, the previously mentioned FairHearing Officer for the agency, hired from within to take over CAPfunction?

Answer: Yes, the hearing officer has been with Rehabilitation forsome time.

Question: Can that possibly be a better way to perform theintended function of the Client Assistance Project?

Answer: No, I don't think so. The benefit of being with theagency is knowing the basic service program so you don't have tohe oriented or trained in that. You know what services areoffered and what rehabilitation is all about. However, if I werein the position of a hearing officer for the agency and then in aposition as a client advocate, it seems to me there could,arise anoccasion that might be conflict of interest there or at least itwould appear to be so with our clients. The whole objective ofthe Ombudsman function is to have a separate office that would winthe confidence of the people in that they would not be biased

100

98

toward agency and would not be subject to agency influence andpressure. Well anytime you have a position that's under a

Division Director of an agency and reports there, the position isbound to be subject to agency pressures and that is in directopposition to what the function of an Ombudsman or clientassistance project was meant to do. The first staff was verycareful in making sure that they were separate.

Question: Let me elaborate by reading a little hit of thelanguage of the Rehabilitation Act under Section 112, ClientAssistance. It says:

The project would assist such clients or applicants in theirrelationships with projects, programs and Facilitiesproviding services to them under this the Rehabilitation Act.Including assistance in pursuing legal, administrative orother appropriate remedies to insure the protection of therights of such individuals under this Act.

This would tell me that you could have performed to coordinatelegal and administration and other remedies and that it wasintended to be quite centered on the client and their rights. I

wonder if that is consistent with the way the project wasimplemented?

Answer: Tne way the project was implemented there would be aconsistency there. The inconsistency is what Finally developedand by reorganization and placing the project directly underagency influence and that sort of thing. It could be subject topressures. That is not consistent with that.

Question: Did you Eeel like you could client center the remedythat you would advise or-pursue?

Answer: I personally did. I am saying the organizationalstructure that now exists is what makes it subject to where it maynot be totally client centered.

Question: Well, would it be Eair to say that the emphasis was onputting out the fires as opposed to client centering maximum ofenjoyment of rights, Eor example?

Answer: No. To be honest about it, I don't thinks its fair tosay that. Like I say, I'm not bad mouthing the Re-Rab agency.I'm saying that this was their intention. It's just theorganization structure that they re-organized and the way clientassistance went did not lend itself to the autonomy that one oughtto have in that positionin order to carry out the charge.

Question: I wonder some ways in which the organization impeded\you, for example, in your research activity or in providinglidmintstrative legal assistance to clients?

99

Answer: Well, if you're located within an agency that youchallenge on occasions. and you're set up to challenge it, it canbe .a very intimidating factor just by you being there seeingpeople everyday. If you're also not just physically located but if.you're organizationally located in a division of that agency andyou must get Division Director approval, that adds another factorthere that can make it subject to all sorts of influence. SupposeI had a client, for an example, in general agency that had agrievance that was not directly with client services but with apolicy that the program and development people had come up withand had ,gotten approved. Now, here I am as a part of the Divisionof Planning and Program Development and then I am taking the sideof a client and .challenging my Division Director, the authority totell me what to do and what not to do. It creates a badsituation. It's like how free should you be, you tell a clientyou're an advocate under t' e Client AssistancL Progrm and thenyou're challenging a policy that is something within the divisionand you are also under them in an agency, well, it creates a verystrange situation to say the least.

Question: How often would you have represented clients inadministrative review, for example?

Answer: I never represented a client in administrative review.If requested, 1 was an observer at many administrative reviews inorder to assure that the client's rights were observed in thereview procedures. I never administered one. That again would beplacing the agency perhaps in a unfair position. If I wasdeclared to he a client advocate and told a client from the wordgo, help you, I believe you have a good point and then I ttirnout to he the review officer, that's stacking the deck on behalfof the client.

Question: Did you over have to do any type of remedy because yousaw a violation of client's rights in the administrative review?How in yo,_:r role as monitor could you have enforced the client'sright?

Answer: blurt I would do is to confer with the review officer andpoint out where I thought the client's rights were being abused orwere not being observed according to rules and regulations of theRehabilitation Agency. In other words, I had access of all clientcounselors, service manuals and that sort of thing, rules andregulations, So I would research those and point our to thereview officer the violation of the client's rights. IF necessarywhen the rev-ow decision came out if 1 thought. it reflected anagency biased point of view and denied clients certain rights thenI would advise the clients of the appeal procedures to obtain afair hearing It they oh ;co to be at a fair hearing I

would attend the fair hearing.

.1 0

100

Question: Would you represent their side?

Ansi.cr: Again, I wuld be an observer.

Question: Hut you wi,ald not...

Answer: Actively participate in representing their side,before that time ever came up I had represented their side. If I

believe and in my interpretation their rights had been infringedupon or abused I would represent them in informal solutions of theproblems in going to the individual and going. to the cooaaelor andthat sort of thing. I would try to resolve that gricynce at themost informal lowest level possible.

Question: But the Rehabilitation Act mntioned your role couldhave included assistalee in lk,gal, administrative and otherappropriate remedies, I wonder: how you might have assisted in

pursuing legal remedies?

Answer: Legal remedies, I would advise the,1 that's where theinformation and referral services in the grant came in. I wouldrefer them to Pro-.ection and Advocacy to obtain counsel when theirarea covered this particular client and what they werequestioning. I would advise theta to obtain legal counsel, if theythought appropriate, through Legal Aid if they couldn't afford anattorney. I would refer them to agencies, private andfor public.

Question: Does the Rehabilitation Counselor not have some

responsibility to malw their clients aware of those kind of

things.

Answer; Yes, they do explain that and it's in a writtenexplanation of client rights on the original application that: theclient signs.

Question: In a sense then the CAP reiterated that for the clientupon a complaint?

Answer: Reiterated and expanded on that. That was justa

paragraph that was inserted and it also gave the CAP'S state-widetoll-tree number.

Question: Could you have represented a client. in a review

hearing?

Answer: No, the Client Assistance Project was so designed here inKentucky to stay outside of the grievance process. It could enterin but did not replace or did not change any of the grievan.:0

rules under the system. So they still obtained their supervisoryreview, the adminstrative review and the fair hearing. Rut, at,

any point In time the client was advised that they conld call onthe assistance of the Client Assistance Project ta enter in at anypoint. They could wait. until fair hearing time and call upon theClient An:ti.stance person and get Information, advice counseling.

0 ,.)

101

all that sort of thing about where they may obtain legalrepresentation. Yon pot the counselor in a paradox almost whenyou say, "Now counselor you assist somebody who is challengingyou." It is not a Li-table position for a counselor to he in. Itis !or them to expla.0 the rights but for them to collie out andfell the client, "Yes 1 think. I'm unreasonable in denying you thisservice and now I'm going to jump out of that chair and I'll 'getin the chair of Client Advocacy role and now I'm going Lo tell you

!;ti me or get this reversed."

Question! If seems then that that would have been a problemwithin the agency?

Ass':er: Oh yes, for the agency and for a counselor to assume thatrolir. So that's why the whole thought- behind the inception of theCA program was that you obtain a certain ,geyser of separation fromthe agency from the influence of the agency and in protection ofclient rights.

yiestio,,: Your separation seemed to decrease with time?

Answr: That's right. That is very definitely true.

Ira about your investigative function at identifyingaud rese,irch functions? Was there good cooperation from

superiors?

Answer: Again, I'm not going to cite particular exiEvles, butI'll have to say tIit as you're drawn in closer to agencyinfluence, you're going to lose your ability perhaps even yourinitiative to go out and to do that type thing. It's puttingsomeone in a bad position.

Question: Did you have.to get prior approval for those kind ofprojects?

Answer; Yes, you had to get prior approval because you wererequired under regular state regulations and'management,principlesto clear things through your Division Director and when you had toclear everything through your director it caused some problems.It they did not deem it worthwhile then you would have . problemin getting some things done.

Question: Was there any internal evaluation mechanism which youuse to gauge the satisfaction of the clients with your role

in the CAP?

Answer! We kept all the report forms that we ever used. We usedbasicallY one document: and the clients would give their answers asto thei:" of satisfaction of what.CAP had done and theoutcome of They were evaluated apnually by theaimicy's sepa'rate program evaluation unit.

102

Question: Wore you satinfid with the kind of client satisfaction

that was made?

Answer: We were working as the whole nation had been working, on

some standarized forms for getting infomration. This dealt notonly with client satisfaction but also other information. It was

beginning to progress in that format. A better gauge of su,:cess

was part of that.

Question: I would like to know something about the types ofrecording that was done by the Client Assistance Program.

Answer: The annual reports consisted of a report that summarizedstatistically and the evaluation of the whole program including

what was done in prior years. Submitted to Washington, copies toAtlanta usually, I think by November 15 each year on the previousfederal year. Other reports included budget reports which weresubmitted usually in March giving the amount of money needed for

the next year given the projected program, and budget to

accomplish it, and that sort of thing. Those were the mainreports they had internally. The reports were on an as needed

basis to stress gaps in the system and delivery services and

recommendations on how to overcome those. They were submittedoriginally to the agency head and then later to the division head

under whom filing systems were located.

Question: 1 wonder what types of things the program looked at in

its annual reports to measure what it was doing to measure itssuccess?

Answer: Annual reports generally consisted of goals that you had

set up previously in the grant that you hoped to accomplish anddealt with if you did or did not accomplish those. Like I say,

numerically they wanted to know the clientele served and then

broke it down into type of services zendereo whether it was

information referral or dealt more or less with counseling andthat sort of thing, how many administrative reviews that youmight estimate that you avoided or how many clients were served

and listed as satisfied, that kind of thing.

Question: So, the number of administrative reviews avoided wasconsidered?

Answer: Well, you were allowed a narrative to explain that typeof thing. They didn't list that as one of the categories that

they wanted you to put in there, but you could in your own wordstell the benefits and they also wanted to know such things as therelationship that you had with the agency. They wanted to know ifthe rapport was good or if there were any barriers there that you

were running into.

Question: Can you tell me something about a typical report,

perhaps the one for the last fiscal year or any one thatparticularly illustrates the program's successes?

1

103

Answer: Well, this all from memory, but the report for the year1981 indicated that we had served, a little over 400 clientsand /or applicants and a little over 200 or half dealt with-counselor/client disagreements, generally over services. In fact,1 think 90% of it was services that we're talking about. Out ofthose that were resolved only 16 of those clients were still notsatisfied and went on to request a review. This shows a prettyhigh percent of the ability of client assistance at that time toresolve them. Not always in the client's best interest but toresolve. A lot of times they let's say in some instances theservices that they wanted could not be provided, I forgot how manyof those were in there, but they were still satisfactory to theclient because they were quoted chapter and verse the rule andregulation and they understood that they could not he providedsome of the services that they sought. So even though the clientdidn't receive the service from the agency they still weresatisfied. They got an explanation that they didn't get fromcounseling. In that report, I am not sure about what werecompletely satisfied, how much percentage, but it seemed like itwas a pretty high percentage that were satisfied completely withClient Assistance Services.

Question: How would youmeasure that?

Answer: Ask them.

Question: And they would say yes or no?

Answer: Yes, some instances we had a Written form, an intake formand it was a client case actually all the way through from thetime that they called and you took down the basic information andthen before you; closed out. This Client Assistance Form had onthe back whether the results that they had asked for wereachieved, partially achieved, fully achieved or to what degreeachieved. So, they wished people to take that and get somestatistics off that.

Question: When you would quote chapter and verse and present theagency explanation for why something could not be clone, did youalso inform the client each time that if they still wished tochallenge that position that there would be some area of dueprdcess available?

Answer: Yes, you would always say it was a standard procedure nomatter what the outcome to still explain the appeal rights andthat was a standard thing that you told all clients before youeven achieved an outcome of anything that they had appeal rightsand you would explain those. The grievance process was anautomatic thing. That was one of the mandates of the office, youmight say, that regardless of what had happened, you explainedwhat they could do.

Question: What would your rule he in an Administrative Review ifsomeone decided to have one?

104

Answer: An observe' l 11 Insure I. hat the process is proper, that

the client obtain all of the appeal rights that he should have

under that procedure. Sometimes It became a third person who

would make suggestions, almost an arbitrator, about maybe what theagency could do and get the agency's viewpoint on it, but it was

never an active-role in Administrative Review. It was more or

less just an observer.

Question: And so did you handle 16 of those that last fiscal

year?

Answer: No, I was only requested to go to 2 or 3 or those at the

client's request. A high percentage of the others had their ownattorney or representative to accompany them. J I am assuming thatthey had already prepared a pretty good defense on these rules and

regulations.

Ouestion: Did you have any power to resolve complaints at the

Administrative Review level?

Answer: No, I was a part of the agency which the client could

call at any point. It did not interfere with any of the grievanceprocedures sot up. At any point I could come in and resolve in .aninformal manner at any level, but I was not a part of any of the..

reviews or the hearings.

Question: Do you i.hink the Client Assistance Program is a good

project?

Answer: Yes, I do, in many ways and from many viewpoints. In

human services, first of all, it's common knowledge that the

Ombudsman function is to help resolve problems that are not

resolved in the usual routine manner or for those '.7ople who for

one reason or another cannot get a satisfactory resoLtion or feellike that they have got their rights. It's a very good thing from,

the client's standpoint. It prevents a let of dropouts that youwould have if you did not have such a remedy or possible remedy.

DM the agency's standpoint, it's definitely good. Let's take it

om a cost type thing. In that year I quoted, we had

dproximately 200 counselor/client disagreements and potentially

every one of them could he taken to Adminstitrative Review or even

a Fair Hearing. but by the use of the Client Assistance Office,in getting it resolved and the satisfaction of the client and the

agency in many cases, it more than paid for itself. On the

benefit to the agency of making recommendations for changes in the

future, it clearly can be seen here that you can improve servicesthat are beneficial to both the agency and to the client.

Question: How separate .or autonomous an entity should the Client

Assitance Project be to function effectively?

Answer: To function at maximum effectiveness, the Client

Asslstance Officer ought to be'autonomous, period. The reason

being naturally that if you're under pressure from anyone or

105

anything eAcept being, a p.d client advocate, there is unduepletisure that opens itsell up fo undue duress; iL 1Jionid heAutonomous, The Hmletd,mati lunction, over since it's heel] in

tence, aceording t l e d e r , ' , mate and even 1 1 ) 1 . 1 ] governsteutshould he autonomous from the general bureaucratic system and frailthe pressures that are generated within a bureaucratic system.GPI, no clatter wheee it':; located, it should have a degree ofaulonemy where there will he II, interforence from special interestgroups. That. way iL can operate without any bias already built inthe system ;Ind the people in there will nut be put under pressurefrom lobbyist from either agency or clients or anyone else. ILshould be fairly well autonomous to such a degree as possible.

As a final comment, I would like to say that I hope dial: whoeveris in a deciding role Co determine. whether Client: Assistance willbe or will not he in the future, I hope that they don't think thatClient. Assistance is just an added appendage of bleeding heartswhowant to help clients and that's the end of it alts that's notthe end of ic. it is not. only a benefit: to clients, it Ls a greatbenefit_ ca Hie agencies, to rehabilitation and it is costeffective. IL pays for itself.

Senator WF:ICKER. Thank you very much.Mr. Ellis?Mr. Ei.Lis. Thank you, Senator Weicker and Senator Hawkins. It

is a great honor to appear before a subcommittee which has doneso much to protect the rights of persons with disabilities. Your cou-rageous support is all the more valued in these difficult timeswhen others have turned their backs on our efforts to become inde-pendent and a part of America's mainstream.

The vocational rehabilitation program has always been critical inour striving for independence, and therefore it is particularly ap-propriate that you examine the program again in an attempt to im-prove its services to us.

At the same time that you look at it, I think it is quite appropri-ate that you look at the client assistance program which is part ofit, because that program and the processes and procedures that youestablished in the 1973 act are the main efforts to strengthen ourvoice in the rehabilitation process and to provide us with a meansof redress if that process is not responsive to our needs.

As such, the client assistance program was your first attempt toprovide advocacy services to persons with disabilities. As withmany first attempts, the client assistance program has several de-fects which were corrected in the design of later advocacy pro-grams. Let me take a look at those defects for a minute.

First, the client assistance project is a voluntary one. It existsonly in those States where the VR agencies want to have it.Second, it is a limited program in several respects. In a number ofStates, it is targeted to particular disability populations and is notavailable to all VR clients. In six States, it primarily serves thosewith visual impairments, and in other States it targets other popu-lations such as persons with cerebral palsy and members of specificminority groups like Native Americans, which means that evenwhen the program is functioning at its best, it is not available toeveryone who might need it.

Another limitation is that it only addresses those advocacy needsthat are directly related to vocational rehabilitation and employ-

t--*t o Fie-IS

10(i

meat. Many of us who are on the way to successful rehabilitationrun into discriminat ion in other areas of our lives where we are inneed of a strong advocate and that service is not always availableto us.

Finally, the most serious limitation in the program is the onethat Mr. Blandfbrd has just mentioned, and that is that it is not anindependent program. In 22 of the 30 States where it receives Fed-eral funds, it is operating by the VR agency. That can work to thebenefit of some clients where the difficulties have to do with com-munication. But where there is a real conflict between the clientand the agency over the kind of service that client needs, I stronglyfeel that that client needs an advocate who can independently ad-vocate for them, free of pressures from the guy who pays hissalary.

In New Jersey, we have overcome many of these defects, wethink, and I am here, of course, to brag about it. Thanks to anagreement with the VR agencies there, the client assistance projectis operated by the P&A system for persons with developmental dis-abilities.

Our program provides a full range of advocacy services to all VRclients throughout the State, regardless of the nature or origin oftheir disability. The State and Federal statutes which establish usrequire that we be independent of all service providers, and thatguarantees, to the extent that any law can, that the services weprovide will not be influenced negatively by the administrativepolici3s of the agencies from whom the clients are seeking services.

Clients who come to us with complaints about the VR agency re-ceive the full range of our advocacy services. Our caseworkers in-tervene when a breakdown in communication has disrupted the re-habilitation process and get client and counselor talking to eachother again.

When the dispute is substantive and has merit, they attempt toresolve it in the client's favor through negotiation with the coun-selor and supervisory staff. On the rare occasions when these nego-tiations fail, these clients are represented at due process hearingsand, if necessary, in court by our staff attorney.

Ours was the first client assistance project to hire a full-timestaff attorney, and one of a handful who employs one today. Ouremployment of an attorney in 1978 established the precedent thatclients of VR agencies were entitled to legal representation in dis-putes with those agenciesa concept that was incorporated intothe law later that year when your committee managed this amend-ment.

While employment of an attorney was initially questioned byRSA, it was accepted with equanimity by New Jersey's VR agency,which has turned to us for legal advice from that attorney on sev-eral occasions.

Besides representing clients in legal matters with the VR agency,the staff attorney assists them in cases of employment discrimina-tion.

Despite, or perhaps because of these robust advocacy efforts, weare respected by both the VR agencies in New Jersey. Our staffprovides theirs with training and we participate in their trainingprograms as well. We have been involved in a number of joint ven-

107

tures with h t he disability consumer groups in New Jersey, the mostrecent of which was a training program which we cosponsored witha VII. agency which led to the increase in their consumer advisoryboard and its revitalization after several years of inactivity.

Our experience with the client assistance project in New Jerseyhas been very positive. It hat; increased our clients' participation inthe rehabilitation process significantly. and has provided themwith independent advocates when they feel that that process is noteffective.

I urge you to continue this valuable program, and extend it to allVR clients throughout all States by increasing its funding. I urgeyou to insure its value to VR clients by, mandating that it be inde-pendent of VR agencies and other service providers.

I ask that you consider expanding its mandate to permit it to ad-dress all of the advocacy needs of VR clients, not just those havingto do with rehabilitation and employment. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ellis follows:I

108

TESTiMoNY BEFOn: THX SENATE NUBCOMMITTEE

ON 'ME HANDICAPPED AT PUBMC HEARINGS TO

P':AUTHDRIZI; REHABI1 1TATiON ACT

FEBRUARY 24, 1983

Submitted by Ethan B. Ellis

President, National Association forProtection and Advocacy Systems

and

Deputy Director, Division of Advocacyfor the Developmentally Disabled,

New Jersey Department of the Public AdvocateJoseph H. Rodriquez, Commissioner

116

109

'';!.. ; ; , . : ; : ! ; i

{1:(.. !"

t t I. Ci i 1

.j. i Cr:',14..t. 1 I

'.r ,ort. jr, .11 tt, 111( 1 t

t.(1 fre,i liit ir wit to join!. I i ,- ' ('1 nnt

Yhic:1 Con,7r-:1- crk,...tr.r; ry;zre

Yitt. i!c:eper..:;-..nt. liver, Cr':' nr.,:or

:-trer.r.. ;nr !;n.:!, tr-

,1 Irct inrtl.er

rehc..tilitctinn (V-)

I n ',tit- :triving for'.l I. tic' liflC. rc.vc,r71 yeorr, it lc'r

rVeti 1(_11 tt,.e

rcrf'occ;1"" ;ncic)C in:fcc'ivr.. lit

it

r,::-. tyo tire:; it rcry.!...cr:

711c,rc.fore,, it I n niTrcr,rio.t.c?

vcc.ticr,,:1 ,-t tLir;

CC Cr: Co :-:tr?.:-1,-,'Cr-.':ninc., it:: rvicec. 6o, it ic

110

t

t

I

i .nt sn tchoo

in th,. Cnni,:n of

1: tor et re , ,:o1ectis

sy :t sltr tr!. in the,- s.tcten

to : . it. vH:l.c thot n'.n.or has

rty-nc'oct1, ..`_i11 :11,111 c,ont

ro: s o clje:Its or, sctt hy ths :coy sort.

.'Cr of : T'scjctn oro

. no ! is cc rotur-. of Cr.,: t1%c

pc,r nls, in :tEtCE: itn re rvicen are

r. "c rociCent.i c if is:C. ,,...on or serif

ir:-ents. Tr tYc

o :cc e re -1,r ion, rit' tor:ete( to votive :.:7,erico,ro..

n 1 o the 7.c,jor of V7 clferto :re cot

fcs -.(veconl: rvices I._ o the Clio;,_ csistot,ce _'reject.

.ti ff., client ;..nnistnnce Project: o rs rcotricred in the

cor. :"Lny VP clients: yho ore on the k:pr to

111

1.1 t ' In 11 iI ^ ,' 1 1 1 11 . I "1. ..t.

11'.,1 I . 1), 111. t I r

, o r.'1 1 I.. Fr , or

'1, 2., 1 r , 1. , :111.1

(.1 t1( tr 11)11,.:2. nti rol hi.. tc.

;t : ,r, 'I..r I,, 1tr 0111; t Cc V .'t (11).-1

j 1111I 11 111 7f 11.- 111,(1t. 1 for 0I,1 r

: it t.', Y1 rir t,',; ho o.

"1111"11Y, :or r t 1', IL t jot:

('1 : r',.r PI. Pro -;( rr " le

or, .-21 fo(1 1,y 1 oyr c.:1 11 r? . In

2 7- 1 Inc .2c, 6 .'.ere

r irl!:t ut Inn tit:,,,

r,, 0I r "1 nt!' tr.

Pr Or 1. r. t, :rxr. Projo,t\

clnho t.ieL to c

r. t';11! ' t (2. r2c:r1-e re %Then

: \cort yit1.

OZ. t..=.o

Ioct.22.\ to z.n i''orcr27.!(,r.t '.22_t2! t'r.c. 2.-.,:ency

(1.1.icr,t moo Pro, ect is operrItc: the Prc.tectio.1

cy Per Fert.2onr. tit,. (2(2,velc)r-entr.1 i abil. tier,

the .7.cpicen e12 1-1.e r en' ,err -2 7,o;2art:'ent eP t1'.e Pt:1,1:c

cur :)r..r= pro7ic:e:2 .2',C.v(72;:cy t-.:rvicr; on 7.tcteviCe

!I t

112

1 7 -'71;7 17111,,,t,: 77.

'I .; t , .77 07 17

777.,,.:,i7tAi777) ttt.

; ' 11 1. 7 177: 7.1 , 0, ttl:,7..(' t-

77 :, 7- t P.7 ;7.7.

7' ..1;,.77(10, 1, '7.71

7 '7 7 "71. '7: 7,7 : ; .

17;

:r

10,T7'1'7

tlt 7-,11

tr, tr

-` ottr rr

t. I r c,

113

1.1.f .. 1

.1.(

r. .

t:J s'(11.

0:!;

1

111

I 10 !.,t

Senator WEICKElt. Thank you very much, Mr. gills,Senator I lawkins?Senator IlAwKiNs. I would like to apologize to those who al..!

present today. My lateness' is not due to any lack of desire to serve.I have been testifying since 10 o'clock at the Immigration Subcom-mittee because that is a very important issue to the entire UnitedStates.

My first' interest in this subcommittee and its jurisdiction cameabout as a member of the entire Labor and Health Committee, anda deep and abiding faith that handicapped funds should never belumped into block grants to States.

I was fortunate enough to be appointed as a freshman to the con-ference committee, and Senator Weicker will remember that thatwas a whale of a fight. I had a crash program by his staff andothers on the moneys and programs available, and was happy toreport that we managed to keep the money for the handicapped incategorical grants.

You are to be commended today, Mr. Chairman, for having hear-ings on the Rehabilitation Acr prior to its reauthorization. I amlooking forward to becoming much more knowledgeable about theindividual programs, serving with you and continuing to learnfrom you and the great example you set in making all of us moreaware and sensitive to the problems of a growing number of thepopulation in the United States.

I want to tell you that I am here to learn from you and to contin-ue to fight for what I feel is an individual and very necessaryamount of money that must be continually watched all the time so

1 2 ,

115

it does not get commingled, as they call it up here, and given toStates through block grants.

I think a lot of the State programs are better because of Federaloversight and I think we ought to keep them that way.

Senator WEIcKinc. Thank you very much, Senator Hawkins.One question for the panel just to make certain that I under-

stand what it is that the panel is advocatingI want to make sure,Neva, that you are in agreementand that is the independence ofthe client assistance program from the vocational rehab operation.Do you feel also as the other two witnesses do on that count?

Ms. CRuz. 1 believe that it can operate successfully within theVR agency. That is where I am at the present time, is in our VRagency. I feel that some of the people who call cap might not con-sider their problems serious enough to take to a legal agency. Theyjust have a questioa about what their counselor is doing.

As mentioned before, most of the problems are the communica-tion type. They may just wonder if the counselor has given themthe right information. They are not often serious enough to requirea change of counselor or legal intervention. But they do still needthese questions answered, and 1 feel that having someone who isoutside of the regular administrative channel can provide the an-swers and an impartial third party opinion. CAP has been on aFederal grant, so even though I get my 1;aycheck through theState, it is a Federal grant and so I am independent in that way.

I do have close communication with our VR director by being inthe State VR office, and I think that there are a lot of calls thatcome into the State office because they do not know where to call.So, they call there and, they are referred to me. I think there areadvantage-s-tbliaving-it,in the State.

Senator WEICKER. All right. Using this as the vehicle to requestopinions, I would.be-very anxious to hear what the community as awhole feels about this aspect of it because I think there are validpoints ()11 bbth sides. Both Mr. Ellis and Mr. Blandford have madeforceffil arguments, and I understand where you are coming fromon,this.----Let us find out; this is the time to see what the feeling is on thematter of independence of the CAP's.

Senator Hawkins?Senator HAWKINS. Do States physically and administratively sep-

arate the CAP and the P&A offices, or do they encourage them towork .toget her?

Mr. Ems. Let me respond to that, Senator Hawkins. In only twoStates are the P&A and the client assistance projects operated bythe same agency. That occurs'in-New Jersey and Louisiana. In allother States, there is no administrative or funding connection be-tween the two operations.

Senator HAWKINS. Thank you.Senator WEICKER. Thank you all very much.While we rearrange the signs and the chairs, we will just take

about a 3-minute recess here and allow the other witnesses to beseated.

[Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.] ,

Senator WEICKER. The next panel to testify before the committeewill testify relative to the rehabilitation basic State grant. We are

)

116

privileged to have .loseph lotti, who is the commissioner of theDepartment of Education fur the State of Connecticut; John Banksof the National Rehabilitation Association; and Andrew Jackson,who is graduate of the year and who is going to be introduced byKaren Clay.

So, lady and gentlemen, we are privileged to have you before thecommittee. Why do you not proceed in any order that you alldecide?

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH GA1,011'1, COMMISSIONER, DEPART-MENT OF EDUCATION, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, ON BEHALFOF THE COUNCIL OF STATE ADMINISTRATORS OF VOCATION-AL REHABILITATION; JOHN BANKS, NATIONAL REHABILITA-TION ASSOCIATION; AND KAREN CLAY, SPECIAL EDUCATIONTEACHER, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ASSOCIATION FOR RE-TARDED CITIZENS, ON BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR RE-TARDED CITIZENS 01,' THE UNITED STATES, ACCOMPANIED BY1NDREW JACKSON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ASSOCIATION FOR

RETARDED CITIZENS GRADUATE OF THE YEAR, A PANEL

Mr. GALorri. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I will read brief excerptsfrom the statement.

Senator WEICKER. All statements will be included in their entire-ty in the record. You proceed in any way you deem fit.

Mr. GALorri. The Council of State Administrators is an associ-ation comprised of chief adthinistrators of the public rehabilitationagencies- -

Senator WEICKER. Commissioner, you are going to have to pullthat microphone up to you. I, as do others in the room, want tohear what you are saying. So, go ahead.

Mr. GALorri. Is this satisfactory?Senator WEICKER. Yes; we can hear you.Mr. GAtorri. The Council of State Administrators is an associ-

ation comprised of the chief administrators of the public rehabilita-tion agencies for physically and mentally handicapped persons inall of the States, the District of Columbia and our Nation's territor-ies.

The core of America's rehabilitation program is the 63-year-oldState-Federal program devoted to providing a combination of reha-bilitation services to physically and/or mentally disabled adults. Atthe center of this program is the State rehabilitation agency whichprovides for a wide range of services for eligible disabled persons.Most often, these services are provided with the cooperation of orthrough private, nonprofit service providers.

The primary purpose of the provision of vocational rehabilitationservices is to render employable those persons with disabilitieswho, because of the severity of their handicaps, are unable tosecure and to hold employment. The Rehabilitation Act is the mostcomplete and well-balanced legislation in the human services field.

In one act, there are included provisions for a comprehensive andindividually tailored program of vocational rehabilitation servicesto individuals with physical and/or mental disabilities; an innova-tion and expansion program; a training program; research pro-gram; a rehabilitation facility program; a program providing Com-

124

117

peliensive services in independent living; and a community serv-ices employment program and a special projects program.

Experience has shown that this balanced approach embodies allof the elements necessary for the successful rehabilitation of per-sons with disabilities. It is this balanced approach which enablesthe rehabilitation movement to make the widely acclaimed prog-ress that has been evident throughout its history.

The Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitationfully supports each facet of this process and every provision of theRehabilitation Act.

We are here to strongly urge the extension of the RehabilitationAct of 1973, as amended, for a minimum of at least 3 years. TheRehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, is a model of what can bedone in the human services field.

We are of the strong contention that to amend or rescind por-tions of this law might severely unsettle the balance that makesthis program one of the most, if not the most, balanced program inthe field of human services.

We further urge swift action on the part of the Congress in thereauthorization of this law. It is imperative that the States begiven the necessary lead time in planning for future needs. Earlyreauthorization by the U.S. Congress will have a significant favora-ble impact on State appropriations and programmatic decisions af-fecting the rehabilitation program for future years.

The need for the extension of the Rehabilitation Act is but one ofthe three main needs of the vocational rehabilitation program, forany program must have at least three main pillars to support itseffective operation. It needs wise, enabling legislation, effectiveleadership and adequate appropriations.

During the past several years, the rehabilitation program hasbeen without effective, strong leadership at the Federal level. Thepresence of leadership is what we are talking about here. TheState-Federal rehabilitation programin fact, any programvital-ly needs strong, committed and knowledgeable national leadership.We look to the current administration, as we have looked to pastadministrations, to provide this.

It is also vitally important that the US. Congress authorizefunds that will enable the State-Federal rehabilitation program toserve as many individuals who are eligible for rehabilitation serv-ices as possible.

For the past few years, the number of persons served and reha-bilitated has been decreasing. This unfortunate and indeed tragicoccurrence has been attributed to the continually rising costs ofdoing business, resulting from years of suppressed funding debili-tating inflation, the growing focus of States on serving more se-verely disabled individuals, and the recent loss of over $100 millionannually in direct service money by the decimation of the social se-curity vocational rehabilitation programs.

Alarmingly enough, our best estimate is that State rehabilitationagencies are only able to serve 1 out of every 20 persons who areeligible for services.

The council strongly recommends that the Congress provide leg-islation which contains authorization levels for the basic State vo-cational rehabilitation program that will help reverse the decreas-

1 2 J

118

ing number of in who are being served and rehabilitated intoemployment and assist in addressing the severe and debilitatingemployment problems which face persons with disabilities.

The council recommends that the legislation extending the Reha-bilitation Act contain authorizations for basic State grants undersection 110(13)(1) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,equal to $1,037.8 million in fiscal year 1989, $1,191.1 million infiscal year 1985, and $1,254.6 million in fiscal year 1986.

Justification for higher authorization amounts arises from thepurpose for which the money is spentthe prevention of an incal-culable waste of human potential, a purpose on which no price tagcan be placed.

Vocational rehabilitation has consistently more than paid foritself by helping persons with disabilities increase their earning ca-pacity, by decreasing the amount of public assistance paymentsthey might need, and by assisting them to become taxpayers.

The need is desperate. For the past months, all have heard re-ports of the high levels of unemployment that our Nation endures.Out of need, the Nation is responding to this tragedy. The Presi-dent and the Congress have apparently reached agreement onpublic jobs legislation to provide relief to those individuals andtheir families who have been affected by this recession.

However, we must also recognize that there does not exist in oursociety any group of persons who are experiencing more unemploy-ment than that which is experienced by persons with disabilities.

To begin to adequately address the severe and debilitating em-ployment problems of persons with disabilities, the Congress mustact swiftly to maintain and enhance the foundation of the onlymajor Federal program that exists to provide vital, desperatelyneeded services to persons with disabilities for the primary purposeof rendering them employed.

It would be tragic to become mired in the process of extendingthe Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. The task before us isclear and it is great, to prevent the incalculable waste of humanpotential. The solution, perhaps the best that Government couldever hope to offer, is before us in the form of a well-balanced State-Federal rehabilitation program, one that continues to provide com-prehensive, cost-effective, humane and desperately needed servicesat the community level to persons with mental and physical dis-abilities who desire to work but lack the training and occupationalskills required to actively compete in the labor force.

That concludes my written statement, Senator. I would like toexpress my deep appreciation to you and my pride from the factthat you are from the State of Connecticut in your commitment tothis effort and your support of the rehabilitation program.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Galotti follows:]

119

STATEMENT OF

THE COUNCIL OF STATE ADMINISTRATORS

OF

VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION

BEFORE

THE SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED

The Council of State Administrators is an association

comprised of the chief administrators of the public

rehabilitation agencies for physically and mentally

handicapped persons in all the states, the District of

Columbia, and our Nation's territories. These agencies

constitute the State partners in the State-Federal Program

of Rehabilitation authorized by the Rehabilitation,

Comprehensive Services, and Developmental Disabilities

Amendments of 1978, Public Law 95-602, as amended.

Since its inception in 1940, the Council has enjoyed a

quasi-official status as an active advisor to the Federal

administrators in the formulatiDn of national policy and

program decisions and has been an active force in

strengthening the effectiveness of service programs for

disabled Americans. The Council also serves as a forum for

State Rehabilitation Administrators to study, deliberate,

and act upon matters bearing upon the successful

rehabilitation of persons with disabilities.

The core of America's Rehabilitation Program is the

63-year-old State-Federal Program devoted to providing a,

combination of rehabilitation services to physically and/or

mentally disabled adults. At the center of this Program is

the State Rehabilitation Agency which provides for a wide

range of services for eligible, disabled pIrRns. Most

120

Senate Testimony February 24, 1983

often these services are provided with the cooperation of,

or through, private, non-profit service providers.

The primary purpose of the provision of vocational

rehabilitation services is to render "employable" those

persons with disabilities who, because of the severity of

their handicaps, are unable to secure and to hold

employment.

The Rehabilitation Act is the most complete and

well-balanced legislation in the human services field.

In one Act, there are included provisions for a

comprehensive and individually-tailored program of

vocational rehabilitation services to individuals with

physical and/or mental disabilities; an innovation and

expansion program; a training program; a research program; a

rehabilitation facility program; a program providing

comprehensive services in independent living; a community

services employment program; and a special projects

program.

Experience has shown that this balanced approach

embodies all of the elements necessary for the successful

rehabilitation of persons with disabilities.

Essential, of course, to maintaining this balance is a

126

121

Senate Testimony February 24, 1983

well-funded program of direct Pesvices to help individuals

with disabilities become employable. It is also vital that

this program have strong, experienced and effective National

leaders. However, there must also be research to reveal new

knowledge; special demonstration projects to test this

knowledge in practical settings; trained personnel to work

with persons who are disabled; and a comprehensive program

providing independent living services to persons who are so

severely disabled that they cannot benefit from traditional

rehabilitation services. Agencies must also be encouraged

to initiate new programs and expand existing ones to apply

new knowledge to new groups of individuals with

disabilities. Likewise, rehabilitation facilities must be

developed in which severely disabled individuals may be

served with optimum care and expertise.

It is this balanced approach which enables the

rehabilitation movement to make the widely-acclaimed

progress that has been evident throughout its history.

The Council of State Administrators of Vocational

Rehabilitation fully supports each facet of this process and

every provision of the Rehabilitation Act.

.4. 4:

21-974 0-83--9

122

Senate Testimony February 24, 1983

EXTENSION OP THE ACT

We are here to strongly urge the extension of the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, for a minimum of, at

least, three years. This will provide authorization levels

through Fiscal Year 1986. This extension is needed to insure

, program stability in the State-Federal Rehabilitation

Program and to continue the provision of quality services to

the millions of disabled Americans who are in desperate need

of rehabilitation.

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, us amended, is a model

of what can be done in the human services field. We are of

the strong contention that to amend or rescind portions of

this law might severely unsettle the balance that makes this

program one of the most--if not the most--balanced program

in the human services area.

We further urge swift action on the part of the

Congress in the re-authorization of this law. It is

imperative that the states be given the necessary lead time

in planning for future needs. State legislatures, many of

which will only be in session for short, specified periods

of time, require advance knowledge of Federal Authorization

levels for future years in order to provide the state

matching financial contributions. Early re-authorization by

13

123

Senate Testimony February 24, 1903

the U.S. Congress will have a significant, favorable impact

on state appropriations and programmatic decisions affecting

the rehabilitation program for future years.

The need for the extension of the Rehabilitation Act is

but one of the three main needs of the Vocational

Rehabilitation Program, for any program must have at least

three main pillars to support its effective operation. It

needs wise enabling legislation, effective leadership, and

adequate appropriations.

During the past several years, the Rehabilitation

Program hap been without effective, strong leadership at the

Federal level. The State-Federal Rehabilitation Program--in

fact any program--vitally needs strong, committed, and

knowledgeable national leadership. We look to the current

Administration, as we have looked to past Administrations,

to provide this.

It is also vitally important that the U.S. Congress

authorize funds that will enable the State-Federal

Rehabilitation Program to serve as many individuals who are

eligible for rehabilitation services, as is possible.

For the past few years, the number of persons served

and rehabilitated has been decreasing. This

1

124

Senate Testimony February 24, 1903

unfortunate -- indeed tragic--occurance, can be attributed to

the continually-rising costs of doing business resulting

from years of suppressed funding and debilitating inflation;

and the growing focus of the states on serving more severely

disabled individuals; the recent loss of over $100 million

annually in direct services monies by the decimation of the

Social Security Vocational Rehabilitation Programs.

Despite this expenditure, there still are not

sufficient funds to serve all those eligible, disabled

pc sons who have the potential and the desire to work and

who need rehabilitation services to attain employment or

self-sufficiency.

Alarmingly enough, our best estimate is that State

Rehabilitation Agencies are only able to serve one out of

every twenty persons who are eligible for services.

We are sure that there does not exist any sector of our

Nation's workforce which is experiencing more unemployment

than that experienced by persons with disabilities.

The Council strongly recommends that the Congress

provide legislation which contains authorization levels for

the Basic State Vocational Rehabilitation Program that will

help to reverse the decreasing number of persons who are

134;

125

Senate Testimony February 24, 1903

being served and rehabilitated into employment and assist in

addressing the severe and debilitating employment problems

which face persons with disabilities.

The Council recommends that the legislation extending

the Rehabilitation Act contain authorizations for Basic

State Grants under Section 110(b)(1) of the Rehabilitation

Act of 1973, as amended, equal to $1,037.8 million in Fiscal

Year 1984; $1,141.1 million in Fiscal Year 1985; and

$1,254.6 million in Fiscal Year 1986.

It is important in these times of fiscal austerity and

"freezes" on domestic discretionary spending to remember

that human lives and quality of services are what we are

actually talking about here.

OuL justification for higher authorization amounts

arises from the purpose for which the money is spent -- the

prevention of an incalculable waste of human potential, a

purpose on which no price tag can be placed.

Whatever the cost, there is no other human service

program whose funds are spent in such a cost-effective

manner to help people to live more self sufficient and

productive lives.

Vocational Rehabilitation has consistently more than

I26

Donate Testimony Pobtuary 24, 1903

paid for itnelf by helping persons with disabilities

increase their earning capacity, by decrvaaing the amount of

public assistance payments they might need, and by ausinting

them to become taxpayers.

Moreover, the value of rehabilitating a person's spirit

and life, is, above all else, immeasurable.

The need is desperate. For the past months, all have

heard reports of the high levels of unemployment that our

Nation endures.

Unemployment is now hovering at a level near or above

that of 0,1 Great Depression. Currently, more than one

person in ten is out of work. In some cities and states,

and among some minorities and other societal groups,

unemployment is much higher, ranging from twenty to as high

as fifty percent.

Out of need, the nation is responding to this tragedy.

The President and the Congress have apparently reached

agreement on Public Jobs legislation to provide relief to

those individuals and their families who have been affected

by this Recession.

However, we must also recognize that there does not

exist in our society any group of persons who are

127

Semite Tuntimony February 24, 1903

pxperieheing more unemployment than thht which iu

experienced by peroonn with dinnhilitiun.

To begin to adequately addrenn the severe and

debilitating employment problems of persons with

disabilities, the Congrenn milt act swiftly to maintain and

enhance the foundation of the only major Federal program

that exists to provide vital, desperately- needed services to

persona with disabilities for the primary purpose of

rendering them employed.

The Rehabilitation Program has a successful,

sixty-three year track record of providing literally any

service deemed necessary to bridge the gap between

dependency and independence and employment.

It would be tragic to become mired in the "process" of

extenc2.Y.; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. The

task before us is clear, and great -- to prevent the

incalculable waste of human potential. The solution,

perhaps the best that government could ever hope to offer,

is before us in the form of a well-balanced State-Federal

Rehabilitation Program. One that continues to provide

comprehensive, cost-effective, humane, and desperately

need services at the community level to persons with

mental and physical disabilities who desire work, but lack

the training and occupational skills required to actively

compete in the labor force.

128

Senator Wca'srit .'onialissioner, thank you very bulb for,V0111' illioly loin your kind remarks. I appreciate it very, verymuch,

Mr, flunks?M IIANIKS, SI11I1101' Illy 11111110 is I10111 11111

cerlilied 4111 caunselor and I am here today representingthe National Rehabilitation Association, thir membership of over20,00 individuals includes workers in all phases of rehabilitation,consumers, and other individuals.

The bedrock of the Rehabilitation Act is provided by the basicState vocational rehabilitation services program, a proven programthat has stood I he test of time and, unlike some other Federal pro-grains, has been generally well-man iged and cost-effective.

Indeed, the Reluibilitation Service v Administration's last reportto the Congress in fiscal year 1981 estimates that the benefit-to-costratio exceeds $11) for every $1 spent. Estimate's obtained outside theGovernment are even higher,

however, Mr. Chairman, it is our understanding that OMB, afterattempting to disprove these facts, is now attempting to discourageRSA from using their own favorable data, I should think that theywould enjoy such success, but instead it disturbs them.

Generally speaking, the rehabilitation counselor has the overallresponsibility for individual case management. Counselors providefor assessment of needs and employment potential of rehabilitationclients, find and coordinate the services that tire required to enablea person to become employed, as well as provide guidance on em-ployment and job placement.

Counselors work with clients on an individual case-by-case basisin tailoring a personalized program that will meet the uniqueneeds of each individual. The broadest range of services are pro-vided in order to assure that whatever services persons with dis-abilities require are available, and that, taken as a whole, they ad-dress the overall needs of the individual.

In addition, the State grant program also provides for coordina-tion to minimize duplication, thereby assuring that funds are spentas effectively and efficiently as possible. This coordination also as-sists the counselor seeking services for an individual client bymaking it easier to know what services are available as well aswhere to find them.

This coordinated, comprehensive approach is greatly enhancedby the statutory stipulation that there be a "sole State agency toadminister the plan or to supervise its administration by a localagency." As you know, with regard to legislative mandates, Con-gress in recent years has placed an emphasis on first serving theseverely disabled, a mandate which NRA wholeheartedly endorsesand which State agencies have sought to carry out.

Unfortunately, this laudable goal has not been reinforced by thelevel of funding necessary to maintain service levels. Consequently,fewer persons are now being rehabilitated under the program, al-though there has been an increase in the proportion of severely dis-abled who are served.

Congress should be aware that it is estimated to be two to two-and-a-half times more costly to rehabilitate those with severe dis-abilities. Therefore, if Federal funds do not increase sufficiently to

13 io

129

cover this mandate, then few er persons will receive the assistancethey need. This lack of resources often leads consumers to feel thatrehabilitation is not responding to their needs. Thus, the providerof services, especially the counselor, is ripe for attack from allsides.

The basic State rehabilitation program is an investment inhuman capital which yields big dividends in the quality and digni-ty of thousands of individual lives each year. Tragically, because oflimited resources, it is estimated that State agencies can only serve1 in 20 of those persons who are eligibleindividuals who couldwork if rehabilitation services were provided.

We therefore urge you to renew your commitment to the basicState rehabilitation program and the Rehabilitation Act as awhole, as well as to our fellow citizens with disabilitieS who look toyou for support. We ask you to do this by providing authorizationsfor $1,037.8 million for fiscal year 1984, $1,141.1 million for fiscalyear 1985, and $1,254.6 million for fiscal year 1986 for the basicState grant program.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak on behalf of persons whoneed these services. I ask that the remainder of my statement beincluded in the record.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Banks follows:]

1

130

STATEMENT OF

THE NATIONAL REHABILITATION ASSOCIATION (NRA)

1;EFORE

THE SF IATE SUBCOUUTTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED

OF THE

SENATE COMMA ON LABOR AND HWAN RESOURCES

RELATIVE TO

REAUTHORIZATION OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973, AS AMENDED

PRESENTED BY:

JOHN BANKS

FEBRUARY 24, 1983

1 3

131

Mr. Chairman and Nen6eva it the Subcommittee, my name is

John Banks, and 1 am here today representing the National

Rehabilitation Association and its seven Divisions, which are;

The National Rehabilitation Counseling Association, which I serve

as Executive Director; The Job Placement Division; The National.

Association for Independent Living; The National Association of

Rehabilitation Instructors; The National Associationof Rehabili-

tation Secretaries; The National Rehabilitation Administrators

Association; and the Vocational Evaluation and Work Adjustment

Association.

First, Mr. Chairman, let me express the deep appreciation of

the NRA membership for the hard work and dedication you and Members

of this Subcommittee have shown in working to better the opportuni-

ties and lives of persons with disabilities.

The National Rehabilitation Association (NRA), founded in 1925,

represents approximately 20,000 members, including professional

workers in all phases of rehabilitation, consumers, and others who

wish to be a part of our efforts to ensure that children and adults

with disabilities receive the services and opportunities they need

to become fulfilled, productive members of our society. We have

worked for, and seen; much progress in the nearly 60 years since

our founding, and since the state-federal partnership in rehabilita-

tion began in 1920. However, as we all know, much remains to be

done, and we urge you to keep the programs strong and its authori-

zations at a level commensurate with the stated goals of the

program.

13

132

The Rehabilitation Act "I 1913, an upended, takes a

synergistic approach to providing rehabilitation services to

persons who require them. in other words, the interrelationship

between program components, such as training, research, the

independent Living program, and the broad range of rehabilitation

services provided under the basic state grant program; produce a

total effect that i5 greater than the sun of any of these efforts

taken independently. Each component reinforces the others, and

forges a strong partnership directed toward providing the best

possible rehabilitation outcome for the individual. However,.

since NRA has been asked by this Subcommittee to specifically

address the rehabilitation counselor's perspective on the state

grant proffam, NRA is submitting comments' for the record, as part

of our written statement, with regard to these other major

components of the rehabilitation program.

The bedrock of the Rehabilitation Act is provided by the

Basic State Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program (Section 100

(h)(1)), which ensures that a wide range of basic services is

available to persons with all types of disabilities. This is

provided through a federal-state partnership that has functioned

sucusfully for more than 60 years. The partnership also exists

at the local level, where state agencies purchase services from the

private secucr, such as doctors and rehabilitation facilities.

It is a proven program that has stood the test of time and,

unlike some other federal programs, has been generally well managed

and cost-effective. indeed, the Rehabilitation Service Administra-

tion's latest report to the Congress (FY81) estimates that the

benefit/cost ratio exceeds $10:11 Estimates obtained outside

133

even higher.

However, !:r. Chairman, it is our understanding that OMB,

att,r attemp!Ing to disprove these facts, is now attempting to

discoulage RSA from using their own favorable data. I should

think that they would enjoy such success, but instead it

disturbs them)

Under the Rehabilitation Act, the Basic State Program is an

entitlement provision which provides federal funds through forMula

grants, requiring a 201 slate match, to state rehabilitation agencies

for maintaining a broad range of counseling, restorative, training,

placement and other services which will enable disabled persons to

be r,aLnfully employed.

Generally speaking, the rehabilitation counselor has the

overall responsibility for individual case management. Counselors

provide for assessment of needs and employment potential of

rehabilitation clients, find and coordinate the services that are

required to enable a person to become employed, as well as provide

yuidance on employment and job placement. Counselors work with

clients on an individual, case-by-case basis in tailoring a

personalized program that will meet the unique needs of each

individual. These needs, be they social, medical, vocational, or

psychological, together contribute to the disability that prevents

an individual from entering the workforce. For this reason, they1

must be addressed comprehensively if we are to rehabilitate that

individual for employment. It is possible to do this because the

state grant program was set up with these individual needs in mind.

The broadest possible range of services are provided in order to

assure that whatever services persons with disabilities require

1 4

134

are available, and that taken ,u; n whole they address the overall

needs of the individual. In addition, the state grant program

also provides for coordination to minimize duplication, thereby

assuring that funds are spent as effectively and efficiently as

possible. coordination also assists the counselor seeking

services for an individual client by making it easier to know

iwhat services are available, as well as where to find them.

This coordinated, comprehensive approach is greatly enhanced

by the statutory stipulation that there be a "sole State agency

to administer the plan, or to supervise its administration by a

local agency". Equally important, the ability to identify a

particular agency greatly enhances the accountability of each state

program to the federal government, thereby assuring that programs

are well managed, funds spent carefully and appropriately, and

that legislative mandates are faithfully carried out.

As you know, with regard to legislative mandates, Congress in

recent\years has placed an emphasis on first serving the severely

disabled -- a mandate which NRA wholeheartedly endorses, and which

state agencies have sought to carry out. Unfortunately, this

laudable goal has not been reinforced by the level of funding

necessary to maintain service levels; consequently, fewer persons

are now being rehabilitated under the program, although there has

been an increase in the proportion of severely disabled who are

served. Congress should be aware that it is estimated to be 2 to

21-4 times more costly to rehabilitate those with severe disabilities.

Therefore, if Federal funds do not increase sufficiently to cover

this mandate, then fewer persons will receive the assistance they

need. This lack of resources often leads consumers to feel that

135

"rehabilitation" Is not responding to their needs. 'Thus the

provider of services, especially the counselor, is ripe for

attack from all sides.

Overall, hoWever, the Basic State Rehabilitation Program is

working effectively to ensure that persons with disabilities can

enter our nation's workforce, thereby enhancing both the economic

health of our nation, and the personal dignity of these individuals.

Second, I would like to address Training needs. Sufficient

numbers of qualified rehabilitation professionals are, Mr. Chairman,

absolutely essential for providing the broad range of services needed

to enable persons with disabilities to enter the workforce. In

recognition of this fact, federal funds have been made available for

rehabilitation training for over 30 years. Currently, the Rehabili-

tation Training Program (Section 304) encompasses,grants to States

and public or non-profit institutions and agencies, including

universities, to support both long and short term training over the

broad spectrum of rehabilitation specialities, including

rehabilitation counseling, medicine, and therapy. Programs of

continuing education to maintain up-to-date, high standards of

service are also authorized, which help professionals respond to

changing priorities and needs within the Rehabilitation program.

The quality and eventual success of any program is directly

related to the caliber of professionals who are charged with

turning rehabilitation goals into realities. It is therefore

disturbing to note that major shortages have been documented in

many rehabilitation professions. If allowed to continue', the

Rehabilitation Program will necessarily provide a lower standard

of services, consequently weakening the overall effectiveness and

136

success ut d heretofore cAemplaly ',Ingram. That cannot he allowed

to happen.

Third, Rehabilitation Research at the federal level is

directed through the National institute of Handicapped Research

(Nif(R)(Section 201(a)(1)), which wds established under the

RehabiLitation Act Amendments of 1978. This institution is charged

with coordinating efforts to increase the knowledge which will help

an overcome the difficulties of rehabilitating those with severe

disabilities. Through Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers,

methodology and delivery systems are improved, while Rehabilitation

Engineering Centers seek to apply new and innovative methods to

overcome problems in the various rehabilitation fields. NIHR is also

charged with the dissemination of such information in order that

persons with disabilities may benefit from it as soon as possible.

Together, ilif.se research activities provide a focused, coordinated

effort to expand our ability to rehabilitate persons with severe

disabilities, to improve the quality of services that arc already

available, and to generally improve the overall effectiveness and

success of the program.

Finally, the National Rehabilitation Association would like to

emphasize the importance of the Program for Comprehensive Services

for Independent Living (Section 721(a)), and the national goal of

reducing dependency which this particular program embodies. It is

designed to enable severely disabled persons to live more indepen-.

dently with their families or in the community and, when possible,

to secure employment. Under Part B of Title VII, the only indepen-

dent living component to be funded thus far, project grants are

made to state vocational rehabilitation agencies to establish and

137

operate "independent I I VIII rentr:." to provide a broad range of

services to enable severely disabled persons to do more fur them-

selves. Disabled persons have assumed an active role in developing

and running these commuav based centers. Enhancing the self

-reliance of persons with,disabilitles both increases individual

1cul4ng:: of cell - worth, as well as frees up more costly institu-

tional forms of care for those with the utmost need.

This comprehensive rehabilitation program is rounded out by

other programs which are targeted to assist special populations of

persons with disabilities, Client Assistance Projects, Projects

with Industry, Comprehensive Rehabilitation Centers, and others.

Mr. Chairman: in conclusion, the National Rehabilitation

Asociatioo believes that, as written, toe Rehabilitation Act of

19/3, as amended, is a balanced, comprehensive, and successful

program that wiil remain so without major legislative changes.

NRA recommends that. all authorities, whether or not Congress

has been able to fund them, remain in the statute as a goal

toward which we should strive. We recommend that, as a minimm,

these programs be authorized for three years, through FY86.

Fur the state grant program, we specifically recommend a minimum

authorization of $1,037.8 million in FY 1984; $1,141.1 million in

FY 198S; and $1,254.6 million in FY 1986. NM's recommendation for

other components of the Rehabilitation Act will be submitted later

to the Subconm.ittee.

With the dark cloud of large tederal deficits hanging over all

federally funded programs, we like to point out that Rehabilitation

is a sound financial investment which yields, in the very worse

case, more than a $19 return to every federal dollar by reducing

1 4

21-974 0 93 10

138

the dependency on lnstitutIonallation, Income maintenance

programs, and social services. Through lhe comprehensive

network of services provided under the basic state grant

program and other rehabilitation components, many persons who

otherwise would remain dependent upon federal handouts for their

financial needs, and institutional care for their personal needs,

can become productive, taxpaying, more independent individuals who

strengthen our workforce and contribute to our overall economic

wellbeing. Equally important, however, is that rehabilitation is

an investment in human capital, which yields big dividends in the

quality and dignity of thousands of individual lives each year.

Tragically, because of limited resources, it is estimated that

stale agencies can servo only one in 20 of those persons who are

eligible -- individuals who could work if rehabilitation services

were provided. We therefore urge you to renew your commitment to

the Basic State Rehabilitation Program and the Rehabilitation Act

as a whole, as well as to our fellow citizens with disabilities

who look to you for support, by providing increased authorization

levels. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on behalf of

persons who need these programs.

14t)

itiii: a al ii: II 1)Arli I OH : II51101411i-rfb Vip 4.11. ei'anal 441 NW Bair. 10 4rre41' I

II a a Ar li 1 -11 r. r . kli . Jir 1 iFi Flo .1

I I 1 ii, II

smigill+ A

.a. 1 . Irk+1 dildailmil. "1111 " "

140

Senator WEicKtot. Mr. Banks, thank you very much for your tes-timony. Now, we have Andrew Jackson, graduate of the year, andhe is going to be introduced by Karen Clay.

Ms, CLAY. Mr, Chairman, I am a special education teacher em-ployed in the vocational training program at the D.C. Associationfor Retarded Citizens. I am joined by Mr. Jackson, a man who re-ceived training through DCARC as a result of services provided bythe vocational rehabilitation program.

We are hero today to represent the Association for Retarded Citi-zens of the United States, which is comprised of some 2,000 Stateand local units and nearly 300,000 members concerned with theneeds and rights of our Nation's mentally retarded citizens.

Mr. Jackson is a shining example of the success of the vocationalrehabilitation program, and together we strongly urge this commit-tee to move rapidly to approve reauthorization.

Mr. Jackson is 40 years old and has been multiply handicappedsince birth. He is mentally retarded with associated conditions ofcerebral palsy and epilepsy, all of which constitute challenging andformidable obstacles to overcome.

Mr. Jackson attended school only until the seventh grade, alwaysin special classes, and because of his frustration he finally droppedout. In those days, there was no law guaranteeing the rights ofhandicapped children to appropriate education.

Mr. Jackson came to our agency in 1978 for evaluation and train-ing, where it was discovered that while he had no work skills, hedid have a potential to be trained. It was not easy for Mr. Jacksonto overcome his handicapping conditions and wasted years of idle-ness, butnearly 3 years later, in May 1981, he completed trainingand was placed into employment at 38 years of age for the firsttime in his life. He was hired as an elevator operator and custodianby Blue Cross-Blue Shield in downtown Washington, where he isstill employed today.

Today, because of the vocational rehabilitation program, AndrewJackson is a successful, self-reliant and happy man who maintainshis own apartment. He earns $12,000 annually and, through histaxes, will repay manyfold the investment in his training providedby the vocational rehabilitation program. And he is just one ofthousands of handicapped people in this country who have benefit-ed enormously from this successful program.

I now would like to give Mr. Jackson an opportunity to tell youabout himself.

Senator WEICKER. Karen, I understand you are going to ask thequestimis.

Ms. CLAY. Yes.Senator WEICKER. Good.Ms. CLAY. Andrew, how did you benefit from the vocational and

personal adjustment training you received? Tell us about the goodthings you learned.

Mr. JACKSON. I had to learn how to buff, mop, dust mop, do theboys' bathroom, and it was easy once I learned.

Ms. CLAY. What do you think would have happened to you if thistraining was not available?

14

Mr. ACK MON Well,I believe I would still be getting the check

every first of the month. That means I would nut he in any train-ing.

Ms. CLAv. Do you like working better?Mr. JAcksoN, Yes, I do,Ms. CAv. I low do you feel about yourself at this point? I low does

it feel to be on your own and responsible for yourself?Mr. JACKSON, Wonderful,Ms. CLAY. Do you like being on your own? Do you have your own

apartment?Mr, (JACKSON. Yes.Ms. CLAY. In conclusion, we urge your support for the continu-

ation of this vital program. Vocational rehabilitation has convertedliterally thousands of tax recipients into taxpayers and, in theprocess, converted bare human existence into true human life.Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Clay follows:1

14

142

Mr. Chairman, Iam Karen Clay, a special education teacher employed In She

Vocational Training Progrmn of the D.C. Association for Retarded Cittiens. 1

en Joined by Mr. Andrew Jackson, a man who received training through DCARC 4,

a result of services provided by the Vocational RohabilitatIon program. Wa are

here today to represent the Association fur Retarded Citizens of the United

States which Is comprised of some 2000 state and local units and neatly 300,000

members concerned with the needs and rights of our notion's mentally retarded

citizens.

Mr. Jackson Is a shining emanple of the success of the Vocational Rehabilita-

tion program and together we strongly urge this committee to move rapidly to

approve reauthorization.

Because Mr. Jackson is unable to read, first I would like to provide brief

background information on his situation and the benefit' he derived from the

Vocational program. And then, through a few questions, I would like to give

Mr. Jackson the opportunity to describe his growth and development.

Mr. Jackson Is 40 years old and has been multiply-handicapped since

birth. He Is mentally retarded with associated conditions of cerebral palsy and

epilepsy, all of which constitute challenging and formidable obstacles to overcome.

Mr. Jackson attended school only until the seventh grade, always In special

classes: Because of the frustration he experienced, he finally dropped out. In

those days, thare was no law guaranteeing the rights of handicapped children to

an appropriate education.

His parents are deceased and for many years he was cared for by relatives

or lived in a foster home. After leaving school, Mr. Jackson did nothing. He

received no educational services and found virtually no help for his problems.

Finally, In 1978, he was brought by a friend to the Vocational Rehabilitation

Agency in the District of Columbia. Soon thereafter, Vocational Rehabilitation

143

referred him to OCARC for evaluation and training where it was discovered that

while he had no work skills, he did have the potential to be trained.

It was not easy for Mr. Jackson to overcome his handicapping conditions

and so many wasted years of idleness. But nearly three years later, In May

1981, he completed training and was placed into employment -- at 38 years'of

age the first Job In his life. He was hired as an elevator operator and

custodian by Blue Cross/Blue Shield In downtown Washington where he is still

employed today. Since beginning there less than two years ago, he has received

three raises and in his most recent performance evaluation, Mr. Jackson's

supervisor described his as "A very courteous and tactful man who performs well

on his job."

Today, because of the Vocational Rehabilitation Program, Andrew Jackson is

a successful, self-reliant, and happy man who maintains his own apartment. He

earns $12,000 annually and through his taxes will repay manyfold the Investment

In his training provided by the Vocational Rehabilitation Program. And he is

Just one of thousands of handicapped people in this country who have benefltted

enormously from this successful program.

Now, I would like to give Mr. Jackson an opportunity to tell you about himself.

Questions to Andrew Jackson

Following the questions, Karen ,

closes with the following statement

In conclusion, we urge your support for continuation of this vital program.

Vocational rehabilitation has converted literally thousands of tax recipients

Into tax payers. And in the process, converted bare human existence into true

human life.

Thank you.

/ r-

144

Senator WEICKER. Thank you very much.Andrew, I do not know if you can understand me as well as you

can understand Karen, or maybe you would rather understand abeautiful woman than an ugly chairman; I do not know. [Laugh-ter.]

Mr. JACKSON. No, it is not that.Senator WEICKER. But, Andrew, what do you do now? What kind

of work do you do!Mr. JACKSON. Right now?Senator WEICKER. That is right.Mr. JACKSON. I just take the elevator up on two and the lobby,

stand there and wait for 'people. With all those pretty girls upthere, I do not know which one to pick. [',aughter.]

Senator WEICKER. Now, are you able to live by yourself?Mr. JACKSON. Yes, sir.Senator WEICKER. And do you get to work by yourself?Mr. JACKSON. Yes, sir. I catch the 92 bus and then I transfer out

to the 7th Street bus. That is the only way I can get there.Senator WEICKER. And, Karen, you say that Andrew about 2

years ago or 3 years ago was not in a position to do any of this, isthat correct?

Ms. CLAY. That is right. Two or three years ago, Andrew did nothave the work skills for employment.

Senator WEICKER. Well, I thank you all very much for your elo-quent testimony. Senator Stafford has joined us and 'I want tomake sure he has the opportunity to ask any questions. But I alsowant to assure you that the increased funding levels which, Com-missioner, you and John Banks have referred to are somethingthat will be given serious consideration by the committee.

Senator Stafford?Senator STAFFORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just came from

another subcommittee of this committee in which some of the in-terests of the handicapped were discussed, and I do not have anyquestions at the present time of this panel.

Senator WEICKER. Thank you very much, Senator. Thank you allvery much.

The next panel that will testifywe have two panels to testify,one on projects with industry and one on independent living cen-ters. I know that Senator Eagleton is here to introduce someoneonis it projects with industry?

Senator EAGLETON. Mr. Starkloff.Senator WEICKER. That is independent living centers. Senator

Stafford, who are you introducing?Senator STAFFORD. I was going to introduce Jean Mankowsky

from Vermont.Senator WEICKER. I wonder if we might not then please allow

Senators Eagleton and Stafford to introduce those that are on thepanel for independent living centers.

John and Judy, I am just trying to get everybody in this act here,and the Senators have to go on to other hearings. So, if we could,please, at this junctur: have the two panelists that will be testify-ing relative to independent living centers. You do not have to goaway; just move over here to the side. John, just come right overand sit with us and we will get you and Judy on in a few minutes.

15

145

Senator EAGLEToN. Do you want me to introduce Mr. Stark loff,Mr. Chairman?

Senator WEICKER. You go right ahead, Senator Eagleton, andthen Senator Stafford will introduce Ms. Mankowsky.

Senator EAGLETON. Mr. Stark loff wears several hats. The onethat I will refer to

Senator WEICKER. Tom, you are going to have to pull that mikeup.

Senator EAGLETON. Thank you. Mr. Stark loff wears several hats.One is a national organizational hat, but I would like to make ref-erence to what he has done in the city of St. Louis, which is myhome city. He was the founder of Paraquad in 1970, and operatedout of a nursing home where he had resided for 5 years.

Paraquad works primarily with people with three types of dis-abilities: cerebral palsy, spinal cord injuries, and deafness. The keyprogram of Paraquad is an independent living center under whicha broad range of assistance is provided, from peer counseling tobudget planning to job seeking. In the 3 years that Paraquad hasreceived Federal support, it has pioneered the concept of independ-ent, living for the disabled in the city of St. Louis, helping over7,000 disabled persons to live fuller and more productive lives byparticipating in the mainstream of society. In the last year alone, ithas doubled:.the number of disabled persons it serves and demandcontinues to grow.

I personally know Mr. Starkloff and his wife, who is accompany-ing him. They are truly remarkable individuals and I think it is areal honor for the Committee to have the opportunity to hear fromMr. Stark loff. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator WEICKER. Senator Eagleton, thank you very much foryour interest in the matter, and I know it is a continuing one. Imight add that Senator Eagleton is one of those, along with Sena-tor Stafford, who has given this chairman just maximum supportin the full committee and on the floor of the U.S. Senate on behalfof all those that are here today.

Senator EAGLETON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.Senator WEICKER. Senator Stafford?Senator STAFFORD. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I really

consider it a pleasure and a privilege to introduce Jean Man-kowsky, a fellow Vermonter, to you and to this subcommittee andto our guests in the room.

Ms. Mankowsky is currently the executive director of the Ver-mont Center for Independent Living. She has been involved atVCIL for the, past 2 years as the peer advocacy counseling coordi-nator, program director, and presently the executive director.

Ms. Mankowsky has an extensive background in working withand advocating for handicapped individuals. She has been a tutorfor blind students at the University of Arizona and a peer advocatecounselor for disabled individuals in Amherst, Mass. She is amember of the Vermont Developmental Disability Council and amember of the Secretary's Council on Career Opportunities for theSeverely Handicapped.

By virtue of her training and expertise, I feel Ms. Mankowsky isextremely well qualified to address this subcommittee on this sub-ject. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.

"i

146

Senator Wt.:alma. Senator Stafford, thank you, and again thankyou for all your help in many, many matters dealing with thehandicapped and education.

OK, you go ahead. I do not know who is going first or second, butthat is up to you. Go right ahead.

STATEMENT OF' JEAN MANKOWSKY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, VER-MONT CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING; ANI) MAX J. STARK-LOFF', PRESIDENT, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF INDEPENDENTLIVING PROGRAMSMs. MANKOWSKY. Thank you, Senator.Senator WEICKER. Jean, you are going to have to get that mike

right up front there. Wo Old it help if we put it on a book there? Iknow .it is hard for you to lean over. Maybe we can raise that alittle bit.

Ms. MANKOWSKY. How is that?Senator WEICKER. That is fine.Ms. MANKOWSKY. Thank you very much for this opportunity to

address this subcommittee. In my written testimony, I have includ-ed a personal and detailed statement regarding the importance ofthe activities of the Vermont Center to Vermont's disabled individ-uals.

Today, however, I would like to talk to you about what independ-ent living means to one severely disabled Vermonter. Today, Iwould like to talk about Carol. Carol is a 25-year-old woman whohas severe cerebral palsy. She sits in a wheelchair linable to func-tionally use either arms or legs, unable to wheel herself, unable todress or bathe or feed herself, unable to speak other than "yes" or"no."

Yet, Carol lives in her own apartment. She did not always livethere. She spent the first 13 years of her life with her grandmoth-er, who ran a boarding home. She spent the next 9 years in Bran-don Training School, the State institution for the mentally re-tarded.

Misplaced and misunderstood, she received only 31/2 years offormal education during that period. At age 23, Carol was moved toa group home for the retarded. It was at this time that a concernedgroup home worker contacted VCIL, distressed at the continued in-appropriateness of Carol's living situation.

For the next year-and-a-half a peer advocate counselor workedintensively with Carol, developing an effective means of communi-cation, listening to Carol's desire to move to her own apartment,and helping Carol develop an understanding of the responsibilitiesof living more independently.

The coordination of community resources was a long and oftenfrustrating process, but resulted in securing accessible housing,attendant care services, transportation, and a computer with whichCarol can pursue her educational and vocational goals.

Carol spent her 25th birthday in her own apartment and cele-brated it with a group of disabled friends whom she met throughher .participation in a local disabled advocacy group in Montpelier.This is not the end for Carol. She is continuing to work actively

15}

147

with her peer inlvocale counselor as she pursues new steps to im-prove and maintain her life.

Although Carol is an extraordinary person, she is like millions ofothersan unknown, ordinary American with a disability. HelenKeller, Franklin Roosevelt, George Wallace, James Brady, mem-bers of the Kennedy familydisability knows no preference regard-ing sex, race, religion, or political persuasion. Disability comes.upon the aged, upon the newborn, and those in 1 he prime of life.

Membership in the disability community knows no prejudice,and any one of you may be called to join our ranks at a moment'snotice. Be assured that we are not looking for new recruits, but youmust be aware that the deepest mission of consumer-run independ-ent living centers is to insure that life after disability is possible,decent, and, in the most profound human sense, meaningful.

Now, I must talk with you about the largest threat to the contin-ued success of independent living centers. Continued Federal sup-port of independent living centers is critical: Our own experienceand the conclusions of the California RSA study, "SignificantIssues in the Establishment and Operation of Independent Living('enters," have demonstrated that there are significant obstacles insecuring adequate alternative funding.

I believe that in these times of increased competition for dimin-ishing dollars, it is totally unrealistic to expect such innovative pro-grams to become operational, demonstrate cost-efficiency and gen-eral effectiveness, develop a track record, and secure adequate on-going funds within a 3-year period...

The potential of consumer-operated independent living centers isvast, but we are only at the point of inception. We are learning tooperate our centers and have an impact on the design and the de-livery of the services which intrinsically affect our lives.

There is much we can do for ourselves. What we require now,and will require for a time longer, is the continued commitment ofthe public will for the support of our efforts. If that will fails now, Icannot be hopeful about the consequences for our emerging con-sumer-operated independent living centers.

Title VII, part A, if implemented, will provide some valuable andmuch-needed support services, but I do not believe that it can beexpected to significantly impact the continuation of independentliving centers. The passage of the amendment under the 1983 con-tinuing resolution has provided only a short-term solution to thisfunding dilemma.

This committee will soon be dealing with the reauthorization ,ofthe Rehabilitation Act. In no way today have I been able to addresseven significantly the needs of consumer-run independent livingcenters. Involvement of representatives from these centers andfrom the disabled community will be critical to the success of yourefforts. The National Council of Independent Living Programs willbe an important resource to you in these efforts.

Your investment in the independence of severely disabled Ameri-cans has already yielded high dividends. &dependent population-cannot he an asset to America. We are gaining in our independenceand our ability to work for, participate in and contribute to our so-ciety. r

148

Careful examination of long-term funding options for consumer-controlled independent living centers will insure that your invest-ment is not lost. Thank you very much.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Mankowsky follows:]

VermontCenter forIndependentLiving

74 River StreetMontpelier

t Vermont 05802B02.229-0501 (TOD)Tollree:800.622-4555 (TDD)

Jean E. MankowskvExecutive Direct.,r

Board of Directors

( .lormiVoce 1re5 We'd

..gtA, a l'pnwt

31,:onn rrenuull!ier.i,erary

Ira riarri Mimi";Irrwaieri,arirorhiaar

ir,rUmwe

'eq Franzen.tiet hint. t1011

Je.111G111,,rnRowSieve Phoiideti

Ma y Py:inbw!qqor.

torn Oarilirem

Disabled citizensworking togetherlot dignityand Independence.

149

JEAN MANKOWSKY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

THE VERMONT CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING

TESTIMONY BEFORE THE SENATE SUBCOMMITTEEON THE HANDICAPPED

February 24, 1981

First, I would like to express my appreciation for the oppor-tunity to offer testimony before this Subcommittee of the Senate.This is not an occasion I would have believed possible ten yearsago. At that time, my disability prevented me from performing

even the most basic personal tasks. I could not sit up, read abook, or even feed myself. I was completely dependent upon my

family. I wasn't aware of the adaptive equipment, personal care

or other support services which would enable me to function more

independently. My future, at that point seemed bleak, and withinmy mind loomed visions of nursing homes.

However, I was fortunate. My family provided me with support

and encouragement. My Vocational Rehabilitation Counsel°, recognized

my potential. I became aware of the Independent Living Movement

and the emerging possibilities for severely disabled people.

I believe it is not by chance that I am here today. My

experience as a disabled person led to my involvement with theVermont Center for Independent Living. My experience as Executive

Director of a Center funded through Title VII, Part B has provided

the impetus to reach this moment.

151

150

I would Iike to sham with you lily thought., feelings and bel left; concern ing

Centers fur independent Living. I would also like to share with you information

about our strengths, successes and future needs.

I AM speaking to you today as the Executive Director of the Vermont Center

for Independent Living from a basis of our tenter Pxoer incite and my understanding

of Issues faced by o ther Centers national I y. Loyal ly as important, I speak

as a severely disabled Individual who continues to work for greater personal

Independence.

With the passage of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and its amendment In

1978, the Congress has put into the hands of disabled people and their friends

powerful tools to address the various problems arising from the condition of

disability and impa invent. Among the more significant innovations and improvements

over the previous situation was Title VII, Part B which provides for the establishment

of Independent Living Centers. The concept of these centers was conceived from

a philosophy of disabled peoples' right to live as independently as possible.

In addition, the advocates for these centers were aware that in order for severely

disabled citizens to move toward the attainment of vocational goals, basic independent

living supports must first be in place. For example, in order for me to fulfill

my responsibilities in managing the Vermont Center for Independent Living, there

are a number of personal supports which I must first have in place. At the

must basic level, Irequire attendant care support. Without this, I would neither

get out of bed, get dressed, or eat. Adaptive equipment is required for my

personal mobility. My home must be accessible enough for me to move in and

out of it comfortably. Without accessible transportation, I would never arrive

at the office. All of these are critical prerequisites to my employability.

Independent Living Centers were designed to assist individuals in becoming aware

of and in securing these and other needed supports.

151

It Is Important to realize that for severely disabled individuals, Independent

living needs are not finite ur static; as an individual's level of Independence

changes, so too does their independent living support needs, and typically the

need for certain criti.al supports will continue throughout a person's life.

This requires the eiistence of an independent living support system which can

respond to the individual on an ongoing basis.

Several types of Independent Living Centers have evolved with varying relationships

to the traditional rehabilitation system. For those of us with disabilities,

the more important developments have taken place in Centers that are consumer

controlled and operated primarily by disabled people themselves. This consumer

control and involvement was the intent of the original Title VII legislation.

In these Centers there exists an atmosphere of respect for the dignity and civil

fight', of disabled individuals. This atmosphere promotes the ability to clearly

wOvr,tand the issues of severe disability and the development of creative solutions

to problem, participants face. In addition, these Centers allow disabled citizens

to became pollcprokers within the human service spectrum. An increase in the

levels of awareness and understanding of disability issues among their non-

disabled colleagues results from cooperative working relationships between consumer-

run Centers and more traditional service providers.

The Vermont Center for Independent Living is, I believe, a prime example

of a consumer controlled Center. Our organization was founded in 1979 and Is

one of the few statewide, rural Centers in the nation. VCIL was incorporated

by a group of Vermont's most active and articulate disabled citizens. These

individuals represented all regions of the state and a wide range of disabilities.

VCR's founding principles included a belief in community-oriented services,

an understanding of the coomonality of disabled individuals regardless of their

152

particular diagnostic category, a belief In the lung-range effectiveness of a

self-help approach and a deep commitment to consumer control. Our organization's

ervice model was developed in response to needs articulated by disabled Vermonters

In three statewide needs assessments done In the late '10's of mobility impaired,

blind and visually impaired and deaf individuals.

These assessments expressed the need for centralized access to disability-

related information and resources, peer suppott, and assistance in working with

other disabled citizens to affect positive local change. The above philosophy

and information laid the foundation for the development of VCR's Title VII, Part

0 program.

iltic VII programs form the core of the Vermont Center for Independent Living

and Include information and Referral, Peer Advocacy Counseling and Conmunity Advocacy

Programs. These types of services PT typical of many independent living centers

and offer a variety of supports which can be utilized either individually or in

combination by persons with disabilities.

Our Information and Referral System fills a critical gap by providing the

only centralized resource on disability-related information within the State of

,Vermont. Prior to its existence, information was so fragmented that disabled

individuals, their families and service providers often had no access to information

which dramatically affected their lives and work. The Information and Referral

System responds to over 600 requests for information a year, Often an adequate

response to these requests requires extensiveresearch and follow-up on the part

of the Information and Referral Coordinator,Information is provided in all areas

of disability concerns.In addition, the System acts as a connector in making

referrals to other appropriate local, state and federal resources.

Our Peer Advocacy Counseling Program oilersseverely disabled individuals

the opporunity to work with another disabled person in assessing their current

1

153

situation, defining goals, identifying resources and problem-solving around

barriers to independence. This program has worked intensively with

1,111 disibled Individuals or year It ha% assisted these individuals

in moving from institutional to cchiamnIty settings, obtaining attendant care

support and needed adaptive equipment, Incating and obtaining more accessible

housing facilities, Increasing personal and social skills and moving closer

to Identifying vocational guals, fie following is n profile of one individual

with whirr the Peer Advocacy Counseling Program has worked intensively for the

past year and a half:

larol Is a 25-year-old woman who has severe cerebral palsy,he it In a wheelchair unable to functionally use eitherarms ur legs, unable to wheel herself, unable to dress orbathe or feed herself, unable to speak other than "yes" or"no", Yet, Carol lives in her own apartment.

Carol did not always live In her own apartment. She spentthe first 17 years of her life with her grandmother who rand bearding home, Attempts to enroll Carol in school wereunsuccessful due to both the inaccessibility of school andJie staff's Inability to adapt to her personal care needs.As a result of this and Carol's inability to communicate,she spent the next nine years in Brandon Training School,the state institution for the mentally retarded. Misplacedand misunderstood, she received only 31 years of formal edu-cation during that period.

As a result of the national move toward deinstitutionalization,

Carol was lested, and even after nine years of social and edu-cational deprivation, she was found to be within the "highborderline" range of mental retardation. At age 23 Carol wasmoved to a group home for the retarded. It was at this timethat J concerned group home worker contacted VCIL, distressedat the continued inappropriateness of Carol's living situation.

tor the next year and a half a Peer Advocate Counselor workedintensively with Carol, developing an effective means ofcommunication and listening to Carol's desire to move to herown apartment ai, helping Carol develop an understanding of theresponsibilities ,f living more independently. Carol's intensedetermination to in 'e more independently combined with theCounselor's skills led them to seek the active support of theoepartment bf Mental Health and other agencies providing needed%ervices. The coordination of these resources was a long andoften frustrating process but resulted in securing accessible

!

21-974

154

housing, attendant care services, transportation and acomputer with which Carol can pursue her educational

and vocational goals.

Carol spent her 25th birthday in her own apartment andcelebrated It with a group of disabled fi tends who shemet through her participation in a local disabled advocacy

group in Montpelier. This Is not the end for Carol. Sheis continuing to work actively with her Peer Advocate Counselor asshe pursues new steps to improve and maiotain her life.

Carol Is only one of many individuals working for greater independence.

Veer support for such individuals is critical. (n addition to helping individuals

learn to utilize the human service system, the disabled Peer Counselor serves

as a role model, a clear example of the potential for independence of disabled

people.

Responding to disabled citizens' desire to work together on critical concerns,

VCIL's Connuc,ty Advocacy Program involves disabled people in working to improve

the availability and accessibility of both statewide and local resources. Our

efforts to assist disabled citizens In *roving existing services and creating

much needed new resources on ci statewide basis have been extremely successful,

These efforts resulted in not only increased and improved services but also

an increased skills level on the part of disabled citizens and greater conmunlcation

between existing systems and those whom they serve. For example, the Community'

Advocacy Program helped to coordinate the input of disabled citizens to the

Vermont Department of Motor Vehicles which resulted in changes in regulations

and tie reinstatement of he led license plates. An even larger effort

occurred when the Communit.. A cy Program worked intimately with disabled

citizens, the Agency of Humd. , vices and the State Legislature to design and

Implonent an attendant care program which has filled a critical gap in services,.

This state funded Participant Attendant Care Program has became a valued and 'sn

155

effective support service with an annual !midget of over 700,000.

The work on a local level is generally accomplished through the efforts of

cixonunity-based disabled advocacy groups. These groups afford disabled Individuals

the opportunity to work collectively to prioritize concerns, identify and implement

strategies to address these concerns, become more involved In all aspects of the

ciamunity and to increase the cognonity's understanding of disability issues.

these groups also offer members the opportunity to identify with other disabled

individuals and move out of a framework of isolation and powerlessness. Through

working with individuals having different disabilities, a greater understanding

of both the uniqueness of each individual and the greater underlying counonality

is achieved.

These three programs -- Information and Referral, Peer Advocacy Counseling

and Cianunity Advocacy -- are integrally connected.to the needs expressed by

Vermont's disabled citizens. They provide the information, the one-to-one peer

support and group orientation needed by individuals striving to Increase their

independence.

Through the evolution of these programs, other needs were identified by VCIL.

As a result, our organization has expanded to include a Vocational Rehabilitation

Client Assistance Project, an Adaptive Equipment Project, and a study of the

independent living needs of non-elderly, severely disabled residents in Vermont's

nursing homes. Each of these projects either addresses an additional need or

strengthens the effectiveness of already existing programs. Additionally, each

of these projects was designed to incorporate a systems analysis component in their

respective areas. This design results from our realization that in order to best

address personal needs, the approaches of various systems may need to be modified.

We are fortunate in Vermont to have the support. assistance and encouragement of

the Tivis on of Vocational Rehabilitation, the Agency of Human Services and the State

15';

I egislatore in thew poll soft.,

In looking at the services offered b/ Independent living programs, the

Issues of consumer control 41111 a peer approach emst not be underestimated.

At the yeilmAlt Center, for Independent I lying gilt of our Board of Dircn.tors

4441 /t) of our %tali are individuals with disabilities. We're proud of this,

and the benefits of this consumer control have been born out in our program.

It allows us to keep in touch with the emergent needs of our constituents.

It enables us to examine existing service systems from a grassroots perspective.

It allows us to speak with conviction because disability concerns affect us

so personally.

To the disabled individual Seeking Support, we offer a veer approach.

This allows disabled people to approach us without Intimidation or reserve

and to work with someone who may have experienced similar problems and struggles.

',00kioq support to make changes in one's life can be a frightening, even

threatening, experience. Tor many severely disabled individuals social

services are seen as charity. As a result, they often hesitate to express

their needs and thus, not having their needs met, fail to reach their full

potential as active, contributing members of society.

I realize this is a complex, somewhat abstract. concept, and I would like

to elaborate on it from my own personal experience.

At age 20 as I began my move towards independence, i was .held back by

society's attitudes towards disability, These attitudes 1 Internalized until

I became convinced that I as a disabled person was somehow less valuable, less,.

important and less worthwhile than able-bodied individuals. I also perceived

myself as a "burden" to my family, my friends and the community. Special

Parking soaces, ramps, federal and state disability income -- I viewed them

all as charity, I strived for independence, yet feelings of inferiority weighed

on my mind. It wasn't until I became involved with an Independent Living Center

C 4

157

that I began to sense the rightful/IV.., of providing support to people with

disabilities. It was no longer just me -- other people's lives were affected.

Irry certainly deserved to live as full and productive lives as possible. And

it they did, then so did 1. When I later attended the University of Arizona,

I did no alth over 400 other disabled students. At that .oint I knew that

support sernces and physical and program accessibility were not charity --

tney were a ion I rights. I'm not militant, but I have a deep conviction. This

conviction has given me the inner strenith to pursue my goals and to work to

ITMUP' physical and attitudinal barrier, within our society.

This is an important outcome of d peer approach and Is intrinsically a

benef It 01 consumer-run Independent Living Centers as a whole. These Centers

encourage those of us with disabilities to view ourselves as worthwhile .and

no develop our potential as contributing members of society.

Independent i lying Centers also hold the potential for benefiting society

a wh.t . many other minority groups, disability cuts across all

racial, cultural, educational and occupational lines. According

to an unpubl Rho/ U.S. Census study done in 1976, there are 27 ,977 ,000 Americans

a th disabilities. At some time in our lives, each of us will be affected

by a disability. This may occur personally, through age, traumatic injury

or illness or through an experience with a friend or family member. Membership

in the disability canniunity knows no prejudice and anyone of you may be called

to ;oin our ranks at a moment's notice. Be assured that we are not looking

fur new recruits. But you must be aware that the deepest mission of consumer-

run Independent Living Centers is to ensure that life after disability is possible,

dcent and in the most profound human sense, meaningful. When viewed in this

'liner, tan issues raised by the condition of disability and impairment and

the props old and remedies suggested by disabled people themselves can, if

158

properly supported by publ IL polity, len ome another powerful uniting force

for all of our r-polation able-bodied and disabled alike.

Ihave appreciated the opportunity to share my beliefs in the critical

need for consumer-run Independent Living Centers and the value of the services

they provide. Now, I must talk with you about the largest threat to the

continued success of these Centers.

Continued federal support of Independent Living Centers Is critical. The

Vermont Center for Independent Living has actively pursued alternative funding

through menbershlp in United Ways, approached municipal governments, and

submitted proposals to state funding sources and private foundations. These

efforts have m.it with varied success. However, they have typically resulted

in activities which are additions to our Title VII programs rather than

replacement funding for these activities. It is clear to us that the

evistence of the Title Vii, Part 0 funds and the activities supported by these

funds have provided the credibility and confidence sufficient to attract these

additions. In order to address the obvious need to replace Title VII, ?art

0 funding, the Vermont Center for Independent Living has already panned direct

Mil campaigns, continued proposal submissions to both state funding sources

and private foundations, and the provision of educational and training Services

in the coming year.

Our own experience and the conclusions of the California Rehabilitation

Services Administration Study, "Significant Issues in the Establishment and

Operation of Independent Living Centers", have demonstrated that there are

significant obstacles in securing adequate alternative funding. These obstacles

include: difficulty in fee for service arrangements; scarcity of state funds;

competitinn for inadequate private dollars; and the time consuming nature of

fundraising activities.

159

1 believe in these limn; or im.raed Lunpetition for diminishing dollars.

It is totally unrealistic to expect such innovative consumer controlled Programs

to becune operational, demonstrate cost efficiency and general effectiveness,

Jnvelop 1 track record and secure adequate ongoing funds within a three year

Period. In Title VII, Part 11 the representative: of the people established

the prerewilsItes for the initiation of a bold experiment in bringing disabled

individuals into full realization of the rights, liberties and opportunities

enjoyed by all other Americans. The potential of consumer operated Independent

living Centers is vast, but we are only at the point of inception, Disabled

citizens ire just now emerging from centuries of bondage to the restraints

of our disabilities and the uneducated fears of our able-bodied neighbors.

We are learning to'operdte our Centers and have an impact on the design and

delivery of the services which intrinsically affect our lives. There is

,urh we ,All du for ourselves, but we require now, and will require for a

tW longer, try :ontAnuir19 comiltment of the public will to the support

of our effort:. If that will fails now. I cannot be hopeful about the consequences

for our emerging (011:umor operated Independent Living Centers. Realistically,

I would anticipate either general failure or radical restructuring of these

Centers which would so diminish their hope and promise dS to make the shell

of their continuane a mockery to the disabled and a reproach to the decent

concerns of humanity.

Title VII, Part A. if implemented, will provide some support for much

needed services but cannot be expected to significantly impact the continuation

of Independent Living Centers. At present. Title VII. Part B grants to Independent

living Centers are limited to three years. The passage of the amendment

under the 1982 Continuing Resolution has provided only a short-term solution

160

/nod fny dt iCrItt.1

!hi% UMUlitt420 will soon be divilnig with the re-authorlzation or the

Rehabilitation Act. Your Investment in the independence of severely disabled

,J1PrICJ,15 has already yielded high dividends. A dependent population cannot

bc An asset to Anerb.a. We are gaining in our independence and our ability

to nork for, participate in and contribute to our society. Careful examination

lung -teen funding options for consumer controlled Independent Living Centers

will. ensure that your investment is not lost.

Senator WEICKER. Jean, thank you very much.Senator Stafford?Senator STAFFORD. I am not going to ask any questions. I just

think that Ms. Mankowsky has made a very eloquent plea to con-tinue the independent living centers, and it is something thatthroughout the 12 years I have been a member of this subcommit-tee, I have supported very much myself. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator WEICKER. I might add that without Senator Stafford's ef-forts and votes, we would all be a little bit more behind the eightball. He has been one who not only talks about all this business,but has laid his political neck on the line for it.

Mr. Starkloff, it is nice to have you and Mrs. Starkloff with usand, please, you proceed with your testimony.

Mr. STARKLOFF. Thank you. Can you hear me?Senator WEICKER. I can, but I think the people behind you prob-

ably cannot and would like to.Mr. STARKLOFF. Thank you for inviting me to testify regarding

independent living. First, Senator Weicker, I want to say that I amvery proud to experience the strength of yourself and this subcom-mittee, which has earned the respect, trust, and admiration of theentire disabled community.

As' president of the National Council of Independent Living Pro-grams, I am deeply committed to developing a strong and stablebase of financial support for independent living centers whichserve a cross disability population and are administered and staffedby disabled people.

To accomplish this, I believe it is essential that existing inde-pendent living centers have ample time and funds to establishthemselves in their respective communities. As Jean just said, 3years is just not long enough to do that.

Before title VII; part B, of the Rehabilitation Act was funded in1979, there were just a handful of independent living programsaround the Nation. There are now more than 150 in practicallyevery major urban area and in many rural areas where supportservices are minimal or virtually nonexistent.

The independent living concept is a relatively new one, but weare beginning to see a growing enthusiasm from the disabled andthe rest of the community over what independent living can accom-plish.

Personal experiences shared by both staff and other disabled per-sons in independent living centers have blossomed into a unique

161

dedication to assist III ahieving lives with dignity coupled with acomiiiitment to make communities accessible to disabled persons.Host significantly, tlw programs have resulted in the stall's func-tioning as role models for the disabled with whom they work.

Now the center policies and structure have been established andrefined. Many are now concentrating on fundraising, fees for serv-ices, and other possible sources of income. But this takes a greatdeal of time, as I stated earlier. Even though these efforts havebegun. it is critical that part I3 funding continue for existing inde-pendent living programs and part A of title VII be funded as quick-ly as possible.

As you are aware, of course, language was included in the con-tinuing resolution passed on December 21, 1982, allowing for an-other year Of funding for the II programs which were funded in1981. To date, those Funds have not been disbursed and the affectedprograms have suffered great anxiety due to layoffs, service cuts,and the inability to plan their Futures.

Along with lee-for-service contractual agreements, there shouldbe nn organized referral system in place and on ongoing trainingprogram between the vocational rehabilitation agencies and inde-pendent. living programs. As these agreements are being put inplace. it is the responsibility of the independent living programs tosimultaneously initiate public relations and fundraising programs.Ultimately, this wiil lead to, a stabilization of the independentliving programs and can strengthen the movement.

The independent living movement for severely disabled people istoo important for us to allow it to die. It is still in its early stagesand needs Government support to enable it to reach its full poten-tial.

I ask for your continued support to assure the future of inde-pendent living by increasing title VII, part B, funding and to fundpart A. Y6u have demonstrated your commitment in the past and Iknow you will continue to do so. Thank you for what you havedone and thank you for giving me the opportunity to urge yoursupport for continued funding of title VII funded programs. Thankyou.

'The prepared statement of Mr. Stark loft' follows:i

162

FEBRUARY 111.191C1

TESTIMONY ICY MAX J. STARKLoFF. PRESIDINT

NAlloNAL COUNCIL OF INDEPENDENT LIVING PMR1RAMS

S. :1ENA1'E SUB-coMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED

I41l IIMAN LINA OM tont:. I. WI. I' 'Kill

Mk. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE loMMITTEE, THANK YoU IoR INVITING

ME TO rEsriFY mluur YOU REGARDING THE FUTURE OF INDEPENDENT LIVING. AS

PRESIDENT OF rim NATIGNAL tolNcIL OF INDEPENDENT LIVING PROGRAMS I AM

DEEPLY coMMIITED TO DEVELOPING A STRONG AND STABLE BASE OF FINANcIAL SUP-

pour FOIL INDEPENDENT LIVINo CI'iTERs ni.:BvE A CROSS DISABILITY PoP-

ULATION AND ARE ADMINIsTERID AND STAFUE.0 BY DIsABLED PELVIE.

TO ACCOMPLISH rn1;; I RELIEVE IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT EXISTING INDEPEN-

DENT LIVING cENTERS HAVE AMPLE TIME AND FUNDS TO ESTABLISH THEMSELVES

N I III. 111 PH 1 commul; Er t ES. ALL OF Ill W110 HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THE

DEVEIJA,MENT OF cOMMUNITY BASED INDEPENDENT LIVING PROGRAMS HAVE LEARNED

HOW MUcH UM!. UND WORK IF FAKES TO ESTABLISH A CREDIBILITY BASE SO THE

DIGABLED CoMMCNI1Y, STATE AND I0cAl. INSTILL,: IONS, FUNDING SOURCES AND

GOVERNMENT BEGIN TO SEE US AS AN FSl1ENTIAL PART OF THE REHABILITATION

PROCESS IN WORKING TOWARD A MORE PRoITCTIVE LIFESTYLE FOR ALL DISABLED

PEOPLE.

BEFORE TITLE VII PART B OF THE REHABILITATION ACT WAS FUNDED IN 1970

THKRE'WERE JUST .1 HANDFUL OF INDEPENDENT LIVING PROGRAMS AROUND THE NATION.

THERE ARE NOW MoRE THAN 150 IN PRACT ICALLY EVERY MAJOR URBAN AREA AND IN

MANY RURAL AREAS WHEItE SUPIRAUI SERVICES ARE MINIMAL OR VIRTUALLY NON-

EXISTENT. THE INDEPENDENT LIVING CONCEPT IS A RELATIVELY NEW ONE, HUT WE

ARE BEGINNING 'TO SEE A GROWING ENTHUSIASM FROM THE DISABLED AND THE REST

OF THE COMMUNITY OVER WHAT INDEPENDENT LIVING CAN ACCOMPLISH.

THERE ARE MANY SUCCESS STORIES L COULD TELL YOU, BUT I THINK THESE

TWO WILL GF1 MY POINT ACROSS. 1WC. YEARS AG0, A 40 YEAR OLD WOMAN WHo IS

Iti:i

t.41:,1111 I PI I F11011 A BINA'. (,PI, INJURY Atilt WAS LIVING IN A Aft; HospITAI,

FOR THE PAST FEN YF.AltS WAS ;'l."1' IN I oNtwr wriii Lorm, I PENHENT LIVING

Ph6RAM. AFTER lu MONTHS OF INTENSIVE CONSULTXTION SHE MOVED INTO HER OWN

11:11(I11ENI hPPING IH)SE loNG YEARS IN rm: HoSPITAL MANY DIFFERENT COMMUNITY

AGENCIES HAD WoRKD W I EH ID 'WITH V i Ire LITTLE SUCCESS. ASS ISTANCE AND SUP-

Poi( I ER, Al I cENTI It ENABLED 111.11 Ft, FIN', AND tyrn.r.,.E ExisTr46 PUDLIC RE-

SOURCES F'' 11Elt ADVANT AGE. IiF.t MINE 'HIE LoCAL INDEPENDENT LIVING cENTEli IS

.LFAFFEH UY BRopEs:.; IoNALLY TICA NEIC DISABLED INDIVIDUALS, THE STAFF WERE

Not ,NLY ABLE To HELP AS PRoEESSIONALS. BUT ALSO AS PEERS. THIS PEER

:,cio Et I WAS I HE KEY I'' HF.I, AcIl I EV I Nti suCcENs

Ulf V. 5.11. EXPER I ENt I, III Itt ,TH STAFF AND oTHER DISABLED

PF It;:oNS HAVE ItI.,J.;;;LAIED INTo A I NIt4CE DED I CAT ION TO ASSIST IN ACHIEVING

I . IVES uF I S S I F Y CW.I.I.E1) ni A CoMMITSIENT TO MAKE COMMUNIT I ES 1(:CESSIBLE

PI ut: El, pi lc, S SICN 1E11 ANTES' . TIIE. plioGRANIS HAVE RESULTED IN

HI 11 Nt I IoN MuDELS FOR T111: DISABLE!) w rni WHOM THEY WORK.

ttdIE ill) Flto11 THE STATE INSTITUTION SHOWING THA' IN THE,

.A:.I LAB 111 I,II,'; n :.I V I Nt, IN .THE HOSPITAL AT A COST To TAXPAYERS OF

LIVI Nt. I I Y IN 11Eli OWN ,11'ARTMENT , HER

Nt, ,:;IS 'WERE VI lG IN( 1.11,F.H ZIA) HOUSING, FINANCIAL

A55151ANCI.: FROM VoCAT I oNAI, itHIAlt ILI TAT ION AND SOCIAL SECURITY. SHE IS

NcW IN A loit ILA IN I so PRotiltA11 AND po:;:onii.ITy OF DECREASING THESE

to:;V:I VI NY ;,IUD.

ANo: BLit f NoEPE:tItF Ni' LIVING cENT ER WAS INVITED BY A MAJOR courukATION

IN 1111..11+. ,SIMUN I FY .1"o .A.151:LI"I HEM IS HEALING WITH EMPLOYEE PROBLEMS WHEN

HIRING .1 SEVERELY DISABLED PERSON. THEIR NON-DISABLED EMPLOYEES WERE UN-

, oMPIRFABI E CoMMLN IC \TING WITH :ASH .ASSISTING THEIR FELLOW EMPLOYEES WHO

WERE DIBABLED. -1'11 IS INDEPENDENT LI V IN6 CENTER WAS 11151:1) TO CONSULT WITH

TIN.; CUSIDA!'S WORESHol'S 1 5 1t ,/NE-ON-ONE CONSULTATION IN OVERCOMING

164

Ill Iltit I II I 1 IN 1 Is, ,1,/, I III I 1 ' 1. .11 1 I. 1+1 1 11 1 111

N; ii,I. till I :,1,1 I' A it 1 1.;,..11d, iiiL;tot 1111 1,1:...it 1,

I Ill 0 tt 111101.I 1,1 iltiNttl I,A1All !III GI El (,I CA1,11 I I I,

N I'll P I E I N 1 I I I I N I , , Nil 1 : : , 1 V 1 . 1 : 1 ill ItiW T11,1 I I I Y I I I I 1.,,i 1,1!

'.1 1 1 El 11,11,1 11110 I ; 1, All lii II'.lit MAl,I I.,

; ,;, I, It IN ii. i;vl, , will 1, 1 1,1 1 1 :. iii

1 K 1 ,1 E l .1 1 1 , 1 1 1 iii i 1 1 1 ; . V . I : , h u h ii Ott 1: I 1 1 11,1 G11

I III t 1 I I I It 1 11 II 1,1 1,1 I I.. 1.1 1 I AI. 1 11.11 l'lit I II 1 I I l.G1 I

I 1 ' . 1 , 1 1 ' 1 N I , 1 I i 1 L I . Alit v lit f 1 1.1. VII II :11,1 I' Itt

Ql, It I I 1.. 1,, lit; I

11'11,1Ni, 1.'11 1111,1 1 liii,. II. II I Otti ,11 I 1 MI 1 lilt A I 'Nil II it :11,111 II,-

1 .'1, 1 I I.1 Ii IN II:. 1,1 , I Vi G11111-. I 1 1 NI W I 1 11 1 UI Hi', 1,i tIll I

I I: N, .1C1,1 111 NT-, '1111 NI :11,11 I 1, 1,1 Al, I .'I l 1,1 I HIItA1 IV FIlM IN PEA, E.. ; It II

It 'I i '.1,; i

1 111 I It II 1:1 11111 I 1,11 VI ii t AGI N, Al.;1,

11111 Aiil lit I 'it PI": IN 11 ALI.

1 1 I . , 1 1 1 1 I I I of ill. I Oil I I I N1,1-NV IT 1 III 1'110(111AM:: 1 1 , F. INIEL

1 1 N 1 1 SLY I I I .1 1 1 I1 1,1.1: I:I ill i t.t, ,1 NI, 1,,1 1 :, 1 Nt: ELT I 1,1,11411.V

hut W II 1. 1.1 .11, ot A :1E111 1 1 1 1, r. 1 III. I 1,1,1,1,1 l.r,I,NT i.1VINII IlIttOilAMO AN!,

I It Ni III I Ill M,,I 1 Ill 1:1

1111. I N1,1 V I ,, Mill 1,11 11 1- PEOPIE: TOU

I MI I Al 'Gil I It '1,, hi, iii i 1 lit ii II I; STILT IN ITS F.:11,1,1 STAGES

N I Si 11011 To 1..NAPI.F I 1' TO 1110111 ITS E1,1.1. POTENT 1 Al..

I A:IK lT 11 V.:1'1, INI111, 1.,11T Al:111'11E. Till, PETITE II INDEEENI,EIIT

1.1 V I lit, Ill it '1'11 1.I. V 1 I ETN1,1 lir, AND FUND 1,011I A. YOU' HAVE

1,1-M, .,t, .1 I:Al y,,Uli IMI,,N 1' IN '1111, PAST AND I KNC)1+, WM, WILL r(lIll'INEF: To

111:11.F. WI1A'i VoL 11,111, 1,1 :NT AND 'I 11A.NK lOUt FOlt GIVING MI. TI1E

oppoitrUNE: frf YOEI, GuNT INUIT) FLINI/ING OF 'FITLY. Vii

FENDED 111.(ICII(AMS

Scooter Wrickrit Thook you very much, Mr. Storldorl Thereason why you su Hip turn to counsel was not I hat I was ignor-ing you. I was merely trying to get an answer to the questionwhich you posed as to funds that were voted in the continuing reso-lution which have not been, as you point out, released,

Counsel indicates to me, and counsel can correct me if I amwrong, that apparently Mr. Conn has taken the position that addi-tional funds are needed if arll the centers are to he funded. Myquestion to counsel Was, (AIR'S this Mean that we hold hack all thefunds in anticipation of one or two million additional, or whateverit is.

Do you have any further knowledge on this?Mr. STARK LonE. Well. I understand that they are $2 million

short, but they have come up with appoximately $1 million in un-obligated funds from the past 2 years. This is tailor; that is all Ihave heard.

Senator WEtckER. But in the meantime, none of the funds havebeen released. is that correct'?

Mr, STA RK 1.1wv. Right. Four programs that were cut off' the lasttime are now holding back on rehiring staff, which means they cuthack on services and other things.

Senator WI-ACKER. Staf will prepare this afternoon. and my sig-nature will he on it this evening, a letter to Mr. Conn to see if weearn get those funds released right away.

Mr. STA RK 1,(/ EF. I appreciate that very much.Senator W KICK ER. Thank you all very much.Our last panel will relate to projects with industry, and we will

have Mr. John Moore of Threshold Rehabilitation Services inPennsylvania, and Judy Valuckas, president of the Connecticut Co-ordinating Council on Handicapped. I want to thank Judy and Iwant to thank John for being accommodating to Senators Eagletonand Stafford in the sense that they had to be elsewhere and theydid want to introduce their constituents.

So. even though you are last, you are definitely not the least andI very much look forward to the testimony to be offered by both ofyou. You go right ahead and proceed in any way that you deem fit.

STATE NI ENT OF JOHN II. NIOORE, .11t. PRESIDENT, THRESHOLDREHABILITATION SERV ICES, INC., READING, PA., ON BEHALF01."11 I E NATIONAL ASSOC! ATI ON OF REHABILITATION FACILI-TIES: AND JUDITH VA LUCK AS, PRESIDENT, CONNECTICUTCOUNCIL ON HANDICAPPEDMr'. min:- Good morning. I am John Moore. I am the president

ot Threshold Rehabilitation Services.Senator WEtct;R. OK. John, get that mike up to you there.Mr. MooRE. OK: I am here today to represent the National Asso-

ciation of Rehabilitation Facilities, which is the primary nationalmembership organization of community-based vocational and medi-cal rehabilitation facilities. Over 350 of these organizations are vo-cationally oriented and provide a wide range of services to bothphysically and mentally handicapped persons. These services in-clude evaluation and testing, skills training, work adjustmenttraining. sheltered employment, and job placement.

1 7

Today, I would like hi tolk briefly idiom oily of the most uniquePrograms within the Rehabilitation Act, which k projects with in-

dustry, or PWI as it is commonly called. This program began in196S as a small project within the Rehabilitation Service's Adminis-tration to involve private industry in the rt,habilitation process.

The Rehabilitation Act of 197:I, as amended, recognized the curlysuccess of PWI and incorporated it its it separate component withinthe Rehabilitation Act. Now, PWI is not a single program model,but it is a concept that placement into competitive jobs should hethe goal of vocational rehabilitation, and that the business commu-nity should have a strong role in the rehabilitation process.

The development. of rehabilitation programs over the years hasplaced a lot of emphasis on the identification of handicapping con-ditions and the valuation of a handicapped person's capabilities.We have made a tot of progress in adapting training programs andspecial equipment to the needs of handicapped persons.

For many years, however, effbrts to get those persons into jobsand to incorporate the private sector into that process did not re-ceive the same emphasis that evaluation and training received.

Now, the concept of projects with industry helps to complete thatprocess and to close that loop and to allow the private sector tobecome part of the rehabilitation process.

PWI has demonstrated that with concentrated efforts, severelydisabled persons can be placed into competitive jobs much morequickly and at lower cost than had previously been anticipated.The key to the PWI concept has been the involvement of the busi-ness community.

Among the several PWI models that have been developed, allhave business playing a central role. In some cases, it is the actualbusiness concern that administers the program and places thehandicapped trainees. IBM and Control Data have impressive pro-grams.

In other instances, national trade associations have taken thelead, such as the National Restaurant Association. Most PWI pro-grams, however, are administered in local communities by local re-habilitation facilities. PWI programs at the New Haven Easter SealGoodwill Rehabilitation Center is one of the olde4t PWI programsand one of the best examples of what such a program can accom-plish.

In all of these local programs, a business advisory council helpsestablish actual job needs in the community, sets standards fortraining and placement, and as:;ists in the actual placement proc-ess. The business community brings new measures of success to therehabilitation process. These measures exemplify productivity, costeffectiveness, accountability and bottom-line results,

Social service principles and values are still important in theprocess, but they are not to be an excuse for poor results.

Nationally, PWI programs have placed somewhat over 30,000 dis-abled persons in competitive jobs. The average salary paid to thesePWI graduates has been over $9,000 per annum. Seventy-five per-cent of the disabled persons enrolled in PWI were placed. The costto the Federal Government was less than $1,000 per placement,

17.

107

The Fedi.' hinds were supplanted by other State and localfunds, including Vocational Rehabilitation funds. Over 11,0011 busi-nesses have participated in the PWI program.

The National Association of Rehabilitation Facilities has admin-isteed a nationwide PWI program since 197K. We work with five ofour Slate chapter organizations and 20 rehabilitation facilities todevelop programs which use transitional work slots in industry andtraining based on the recommendations of local employers.

Last year, the NARV project placed 193 handicapped personsthrough )i combination of Federal, State, and local funds. Most ofthe clients ware severely handicapped, with the vast majority beingdiagnosed as mentally ill and deVelopmentally disabled. The salaryrange for the persons placed was between $0,1:32 and $19,200.

A recent independent survey taken by the Portland State Uni-versity found that in fiscal year 1981, the average hourly wageearned by PWI clients was $1.75. The average cost per placementwas $7:i7 in Federal funding in that year, and in a survey of clientsplaced through PWI compared to other placement programs, it wasfound that twice as many MI-placed clients were likely to be pro-moted within their jobs.

The National Association of Rehabilitation Facilities believesthat the proven success of PWI over the last IS years clearly justi-fies expansion of the PWI concept. Although PWI has received in-creased funding over the past several years, it is time that PWI begiven higher visibility. Congress should provide a funding levelwhich would encourage PWI programs in all States and will allowexpanded programs in certain industries which hold the mostpromise kw jobs.

NARY recommends an authorization level of at least. $25 millionfor fiscal 1981. NARF feels this figure is fully justified, given thereduction in public assistance costs and the increased tax revenuesthat would be realize I from the more than 18,000 handicapped per-sons that could be employed if' the full authorization of $25 millionwas appropriated.

We also feel that PWI should he given a separate title in the Re-habilitation act as a concrete indication of Congress 'commitmentto providing meaningful employment opportunities to handicappedpersons. PWI should continue as a discretionary national programwithin the Rehabilitation Services Administration.

The flexibility of cooperative agreements between the RSA com-missione. the private business sector, and the private nonprofitsector should continue. The flexibility afforded under the currentprogram has allowed and encouraged many businesses to partici-pate in the program which might not otherwise have;bc,en willingto take the initiative to take part in PWI.

This flexibility has also allowed local rehabilitation agencies totailor PWI programs to meet local needs. If anything, added em-phasis should be placed on the cooperative nature of the programbetween the business community and the local rehabilitation agen-cies that can assist business in the training and placing of handi-capped persons into meaningful jobs.

Mr. Chairman, I cannot let the opportunity pass to express theappreciation and thank you of the National Association of Reha-

many members and handicapped cli-ents hi!. the work III(1 ul'thi, (11/1111111h.C.

Our ilstiOiItiOn st,tncl, ready (l) w1111( with y011 1111d your staffand the other members of your committee toward an early reauth-orization of (hi, Hohahilitution Act, and sve will provide a morecninpehensive statement on all ;1.vects of the reauthorizationbefore the record is closed. I will he glad to answer any questions ifyou have any.

Senator WEicitKit. Mr. Moore, thatilc you very much for yourvalued testimony and we will look forward to receiving your moredetailed statement.

[The preparNI statement of Mr. Moore follosys:1

Mar

169

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REHABILITATION FACILITIES) t,

STATENENT OF

John H. Moore, Jr.

President

Threshold Rehabilitation Services, Inc.Reading, Pennsylvania

On Behalf Of

The National Association of Rehabilitation Fact 1 ti es

Before The

Subcorrrni ttee on the Handicapped

Coriniteo on labor and Huron

United States Senate

February 24. 1983

1

170

Ili,1 tik.t , 'lr h.I I I tails, Nisa e, I ., ihtthhotti

koklbl I ',Lit ton 'wrilk.,", Itic., of Reading, Pennsylvania . I am here t oh-1y

r e p t esent Iiij t h e Nat tonal c i a t of Retold l i t at ion Fact I it i.

NA10. the pi !miry national membet /at 1,/, nl r,nnunlIy- har,r`rlvoca-

t ona I arid mod I ...al rehabi lit at i la. t (Ivey of these (wont/at ions

rte v.s .1 t .11,1 I Iv I 010 .41 , ptowtding a wide range both physical ly

and meraa I Iv handl ll,t.t per..on. 'them. !au-vice include evaluation and test ing,

kill Hain] rig Wol It ,id pi.,t rtint tr,uIii uv`, ,helterirl (grid ovilleflt and jOb place-

!Pont

11.11 in A. t '1?,k , ha for 'limy years provided the

toundat t.n f.r. I he prO'1,0 on of service.: to mental ly and physical ly di sabled

perons, the trn federal rehalii I I tat cri program has its roots back to the

1'110. and ha, !aq-viN1 a, a rl,,tr Ind! ca t ion of the f ederal government 's

rom,.11-.11)1 I t tv and ccutnitment to provide meaningful programs for AaeriCa's

dl sabri d i 1Z 1 2.0r1s.

rhe vocat tonal r.M.ihi 1 t at ion program has always been a cooperative arrangement

between the t g.-vernment , the states and the thousands of private, non -

private I !Ail I I t'S providing services to di sabled perscns. NARF is

proud to pr:vate, nonprofit sector of the rehabilitation ccmnin-

i ty.

Today I wag'.-; io talk brief ly about one of the ITIOSt unique programs Within

the Rehabi , Project s With Indust ry. Project s With Indust ry, or PW1

as it is crt-c! . 1 v :ailed, began in 1968 as a smell project within the Rehabili-

171

! I.11 Ri , I I sit It, the rdt,ibl11t,ittcrt

111 Rt'Ildb; IlLit I on Act of 1973, as :mended , recognized the early sue-

rp,irat ed tt a, a separate component within the Rehabi I t a-

r,o'l a!`J n..lol hail 1 l,,(11.1,1 that placement Sato carpet ive

ria g vocat tonal rehabilitation and that t he business can-

lea h nav a -,t ri.ng role In II.e rehabt I t tat on process. The development

of I etat., i it it 1,,,1 i,tcy4farr ti' vei.ns has s placed rritch needed errphirs s .)n

oat i.am id ham ! capp Imo t ions and eva I t on of a handicapped

lit Les. %eh progress has also been nude in adapt ing t raining

, +1a,) 'men to the needs of handicapped persons. For rainy

et tart to ot t hamthc,q,ped persons inter jobs did riot

,11.1,1.1, that e..aluati ori and t rai ntng received. ['WI errchasizes

re:I ha! ter;cr,,,, rat ed liar concent rat ed ef t s se% erely di sabled persons

oari he place! Into cspetittye !Inch more ciu ckly and at lower cost s than

had prvio,-.1v hen experienced. The key to the FWI concept has been the

ni r. h ttitress ccurimi tv. Among the several P41 models that have

op-al : hit s mess playing a cent ral role. In some cases, it is

me mias ;less ,:oricern that administers the proo,ram and places the

handl capped trainees. IBM and Control Data ta have had in-press ive programs. In

.a he, instances, nal 1 caa I trade as site tat Ions have taken the lead such as the

ama: Pesi.e,t,e I A tat tom. Most PWI programs, however, are aural ni stered

rot:run; t les mx local rehabilitation facilities. FWI programs at the

Faster Seal -Cookiwi 1 I Rehabilitation Cent er is one of the oldest PWI

172

pr ai,J1 ! es ,t pr ,ar, a( r 09;11 sh, In

e,11

nrogrart.s a ` +u;:.-Jess advisory ..- .ui.II helps estal+l'sh actual job

tv, set s standards for t raining and placement and assists

s 11). hti.,1 ries, r,rmii ,1 ti brings new Measures of

I t align io 111,1 x+ gal i fy productivi ty,

alt.thi Illy and It t,in in, !ty,(11 t ,. ;orI al service prin-

va V.7 r I ritiort ant hilt they should not be an for poor

1"?.1 prk_Rr,rh, saLl Cd persons ii. compet t vc

:h c,ta..;e cl (-V paid to these 1"41 graduates has been over $9000 per

I iv, pet int of the di sahl ed persons enrol led in :NI were

t iidera was 1e5, than $1000 per placement.

The Het.' funds wet e nppLintist hy other state arid local funds, including

Hina renahilitation bids. (Nr 1,1,000 ba, messes have participated in

"6. i ;.!

NARF tin LidNI1 n -,!,red a na t ona ris/ I program since 1978. NARF works with five

NAld: ers and lcld rehatiiitatiLni facilities to develop programs wttich

;ha l work slot S In l!VhiSt ri and training based on t he reccinmenda-

t I ocal oyers. Last year. the NARF protect placed 493 handicapped

through a ,:arir.nat On f federal state and I cal funds. Most of the

ol ent s were severely handicapped with t hi, vast major' ty being diagnosed as

11 an.: de\ opront.i I iy disabled. The salary range f or these persons

Lei wf,m and $19,200.

173

' ": ' t ,tyt I ,m111(1 thl:t

10 In -,,,tvey of client::

I t hat twice is

i,, rh.1, i

I ' tr, t . Al tt,),Izt, Phi has received increased

1.z If :c . ... , . a It in: ha t P11 !re ven hi :Vier

41,1 .1 I I .1 h :41 t r,ourage Phi

p ir.15 .11 -- wit I pro;rarz, iii certa in Indust ties

pr 'o' ci j Cs. NAN r cc:err:ends an atithericvjt ion level of

The current funding I evel is Si; nu I l ion

it :or i-11 MI Ii en I or t t scat l98 it

har, nn 1 I ri root t he needs of handl tapped persons

p: : it .1: ,. ',APE t I only believes t t rehab' I ti-ii. noun 0,11,1 'wet that neat given adequate

r, r - ....5 that an increase of throthreefold to the appropriat tens

t r r"41 1 r, 10 easi iv DbtaIned, therefore t hi s recarmendat i on is for an

t I . . ) 1 , l e v e t it,t'; nu I I icsn t o ertph,1515 the need t o expand PWi "IARF

thr, : I . ii t I f ed the reduction in publ iv a Ow sr ance

.1nd th.. t.r.i revenues tna t wcritd he realized f rem. the more than

! 000 handl :-...apped :::rs.tns that it:), he erp i eyed i f the full ant hori zaticn of

rra I cri .

, b o : 1 1 , 1 :.,iver, ,,,pa rut.' t i t l e In t h e Pelialm I i tat t on Act 15 a concrete

ca ttcrief Coraz;ress' calm t merit no providing meaningful employment opportun-

1 5:

174

H ..! p !r! . .1. !!,!!! !!!!!, A!. A di et i 41.1 ry nit i (vial

p!!. 4.; 771177 77177 77i'1,17111. .111 ..7,t1 :7'11/1, t17111,1717711,it1,11. I vila I ity of

it 1 1.7177.71!,741 1,07 '.47,11 711(' -..',-1!1711,7.1 .11,7 , the itri hat,,,,ess sector

Ind v. t r. !hid d '! iin'. 11,7 1,7X11,1117'; .:,r(Iftd under

the 'ir It'' 7 pr'1.7 .1711 hi, Ail n - h,rdno,,,,,". ii porttclitte

!!,1,7111 rcd .dher!,..! t! 1,,,e been 111.1:, IC ak the

Ic tale ;. ci II,, t-..!Ntratris. T1 !! I I ex itd i!!,/ ibis ii allowed

II ,'t IC' t al lot- ic meet 1::(1 I creeds. If

171','!, 7! 7,7, .141,1 - ;i! i n,iccre of t he

Tv !Ind 1117 .1 rehdl, 11td oh agencies

A!,,!, t 1,1; In 7 ri rriccc arid placch,; capped persons into

!.17 1,, 1 11 1 7 ,

Mc. hal 1 ! dnh..! :et t 11! op'.': ninny pd I.:. expre,5 the apj, !! ociat ion

And t "LAP!.. t 1,14 ! Il.e,11cdpie,1 ndi v are ;,erk,!ed

Ahd ri rehab! !irat I co ha, tho I ed,le: ship von have exhibit ed

IS J1,1117.11111 .7 7 711 ,11,-.11TIA t

!iAid! - . t a t And!. r eddy t '..;.?rk t h vou and staff t early r eau ho

,A t !, .1! t he 16.11Aht .!-, Act of i';17.1as dr-nem:ed. A CC9,1- C110.'11517/72 slat

t the r-eiuthori ?At ion 'Ai II be --).1brrlit t ed by NART- before the

41..,1 t ..-er ArN /The! t dx-1!. vcri he :f the Cartinit tee

7111,71i 7 .7 I1111,

175

Senator n k la( Judy, you go right ahead. it is good to haveyon.

VAI.t.CKAS. Thank you, Senator. I atn not addressing you aspresident t he Connecticut Coordinating Committee of the Handi-capped i would low to take this opportunity to thank you onhehnlf 'II for to, import you have given the disabled.

I might add that as a member of the Little People of 'America, Iurn used to being the It 0 the last, and also the middle and thefirst. I Laughter]

Ms. VALuckAs. I urn highlighting my written testimony to indi-cate the role that projects with industry has played in my own in-dependent living. Ten years ago, after receiving an educationfunded through MR and working for the State of Connecticut, itwas necessary for me to leave my job to undergo a series of oper-ations and a long period of recovery. I found myself in the sameposition then that a great many disabled have had, not having ajob, not knowing if I could work, and not feeling I had any market-able skills at the time.

After having to prove that I was sufficiently disabled not towork, I was able to receive social security disability benefits. I re-ceived less than $5,000 a year, which enabled me to maintainmyself at below the poverty level for my area of the country.

Quite by chance, through my involvement with the legislative co-alition in Connecticut, I came across the New Haven rehab centerand their computer programing training program, and I requested,after I had seen the program, to enter the course. I knew that Ihad found what I had been looking for. I had an opportunity tolearn a marketable skill. I had my confidence bolstered by beingwith people who were starting over or just starting out. I had coun-selors to help me retool my interviewing and job-seeking skills. Ihad an opportunity to meet prospective employers and to visit pos-sible places of employment.

I was learning a new skill that would not just fade away either. Iknew that if I should have to leave my job again for medical rea-sons, I would havt kill that was in demand and a place to startfrom. When I h, .niched the 11-month program at the NewHaven rehab cen-, ., I not only had a firm job offer, and I had sev-eral, but I knew I could do the job and keep do.ng it.

For the past 21/2 years, I have been employed by Aetna Life &Casualty in Hartford as a programer, and each year I have paid intaxes what I had been making each year on social security. I earnover $20,000, and I can once again provide my own tm.sportation,pay fOr my own special needs, such as special shoes or equipmentthat I need for my disability, and live in my own apartment.

I know I can take some credit for my own success, because I

know that one does not just passiNely place a client; that you haveto actively participate in your program,' using your own resources.But at the same time, I know that a successful program such as theone in New Haven was the product of a lot of hard work on thepart of many professionals, skilled in bringing together all thefacets needed to make it work.

The active involvement of the business community, the participa-tion of the rehab center, the client recruitment and evaluation, andthe job counseling and interviewing just did not come about; they

1

1114)11I ;Ind wrio g(1111r, 1111 !whirl(' the SC CM'S all along, andthey still art..

It there is itny point to my own independent living, it is t hat I

that this project )J[ continued and supperted. Thank you.IThe prepared stati,illnt of Ms. Valuckas follows:]

It'd, I I 'tit 111 PI I, HAI( tet

177

.11Hi Ill I,II ICtIiiIi 1.1,1tItl'Alty ti,u4:1

Pi dent I frail

I 'di lott in,i; Iant.

la.,t 11,1111.14,

Intl I

norning/good afternoon Senatiirs my name ts Judith Valtickas

!coin ronnctient, and I would like to tell you ot some

my eNpertences as a illaihid person,

I ha, Linn years at a I1n,o when most persons with my physical

would nave almost. certainly been placed in MI institution

or remain at lwm wilh !amity with little hope of !with; mainstreamed

Into Amertean tile.

alt 1, the support of my family and some members of the local school

J, ante to attend local gramnmr and high schools. Even so,

"w r' ',"r" .dc,tactes to overcome from crawling onto local

to limblnv up flights of stairs to get to a classroom.

nensI,Jr.red myself lucky as most of my disabled contemporaries, who

were only io gut around than 1, were tutored at home

until the ,we of lo and lett in the cave of their families with little

or n, ,t knowledge id lit, on their own,

'ntth I nil i; tram the iiivirnon of VocittIonal liehabi 1 itat ion, I wiiS'

, 1 to al tend Mid riii!,1 led a 13.A, in PAW i 1.811 in 1968, but

S, t- frif, ,hoot to work was far from easy, It ma common-

e -Yen recently as the late 60's among the disabled to believe

th.i private sector was forbidden territory as fur as getting

a doh one's hest but was to pass a civil service

xim and get a Job with the State. This is what I did after

over , year for a toh - in vain. In 1970 I started work as'

Peiieari:h Asalyst l-r the Dept. on Aging and kept that Joh for over

three yew':;, I wa- ble to support myselt alai bought my own car and

arta.d a nod salary for the time.

prohle,s I to leave my Job and undergo a long

'1.i-1,, of oerati,ns with an even longer period of recuperation lollow-

in. Alter a.whiliVhad furnished proof that I was sufficiently (Its-

al,td er,on,J, not to he able to work, I was authorised to receiye Social

178

I , !! l' 11 -I ,11 .1 ptI't 111,,I, my .,.111 I ,

1 ', ' 1 ./ 'I 11' 11111i I 1' . ) l ,r,li ..t1o1 1.11 1 11, .11.1.1.11, 1111 111

1 , 1 I I . 1 1 ' 1.111 10 .11',1 1,1 111111 I ',' 1 WIt' [WI III .1111114; 11,i,1 11

I vii WI th ivy null I !F! iii :!,IV. WO",

II A! I I!!I L1 !y! it I I II 11', II,!1!!! )t IIk v 1111t t hr I II-

..1PP .1 , 11111 1 V4P 411I1W 1

flit, 1' I 'P1.1.

;I.,: I 1 ,t 1,., .1 1 .1i 'Alti 11. I Ihttl ,111.11,1 1111'' WI 111 11111.11'

s ; . 1 P 4 1 1 1 P P 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 " 4 1 1 1 1 1 1d1, I 111 1h, 111.1A 1 y y.,1,. I I y

I I I I , .1 I i '1 !!!! ,111 11.".111' I 111 i)1 .t tn.t It :11.1, .1,./1.

I.1 I I 7 717771 III lt,y I ill ii, . I 11,1,1 111'11.

11.11 .1 A tIn. v:11,1,11:11_1111. it (It, 7.1,

1 1 4 1 1 ' 1 1 1 4 1 1 4 . 4 1 1 4 , 1 1 1 4 P I P 1 1 , 1 1 , 1 1. 1111.11 I I VP. 111111,', 1.1.11, 11,1/1/1'1111W,

.1 i it I. .\.7,7 I tin , I I; 111, '117 . 1,11,1,1 I t 17 711, 11,11-71 ..7,7117 77,07,

.:. It I ii. 1.I. I I 11.,it t I ni dt,,,i 1111,11 1 II A11,1.1'1,0,11 111, . 11:1;1,11

1i11".1 "111' "1.1." .11111I.I 1111.1. III unitltt 11111:, ; 1(0144 with ,11.11,-

.11..1 ' Ii 111,1 r r t,it tinlinit cull I 1,1,11, 1,11.

I I 11,1 I I I C.I Intl wk.ric 1111 1 I I In, 1 rOil It' ;II I

. 1 7 7 i-in 11th , y,,..1". I 11..IIII111,1'1,1 11.1I,' I II:, to

1, 1, II .11+,1 JtC1 I' 110' 1.011111,1.1 11111 l'mrI,11.-

,1 I 7 '7.17,1 7 Ii ,7 711'1 i I 1pi/,..1 .1,1 I t, I twit ,t 1 t 1'1,1111 1.011

I P. I :.' 1,1 1 1 1 1 !. 111,- 11 111.11 i..t pin.tI I 11 t L1111111,1 11'111

r I, 1 LI 1'711 III I 11. "Nt''it 11.11.11.11 II111.11.1

.1' 1. I 11 ni,i , 1.1;1_1, I W.1, .11%. 1 ,n 1,,ur ,/t I II, l'11111_1,r aryl

I r ir I II" ht.1111,1, 1:11011 .

p . I .111.; II.- 177711 1,777,1770d that tiny wile luwnklnig11s- 111,11 ,11 777,117 7' I 71' 1,11i 17, 1,777.117r, I

A .r . I lnIIil Vt II, ilitinI I Iii,' '7V117711 1.7111771r t 71/71 t y 14.(tl,77,77171,71 - 7111k1

7 7 7 , 1 I 7 1 1 7 7 1 1 7 1 1 7 7 t 1 I crrytm hit ort. I 11..11 I 1,1it.,1 !It/1V It,

,..1 1 lit

I ,71:1 1 .1, hitt 7 !1.1.1 1, 11 I 1 I r:.' ' .1 . 1 w,tn il, t

Ifl ',.; V Jr .1 rr'...1. tr I r,k ! I I . I hint ;nil

1.. 7.1171711.. II 7 .717,1 7,1.111,117,1 117 1717717777 71 7,1777 i1 1171Y , 11;Y

; Wi ,..;; 1.11 I il,,, !! I I ;hake ; 1 iii' I or, I Tot. w11,!.

`1. 1 1' 1 1111

179

1.1, ,,, t,., 1 .1 ,1 1',' 1, 1 1,', 1 11 "1 10'1 . 1,

1, 1 1..11 .1 1 1 1 1 11 1

'1,1 .1'1 .? 1 ,, 1 1 1,, ..11 1

, 1. 1 , ht. 1 lilt. pI i t. I t I', 1 011 1 :,.1, 1 11,', ,1. 1 1 1

:1 1.1,..I 1 1 t ,,,t.o 1 `, 1 t 11 1/r. t ...I, ...III' 1 ,;1.1 t 11 I /,., 1,1

' r, 't Hi I .1 ,P, i I I 111,1 t ti,,t, tp t I ,P,1,1 ;,,, 'Iv,. )

1 I Ili . 111 111111.111.1 1111 ,1 1, 1

1 1 f . : , ^ ^ ^ ' ^ 'o1 1 i1,11 1 II 1 .111, 1 111 11 111 1 1, 11.111 .1 1 j

.1 . ! ; 1 I. 1 . 1'1 1 1 1 11,' 1 i1111 1 .

.11. .174 1 W.' 11.1 1 1 1 11.1V. '=* 'v'`' A,1 P.

1 1 I. r I It'd ,.. 11AV, 11:1 Id

1,li 11,.1.. 11,., 1 11 ".1 ;;,p, t

/1 ,11' .1 t 1 1 11, .

it 111.1 1,1 1 11 Illy

I 1. I 1 1 ! I I 1111, i ,t' ivy ;1, I

.I1 111.. t.,i I 1 11 any 1.,1111 1 l't,; hot I 11,t

' l'. r' I II :1 I. I r.ii :tt I I vt, l' (' I 1,,

.,;,. m". . .","``I II;. , pPl., I Pp,- it It, 1.1 It,I ,,t

1,.I k ,,,1 t {,,I t" , I:, I 1 It'd 1/1'1 111..1 t -, 1 ; I 1.,,,.1 , h :,/ 1 1. 1,.. 1 '.1."11".. 1.111' ,1 IV(' 1 11V,1 1

1 ,. !,11 1 i.. , . .1,.1,0111 1 11, 1,1 1'1 11.1 , . "1 r,Pil.th, ,,tit t

tp., I pi., t , .1/1 11,, 1 1 '41; ,1 1 lit 11",, 1...1 1 114

1I 1.1,1 t .1 1..01 1 11..Y C,.1 1 H11 1 11,..1 h.. 1 1 :1 1 ,'111:

1 1 1 1 t 11 k.P I ha I ,,P; ,,E I II

"I .! ,

I I ! IttI', I Any / I 11 I I ttiry i):. pp', ...a [li; I I 13

`,Ai. I ; ;Ip.; .`''u`~',/",. a I t ha t

t ,tf;;.; 1111 1 1 11,1 1/1,1,`11 1 ihany :it I 11

; ,K :1,4 I ,,i" .1 "o. y 1 1 1 11, ,II"" 1 1 1 "1 I. 1/111 1 n(1" . I , ;;,,nt Int,h,1

1.11- ;-, Iitt ..;p; With I .1 1,1111 Vi1Y

11,1' i .11 t ..11! , r,11

1

iso

11(1 (111(4.1(1141.,,:t°1:1Xiiiii(11)11:11)11Y1(>111.118ywutks

timid< 0" $'11..Y 111"h.

for t0,"1""git)(11)1*" the Committee Oust "")rtting.nutier.H11 submitted for record l'ud°\41s1

ou

18 )

DU

:11NT (11

hirl

rMI (TIE

()F

HI{Akit NAMON AC1 OF 1973, AS AMPIND

1'

182

r

',Or irr,' .111' III11 I:(2:1

(I NI,). lho

t )1' h

iilividuals. The

on tic tilri arid filling

1'1 i Hp 01,1 dui, I It. at ion, and tin serving

-Hrm,o'Itmj for the delivery of t.ervicet, to the

" lirojrai ;ere to include 504 techrical

i.derral, rot,tor-.. of l.upport personnel

o. , ddyocite',, etc.), rehabilitation

In, i iihaltn, education, !dA i.rl, dnd VOCd-

t.londl d c,rr 1, d niLetiry in the loco] community. The delivery

of CRC Lould be fro I single tacility, a group of facilities

r)r dry rotor and referral program that directed

! to do; , ;,n,.t, ,.dmiflunity resources, In other words, the

er .,rue. , ..flt? -dii;ped and oller associated persons within

loci;? :he information and /or services needed

!..,d?.,r need

coim,iqition for Comprehensive Rehabil-

"4' .'"ourLed t,y the Rehabilifdltion Service:,

uur

(ore

s .YJr, 52,060,000 was made available to

lartal region). In September of 1980,

F;hu 1e Isldr,d, Arkansas, Utah,

N,!w Jersey, Virginia, and

rates bin :0 develop CPC's to meet

1 8:3

.11,1. A r pi is uf he CRC ;ir(olr.irn',

pr.'-.ented at tt,e effil of till,. r'port. A

,! L fr. 4111 I I .ho I iii. I ti'1011 that the .e

dr,1 vo 1, r h to the

t enter', apd the (RI, Lolit.,T1 held out d

I,. dnd u del i v( y f pr I he fuliuro, A With

takes time tO ievelop and refine

prn,11,1 1.(1 Iii Id5', W,r' .114,111,1,1d for' d three year period.

period i, ,.hort by Of,. due to a legislative oversight

todAin9 for the third ow of the projects. This came

the CRC programs were just reaching d level

:f ! , :J ',tidde5', of thee programs during the first

two /ear', twipod many of the projects to secure partial

1'4'h-11h') II, 1 ;Injrdin. is or 5 t.,1 Ce, the CRC even showed an

reA,,e in their thi!-d vcar budget. In two states the program was

LOti,[y eli.:Iinoted hut, even then, "eminants of the program were trans-

ferred 'o rIn"r sources. The concept of the CRC was and is supported by

the t'enahilitation Agencies, and should be given the opportunity

to ;,iture. The ten Center Directors have many years of experience in

Renat,ilit)tion prior to their involvement with the project. They have

seen t',e, need and after short expe,lenc:c have confirmed the need for

Such Dreg rum. With the Current bL1T2t. s- at ion for Vocational Rehabil-

i'.0tfoh, it seiss Appropriate that the g, .ls of the CRC should be sought

after. :f continued, the CRC projects will provide a model (s) whereby

the- L;odi!, of cooperatiLn, non-duplicaticv., and utilization of available

re',ources con he acnie'ed,

On :he following pages, a description of each of the Center's

orogrami 15 c,rovi:led for review.

1 (4

it )v,.% . compialit,Nstyl; !Al ION (FNtl (11.1 I-A.1 ION INFOHNIATION & RI..1..1..ItItA I, NF ItVI('ES '101)AV)

(FIRST)Rehabilitation ('enter is administered by the Rehabilitation Education

',. r, rs 111.111, I, the Slate's 1)11,4111111111 of Public Instruction. Ity esiablishing this mined in,ompletcd /45,101) square foul cinoples, the stale agency bay assured that all disabled

scan, -sill have timely access to both mho mai ion unit SSet111,11 Set VICeS,

A ii atewide, EIS line Libeled DIAL (Disatality Inlonnauun Assistance line) has been in.h enables any disabled prison to call toll (ire In MI service

l he System has 'VI N' capability,1,ii. ion files are air anged by service and provider records which are crossrefetenced to

pri rii . ti from either direction. It is anticipated that the present manual system will beIlly ile.if tulure

he Intl,/ iihition .11).1 Hetet rat ! mil is stalled by professional vocational rehabilitation staff in.I n d ing an inter pictei lor the deal Slatting in 'his fashion makes counseling and referral services

..sailahle I hese piolessionals are then able to poivide follow-up se' vices, vocationalrellabilnamai or otherwise, depending upon the situation. Transaction records we kept to deter.

ITtilie the demand for services and to assist in detecting arty gaps or overages in the ousting

liainew.iikii ,nninitiee ;ippointed by the agency director monitors progress of the project and.asis mionimity h,lnun ails it y. It is composed of disabled consumers, representatives of con-

providers ul service, representatives of business arid industry, labor, and the projectdue, for V. hairs the group. A principle responsibility is recommending adjustments in serviceotlei mg% w her r unbalances are observed.

A consumer Marsh program has horn established which supplements, but does not supplantt adnional Joh placement channels. I his program, which couples employer accounts (serviced by

einem specialists) arid client resumes detailing job skills, is reviewed daily. It is operational on-

hs in the s.entral Iowa area at the present lime, Pieliminary steps for expansion have, however,

been taken in both eastern and western parts of the state.A third mann component is referred to as the Facility Placement Team, This unit is staffed by a

I chabilination counselor, a job placement specialist, and a rehabilitation engineer. In addition toplosiding direct placement services (including fabrication and job site modification) (or severely

ifisaldril persons, cinisidration and technical assistance is offered to private and public non-profitand others concerned with Section 504 of the 1973 Vocational Rehabilitation Act,

I his win has fcis.cd wide recognition and the rehabilitation engineer recsived the Citation

Award of the ./ernational Association of Personnel in Employment Security at its meeting iniiiiinto. Canada, in 19111.ri adaptive device resource library is being developed which consists of separate files: bio-

emlineering devices, devices design. functional limitation resources, rehabilitation engineering,and rehabilitation engineering centers. At present, two are operable: devicesdesign and functionalImmation resources. The devices design file is organized according to area of use. e.g. corr7i..:inica.iron, employment, etc. The functional limitations file is organized by the affected part, e,3., move-ment of -the head, upper extremity. etc. The files are cross-referenced for ease of access.

Aii additional functional component of the CRC is recreation services. Efforts have been

ihresied to identify, promote, and provide appropriate recreational facilities (or disabled persons

within and ..1010111 the rehabilitation complex. A close liaison has been established with thetherapeutic recreation program at the State University of Iowa. There has also been extensive in-

s ols rment rn activiries for the International Year of Disabled Persons.Re,.reation his been maintained as a separate unit through the development phase. It is.

hoarser, planned to merge the off-site records with the I & R file. The recreation specialist will

then inure time to cordinating activities within the complex.Per h.to Itte f110 exciting feature of the CRC is that it has enabled the stale agency to address

rt,.1)Imilenti,ilitilis made by its clientele for meeting the needs of disabled people. Counseling,And litlielitiess issues are dealt with directly through I & R, the Consumer Match, and

he I acilit, Pia, einem Team. Public information suggestions are approached through I & R, thehe dsisory Committee. Socialization opportunities are attended through recrea-

185

Seven specific objectives had been originally outlined for the project. Though not listed here,each related to one of the units described above. Progress has been, made in every instance inmeeting those objectives. The chief remaining hurdle is automation. Funds originally requestedfor this purpose were necessarily reallocated to cover the cost of personnel to develop and providethe wide range of services included in the project. Hopefully, resources will yet be uncovered tocontinue and strengthen these early efforts and to get information services on line.

If this can be done, the agency's network of offices provides an ideal structure for providing ac-cess to information and to services to all disabled persons in all areas of the state.

In its short existence, the CRC has come to be regarded as the microcosm of rehabilitation services for disabled Iowans.

:

EltEgif AVAILABLE

17974 0-92--12

;

186

WISCONSIN - CURATIVE REHABILITATION CENTERCurative was selected as the facility to administer the Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center Pro-

ject by the Wisconsin Division of Vocational Rehabilitation because of its long history of pro-viding quality comprehensive rehabilitation services to the people of the State of Wisconsin.Curative Workshop was founded LI 1919 by the Junior League of Milwaukee. Du :Mg its 62 years,it has grown to become a comprehensive outpatient medically oriented facility serving physically,mentally and developmentally disabled children and adults. To more accurately reflect this ex-panded operational scope, the facility was renamed Curative Rehabilitation Center (CRC) in 1919.

Fur those of you not familiar with Milwaukee, Wisconsin - outside of beer commercials - it islocated in Southeastern Wisconsin, on the western shore of Lake Michigan. The seven (7) countyarea. comprising southeastern Wisconsin, has a population of approximately 2,000,000 nearly40% of the state total. It is also estimated that this region is home to 50% of the state's disabledpopulation, due partly to the concentration of heavy industry there and a corresponding increasein job related disabilities. Some of the factors considered in the selection of CRC for the Com-prehensive Rehabilitation Center Project are:

I. CRC is the only rehabilitation facility in the state accredited by the Commission on the Ac-creditation of Rehabilitation Facilities in all seven (7) program emphasis areas. It is also truethat it is the only rehabilitation facility in the nation accredited in all program emphasisareas.

2. CRC is presently preparing for accreditation by the Joint Committee on the Accreditationof hospitals (JCAI-!). If this venture is successful, it will be the only facility of its type toreceive this type of accreditation.

3. CRC is one of the three (3) nationally recognized centers for Neurodevelopment musculartraining.

4. CRC is a member of the Milwaukee Regional Medical Center Campus.5. CRC is a major affiliate of the Medical College of Wisconsin.6. CRC is physically located in a modern $9,000,000 facility; operates seven (7) satellite

facilities and employs a staff of approximately 350 individuals.7. CRC provided continuing educational programs that were attended by approximately 1300

persons from 33 states and 3 foreign countries in 1980.8. CRC has received numerous federal grants, and is experienced in providing specialized,

coordinated developmental service programs funded under governmental and/or privateauspices.

9. CRC served approximately 7,000 individuals in 1980.Curative's CRC is presently operating in five (5) component areas. These areas were

selected both to meet funding designations and to respond to local service gaps.In order Pr discussion, these five areas arc: (I) I & R, (2) Adapted Recreation, (3)

Rehabilitation Engineering, (4) Specialized Job Development and Placement, and/(5) Com-munity Development.

In turn, each of these component areas is being implemented through specific activities infive (5) functional areas. These are: (I) Program development, (2) Technical Assistance, (3)Coordination, (4) Follow up/Evaluation, and (5) Dissemination and Replication,

The governance structure for the Project is a replication of that used in the Training Ser-vices Grant Program. Twenty-one members constitute the Advisory Committee for the Pro-ject, including representatives from all the CARF - accredited rehabilitation facilities inSoutheastern Wisconsin, four (4) colleges and universities, a center for independent living, acounty commission on the disabled, the state VR agency, and the statewide facility volun-tary organization, presently representing 69 facilities. Present staffing patterns include six(6) full time staff and a Project subcontract for I & R services.

The 1 & R subcontract is being performed by an organization called the Wisconsin InformationService. They arc the largest I & k vendor in Wisconsin with current operaOns handling over50XX) calls per year with information on over 1200 agencies. The focus of this component is toprovide Wisconsin Information Service with the capability to serve the disabled through the com-pletion of a new non-medical data matrix.

As in most on-line systems, this matrix, when fully developed, has enormous advantages over

187

smaller manual systems, Of particular interest is the use of what we call our.1RUF foini, whichstands for I & R User Follow-up.

When an information call is taken, certain caller information is voluntarily requested. This in-formation is input for later random selection and follow-up. During the follow-up, callers arc ask-ed, among other things, if the information given was accurate and helpful: whether a suggestedagency was contactei:; if not, why not. etc. This process serves as an evaluative tool to assure thatall information is accurate, that referrals are appropriate and that agencies which list certain ser-vices are actually providing them.

A very recent development has been the Project's involvement with the Milwaukee FederatedLibrary System and a neighborhood based information system called The Answer Place - acronymTAPS. This system, when complete, will enable local libraries to store and disseminate informa-tion typically not found in large I & R data bases. Project staff will be cooperating in this develop-ment with specific emphasis and programs of interest to the disabled:

A second Project component is Adapted Recreation. The thrust of this po 'lent is to providetechnical support to municipal recreation departments, voluntary organizations, rehabilitationagencici and private recreation vendors. Obviously, implementation activities could be the subjectof lengthy discourse, but some brief examples follow.

A category of assistance rendered by the Project centers around the general subject of C01111111.1111-ty.events. Summerfcst is the third largest outdoor festival in the nation. Special discount atten-dance for the disabled drew over 5,000 persons. And, last week, over 7,000 disabled were hostedby an Italian festival.

Fun Olympics is a special non-competitive event day co-sponsored by the CRC. McDonald'scorporation and the Wisconsin State Fair. We estimate this year's att !ndance at over 2,000 persons-drawn from all over the state. In specific events alone, the Project will have served over 15,000persons.

Cerebral Palsy Games are not presently being offered in Wisconsin, having been only recent!,introduced to other Midwest states. For those of you not familiar with CP games, they arc com-petitive events which may include individuals with a wide variety of disabilities. Of particular in-terest to us wcrc the varying roles which health and recreation professionals could perform in rela-tion to a central activity. For example, trained certifiers arc needed to classify participants into oneof seven classes based on functional limitations. University departments are being asked to providetraining facilities and .student volunteers, etc.

The Project also previdcs experiential workshops for disabled persons who would like to learncertain skills. We recently completed a bowling workshop with 43 participants. Bowling theoryand technique were discussed and demonstrated by disabled bowlers and all types of adaptiveequipment were available for use. This particular workshop geared to those individuals who wcrcnut participating in any form of organized recreation.

A recently begun program is one which we call our mentor program. Very simply, the Projectmatches, on a one-to-one basis, disabled individuals who would like to teach or learn a specificrecreational activity. For example, a woman confined to a wheelchair was paired with a paraplegicgolfer, who was willing to teach techniques and adaptation he had made.

On some occasions the Project serves as liaison for private groups that provide outings for thedisabled. Another goal is to increase the capability of private vendors to program for, and accept,non-traditional customers. Finally, the Adapted Recreation component works to increase theutilization of existing programs through referral and publicity.

A third Project component is Rehabilitation Engineering. Although this component has beenimplemented, we believe that it will have a great impact on rehabilitation services. There are threedirectional thrusts or emphasis areas.

The First arca emphasizes the use of the engineer to provide support for the recreation compo-nent; specifically to aid in the design of adapted equipment for use by disabled individuals inrecreational or leisure activities.

A second emphasis involves the development, planning and implementation of engineering ser-vices to business and industry to provide environmental and worksitc modifications for disabledjob applicants or employees.

9 J

188

third, the rehabilitation engineer is available to provide support for the modification of In-dependent Living environments. We believe this to be particularly important in light of recentdcm.stitutionalization mandates.

The fourth Project component is Specialized Job Development and Placement. It's no secretthat with funding cutbacks, and pressure on rehabilitation services generally, that placement ser-vices have been severely affected. This has been particularly true in Wisconsin. Acknowledgingthis fact, we initiated a Job Seeking Skills program. Melding different job club and job seeking ap-proaches, we utilize a structured 10-day, 2 hour per day program which emphasized dress and

'grooming, resume writing, job prospecting, interviewing, and above all, self-confidence. Discus-sions, viductaping and practice are all utilized.

Several features of this appronch are its mobility - we offer this training at different sites depen-dent upon demand. Also, we will soon be using retired business executives in mock interviews toadd a touch of realism. We also offer single day workshops on the same subject.

Another version of the Job Seeking Skills Program is training trainers to use this approach andproviding them with all materials which we use

Atwitter program within the Specialized Job Development and Placement Component is a LeadNetwork. Very simply, the Lead Network iS a formalized notification process by which job ordersare quickly passed to a network of rehabilitation counselors arid placement specialists. Whencounselors are unable to fill a job request from their caseloads, they 'Tier the Ind to the Projectalong with position details. In turn, the CRC immediate!) notifies the network.

Them are two aspects of this program which make it successful. First, speed is critical. Anemployer who has expressed interest in hiring a disabled employee, will quickly lose interest ifreferrals are not [node within reasonable time periods. Second, the existence of the network alsomakes it possible to present several 'qualified applicants for the employer's choice. Within 24hours, the network can assess counselors serving over 1,400 clientf.

In the last two months, the Lead Network has succeeded in ten (10) placements, with an addi-tional four (4) pending. Placements have ranged from factory work, to office help, to a tool anddie apprentice with an ultimate salary of $12.48 per hour.

Lastly, the Project provides 503-504 consultation in two ways. First, we work proactively withagencies or businesses which need help in revamping affirmative action programs to effect more

intensive hiring of the disabled. For instance, we have recently begun work with WisconsinTelephone, the local Bell subsidiary.

Second, we are working with the local office of Federal Contract Compliance who has been

naming the Project as a contact in non-compliance letters. So - if we don't get them one way, weget them another.

Finally, the fifth .Project component is Community Development. The Project providestechnical support to planning and funding agencies, whenever possible. We are currently

cimperating in a county-wide disabled housing needs and demand study. Other agencies involved

include IIIJD, Wisconsin VR, State Bureau-of Developmental Disabilities, County Combined

Community Service Board, United Way, to name just a 'few.Lastly. it should be said that nearly all activities in which we are involved are jointly programm-

ed. We consciously involve, or seek support from units 'of government. rehabilitation agencies.

funding bodies. private industries and businesses. During September, we are cosponsoring a two -day event with 38 other organizations! In this way. we are fairly assured that maximum impact is

retained.

189

VIRGINIA - COMPREHENSIVE REHABILITATION CENTERCOMMUNITY REHABILITATION SERVICES SYSTEM

The Community Rehabilitation Services System (CRSS), administered by the Department ofRehabilitative Services (DRS), exists to provide comprehensive rehabilitation services to handicap-ped individuals in Health Service Area V of the Commonwealtf, of Virginia. Through these ser-vices handicapped individuals wilt increase their ability to function independently in society,reduce dependency on others, develop stability in the family unit, and become better prepared forcompetitive employment.

The nrimary objective of the CRSS Client Evaluation Program is to assess an individual's func-tional potential and to formulate specific recommendations for a realistic rehabilitation plan. Thisshall include recommendations for the individual to prepare for and engage in gainful employmentof for those for whom a vocational goal is not feasible, recommendations for improving theirability to live with greater independence and self-sufficiency. These recommendations provide thefollowing information to the individual and the referral source: (a) whether the individual is readyto make vocational decisions. (b) areas where the individual may need to change, including adjust-ment to a disability or gaining information and knowledge of the work world; (c) potential forspecific training lime:, pla:ement. or other rehabilitativ.: services; and (d) specific treatmentmodalities to enhance an individual's ability to live independently and function '.ithin his familyand community.

The Community Rehabilitation Services System provides comprehensive rehabilitation services.As a component of the system, a Job Seeking Skills Program has been implemented to assist in-dividuals in obtaining employment. The se.ices provided by the program are needed becausemany individuals in the area wish to become employed but lack the knowledge, confidence, andself-esteem necessary '.o obtain employment.

The program is designed to assist individuals seeking employment through learning the follow-ing skills: how to complete application forms, display appropriate behaviors during interviews,give positive answers to problcin questions, prepare a resume' /personal data sheet, and scheduleinterview appointments by telephone. Clients will be taught to interpret standard paycheck deduc-tions that will be made in their paychecks. Tips on good grooming will be discussed. These goalswill he accomplished through the use of lectures and discussions, peer counseling, role playing,video taping, and critiquing behavior analysis and feedback.

Clients will have the opport unity to practice discussing their problem areas openly with others inthe group. Clients will practice discussing these problem areas in a positive way during role playingsituations to illustrate how these areas might be discussed in reality during an interview. Emphasiswill be placed on the client's ability to explain his/her problem areas in a positive way and relatear changes made relative to obtaining a job. The staff will help the clients to build self-esteemthrough constant practice of stating assets, skills, and abilities on a daily oasis. Clients will betrained to recognize the different resources available in locating jobs.

The J.S.S. Program lasts seven days with extensions of time as indicated. The staff will provideservices on an individual or group basis relative to clients' needs. The program is designed to serveten clients per session. Each session will begin at 8:30 a.m. and end at 3:30 p.m.

The Independent Living Program is designed to establish consumer based advocacy mechanismsand support services that will enable the severely handicapped to choose and obtain their max-imum lesel of self-directed independence within the community. Through the services of this pro-gram, the removal of barriers in the community which create disincentives to the severely han-dicapped who wish to live more independently and the building of community canacity forassisting the sever -'v handicapped in areas of specific need are stressed. Program components in-clude: advocacy, peer counseling, educational services, and information and referral.

Rehabilitation Engineering is defined as :he use of cnginccring problemsolving and technologyto increase the level of functional independence of people with disabilities means of modifica-tion of !ionic arid work sites and/or adaptations of equipment. Rehabilitation engineering ispresently performed in research centers and service delivery programs. The research centersthroughout the country are responsible for long-term research projects that improve both techni-ques and equipment In contrast, the service delivery programs provide community consumetathat have individual needs and problems with pratical applications and solutions taken from

190

research done, in rehabilitation engineering centers, engineeting research programs, and private in-dustry. If necessary, the service delivery program also cus:om designs ar.d fabricates solutions tospecific individual problems.

The Engineering Unit at CRSS is comprised of a Rehabilitation Engineer and an AdaptiveEquipment Specialist. The Rehabilitation Engitz,.... is primarily responsible for consultation,evaluation, and design The major duty 1.4 the Adaptive Equipment Specialist is fabrication in theareas of woodworking, metal fabricating, and plastic forming.

0:3S is presently operating a Community Education Program in FISA V.to conduct professionaldevelopment activities' for those serving the handicapped and to provide technical informationalprograms for the handicapped population. A plan which includes program design and target au-diences has alread; been developed based on the community needs assessment. These programswill carry continuing education units or continuing medical education units as appropriate. An-nouncements for each series are planned, and these can be widely d,st ributed throughout theHampton Roads area. Flexibility has been employed in determining' traMing sites. Programs maybe brought to the work site if it is considered advantageous to participants to do so. Series of ser-vices provided are as follow:

Series ProgramsConsumer Education Series I. Knowledge Utilization Seminar

2. Handicaps Unlimited of Virginia, Inc.State Conference Co-Sponsor

Client Evaluation andAdjustment Series

Facilities Series

1. Developing Local Work Samples2. Rehabilitation Engineering3. Social Skills Development4. WocK Adjustment: What is it, Where is it going?5. Placement Through Job Preparation

I. Behavioral Assessment of the SeverelyDisabled, Mentally Retarded Individual

2. CARF Problem Solving3. Effective Instructional Techniques

Special Educatic...1 Series I. Techniques for Working with thePhysically Disabled Individual

Medical Education Series Series of four programs with topics to be identified bymedical professionals.

A 504 Technical Assistance Unit, staffed by one Technical Assistance Coordinator, has bccnestablished within the CRC to become the resource to state and local governmental units, collegesand universities, public and private organizations, commercial and industrial establishments, andinterested individuals seeking information and assistance relating to 504 and any range of . ervicesrequired by handicapped persons. Rosters of special support personnel available within the area,such as interpreters for the deaf, readers for the blind, attendants, legal aid and advocrcy person-nel, have been developed by consumer groups and special interest organizations. Linkage withthese existing activities will be maintained in order to coordinate referrals to such services. A grassroots component of involved, educated, and united consumer groups, closely linked to the In-

dependent Living Program, will be developed to increase the resource capability in providingpublic information and technical a.-...,istance. Increasingly, si.ch coalitions yield political influencesand are a force to be listened to by the elected officials. Additionally, these groups have the prac-tical experience that provides a true insight into the needs of the handicapped relative to ac-cessibility. Workshops for appropriate governmental personnel will by conducted, and public in-formation programs will be established for key elected and appointed officials. Through the use ofpublic service programs, public awareness of the need for barrier free access will he expanded.

191

hera,-eutic recreational services will be provided through diverse service systems at the CRSSfacility an.l other community recreational centers and will be coordinated by the TherapeuticRecreation Specialist who will: (I) provide services directly; (2) subcontract with specialized pro-viders of ,ecreation services not availale through the CRC; (2) utilize the client population to pro-vide leadership in developing and delivering therapeutic recreation services; and (4) refer clients torelevant community providers of therapeutic recreation services. Referrals to the TherapeuticRecreation Program will come from the various medical/treatment programs at TidewaterRehabilitat, is Institute and Eastern Virginia Medical Authority, the CRSS programs' clientcaseload, the Independent Living Program, and the general community.

Activities available within the Therapeutic' Recreation Program will build on the existing LeisureLounge Program in the facility which currently provides a meeting place and planned leisure ac-tivities for the severely handicapped. The capacity for this program will be increased from twenty-five to fifty clients, and additional activities, such as leisure counseling and family involvement inthe clients' resoeialization, will be developed. Outings, trips, visits to local museums, libraries,historic sites, etc. will be arranged. Crafts such as jewelry making, art, and sculpting will beavailable for those whose interests and fine motor skills can be applied. Special interests, e.g.photography and music, will be made available. Opportunity to participate in a wide range ofspurts including basketball, softball, bowling, and table tennis will be provided. For those in-terested in special techniques for stress management, courses in meditation and conscious relaxa-tion will be offered.

I

192

COMPREHENSIVE REHABILITATION CENTERProvidence, Rhode Island

The Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center program was developed by Rhode Island VocationalRehabilitation in cooperation with the Rhode Island rehabilitation network and the Institute forRehabilitation and Restorative Care at Brown University. The Rhode Island Rehabilitation net-work is a group of agencies, facilities, and individuals working together to improve rehabilitationservices in Rhode. Island. The formation of the network (officers, executive committee, constitu-tion and by-laws) isthe culmination of over six years of planning and effort by Brown University,the state vocational rehabilitation agency and countless members of the rehabilitation anddisabled communities.

The major purpose of the CRC is to establish in Rhode Island a community focal point for thedevelopment and coordination of comprehensive rehabilitation services. We are concentratingour energies on fulfilling service gaps to enable handicapped persons in Rhode Island to attain fullparticipation in society.

The Rhode Island Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center's philosophy involves a process of con-tinuing input from the rehabilitation and disabilities communities in Rhode Island in order toascertain utmost rehabilitation needs. This ',Moue cooperative arrangement includes a majoruniversity Brown; the rehabilitation community as represented by the executive committee of the.Rhode Island rehabilitation network; and the state rehabilitation agency. Thus, thc vision ofbecorning a focal point in the community for the development of rehabii''ation services is realisticand achievable, given the assets described above. Moreover, it just makes good economic sense tofoster and fund a program that is committed to the elimination of duplicative services while at thesame time providing cost effective new services. Additionally, the Center is enthusiastically engag-ed in an effort to expand and enhance thc network concept of linking program and staff resourcesin new and creative ways.

During the first year of program activity, the CRC awarded grants totaling 597,482 in seedmoney to I I Rhode Island agencies and associations serving the handicapped. The purpose of theseed grant program is to stimulate the development of programs which will eliminate gaps andidentify service areas and also improve the coordination of existing services. The reaction from thecommunity with this program has been very favorable.

In addition to serving as a primary information and referral resource, the CRC is also providinga broad range of services needed b, the handicapped community. These services include the provi-sion of technical assistance and consultation to the rehabilitation community pursuant to Section504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the maintenance and updating of rosters of support person-nel providing specialized services needed by handicapped persons; and the further development ofprograms which will lead to expansion and accessibility of !recreational facilities in Rhode Islandfor the handicapped.

The Center has also instituted a client tracking system in order to facilitate follow along andfollow up of clients that are referred to the Center. The Long Range Evaluation System, developedby Carl V, Granger, M.D., of the Institute at Brown University, is being utilized as a vehicle forthe development of a common language as well as to insure appropriate linkages as clients movethrough facilities and agencies that are a part of the Rhode Island rehabilitation network.

One of the major initiatives of the CRC is to significantly expand the network membership sothat a complete Rhode Island rehabilitation network will be established at the end of the grant.Although this effort has been extremely successful thus far, much more time and effort is neededin order to bring the entire rehabilitation and disabled community in Rhode Island into the net-work

193

COMPREHENSIVE REHABILITATION CENTERAtlantic -City, New Jersey

The central thrust of our program is to establish ourselves as a focal point for the disabled inAtlantic County to help them become more independent. However, our efforts go well beyondthis, extending to community programs, advocacy, technical assistance on Section 504 regulations,and most of all, client counseling and direct services based on individual needs.

In 'our first six months of operation, our office has directly served more than 2,197 clients.Nlany Of these clients called for information, many of them visited our office, and many par-ticipated in our different programs.

Our slat f is trained to heti, clieuix wish personal problems, give credit counseling, provide ad-vocacy and/or intervention to obtain equal treattmni in inoloyment and accessibility. As we eon-iisme, and more people learn of our services, we find we are helping mono and more people withtheir mental and emotional problems in addition to the physically disabled.

Our programs include; information and referral services conducted by staff and a computerizeddata hank; transportation for the disabled who can riot use existing forms of public transporta-tion; recreational outings which we arrange for the donation of tickets to forms of entertain. entin the community; the providing of wheelchair beaches in Atlantic City which were built at our re-quest, with our assistance and our mobilization of a volunteer work force; curb cuts at intersec-tions throughout Atlantic Cy; and public awareness activities geared toward changing society'sperception of the disabled and toward helping to enhance employment placement opportunities.

In addition to these efforts taken by us, we have also identified new clients to qualify for theNew Jersey Division of Vocational Rehabilitation Assistance to help them reenter the mainstreamas productive citizens. 1.1 addition to these staff, services, and programs, we also have purchasedcomputer hardware, vans for wheelchair use, TFY machines for use by the deaf, and we have pro-duced literature on our services. We have nine objectives that we are striving to meet for the yearof 1981 and these are:

I. To serve as a focal point its the community for the disabled in obtaining services, benefitsand oilier forms of assistance.

2. To fill gaps which exist in sersices for the handicapped.3. To familiarize staff with existing social service groups for the handicapped in Atlantic

Count y.4. To provide client counseling and direct services to the handicapped via our social service

technicians. CI:ent counseling, assistance intervention in such areas as employment,transportation, aordinating housing needs and availability.

5. To provide information and referral services for the handicapped through our techniciansand through Information Atlantic.

6, To provide advocacy in such areas as barrier free design, employment, and on as-neededsubjects as they arise.

7. To provide transportation to the handicapped on a priority basis.8. To provide and/or assist in the coordination of recreational activities, to utilize existing

community centers, schools, colleges and other community resources to provide such ser-vices.

9. To boost public awareness of programs of and service for the disabled through use of newsmedia, pamphlets, boo;:lets, etc.

194

ARKANSAS - COMPREHENSIVE REHABILITATION CENTERThe Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center in Hot Springs, Arkansas, seems to have some dif-

ferences with other CRC's across the country. We are the only CRC serving a rural area. GarlandCounty, in which Hot Springs is located, has a population of approximately 70,000 individuals.The surrounding counties are very thinly populated.

It is important to note that the Hot Springs CRC is located across the street from the nationallyknown Hot Springs Rehabilitation Center and we are administratively connected. This has definiteadvantages in serving clients but has certainly presented an identity problem. We have had to workespecially hard in establishing our own identity which has been done primarily through the mediaand speaking engagements. For example, we have spoken to over 500 persons in professional andservice related groups such as employees at the Ouachita Children's Center. the Mental HealthCenter, Area Office on Aging, Lions Club, Kiwanis Club, and Council for Exceptional Children,etc, Today, after almost a year in operation, the CRC still has much work to do in establishing itsown identity with lay persons in the community. Of course, the tremendous advantage of being af-filiated with the Plot Springs Rehabilitation Center is the use of their facilities and the availabilityof all their expertise in working with handicapped individuals, from wheelchair repair to orthoticsevaluations. Because of our program, for the first time, ILS.R.C. facilities ar available to nonVRdisabled persons. Our unique position has allowed a cooperative agreement to be worked out be-tween the CRC, t I.S.R,C. and the State Spinal Cord Commission so that Independent Livingcases earl be admitted for one-day services at the Hot Springs Rehabilitation Center, thus insuringSpinal Cord injured clients getting the best possible services at minimum cost.

"Die !lot Springs CRC is a small, in-housed group of professionals consisting of a director, assistart director, two clerical staff, two counselors, social worker, two recreation leaders, recreationaideAri et and an interpreter. It is because of this vigorous, dedicated group that all of our pro-ject objectives either have been accomplished or are ahead of schedule.

It was significant that we recognized that we did not have the answers to the needs of disabledpeople in the community. While most of our staff had experience working with disabled people,we felt it was imperative to go to the community end ask what was needed; therefore, during thefirst three months of operation a number of open forums were held to help give direction to CRCactivities in working with handicapped people. Consumer groups such as the deaf, wheelchairbound, and parents of handicapped children were invited in to express their needs. Professionalsfrom rehabilitation, public schools, County Health Department and Office on Aging were invitedfor an exchange of ideas. These forums really helped smooth the way for CRC operations withinthe community as the consumer and professionals saw that their input was being implemented. Forexample, the SPA Deaf Club was organized and because of its activities we have raised over 5500for a 24-hour 1TY to be placed at the local police station for emergency use. The Architectural En-vironmental Barriers Council sought fleeting space and this we happily provided. We were con-tacted by the Multiple Sclerosis Society and we helped them organize a club which meetsperiodically at our facility. A Summer Day Camp was organized for handicapped children of thecommunity. One of the expressed needs by all groups was continued community education of theneeds of disabled persons and as a result a number of programs have been presented by the CRCfor community consumption. These workshops have included "Blind Awareness", "Employersof Ilantlicappd". neatlie these workshops have been pereeivecl.succssful by both the .senters

and the consumers more workshops arc in the planning stages in an effort to provide (miner com-munity service.

While the impact on the community can not he necessarily measured in number of services,these activities certainly reflect dedication and hard work from our small staff of professionals.Sine we are housed in a rural area, it was anticipated that we would work with approximately 500clients during our first year's operation. At this point, we have served over 550 individual clientsand still have over two months to go before the first year ends.

This brings tis around to discussing the direction our program has taken in terms of types of ser-vices we wet,: Inaridated to provide the community. Information and referral has been one of themajor se's ices. provided not only tai disabled individuals but to many professionals as well. As aresult of our many contacts with the Office on Aging and Rehabilitation Services, Health Depari.mem, school ivitcnr,, etc_ sse have really become a community contact fur those professional!,

195

working with disabled pm smis. We have been able to locate a number of disabled persons whowere eligible for iegular VR sers lees and !lase been placed on Vii case loads

The counseling program has consisted primarily of crisis inter sention counseling. I he long (eoncounselees have been referred to the local mental health center for therapy. Not surprisingly, dueto the ecuminlY, a large number of our conuselees has e needed socational counseling and lobplacement. We have placed I I people in jobs within the although job placement wasnot an original part of our grant proposal.

Recreation has been another major focal point of our CRC program. Through using our ownfacility for in-house games, such as cards, ping Tong, table games, pool, macrame, and captionedmovies, a large part of the recreation has taken place within our small facility. Our access toH.S.R.C. facilities has allowed howling, volleyball arid basketball to be popular activities. in thespirit of our grant,' cooperative agreements have been reached with the Office on Aging, VeteransAdministration, First Step, (a local school for severely handicapped children), to provide recrea-tion to their clients. Some of this recreation has been provided in our facilities and at times ourstaff provide on-site recreation. We are presently making plans to carry on-site recreation to thelocal mental health center and the Ouachita Children's Center, a shelter for wayward orbehaviorial problem youth. By being innovative, we arc reaening more of the disabled people inthe community than we would otherwise.

Another aspect of our program has been short term health services. These have been primarilyprovided through llot Springs Rehabilitation Center. In conjunction with their Physical TherapyDepartment, wheelchair repair and physical therapy evaluations are being provided to handicap-ped persons III the community who would not otherwise tie eligible. The saute is true in Oilhoticswhere a number of adaptive devices have allowed disabled seniorjeititens to continue to be in-dependent rather than go to a nursing home facility. Just as cultlig, at our request, PT and OTstaff have made a number of home visits to help disabled ci94nsjof the COMMUnity, usually elderly, remain independent and at home.

The least used service which our grant mandated has been transportation. There have been anynumber of problems with providing transportation and at the same time, the need for transporta-tion has been diminished through a new city transit system, w here the buses are equipped withlifts. For all practical purposes, we are out of the transportation husiness unless there are emergen-cies and then that service is provided:

Interpreting has been a much bigger aspect of the CRC program than see originally anticipated.The deaf community was starved for services and we have really filled a void. As a coin:mind y ser-vice, we have also provided sign language classes at no charge. he participants are asked to pro-vide their own test books, otherwise the class itself is free. This has been in vets Pi7p111:u aNreCI ofour program and we will continue this community service.

Thus far, we have had only four requests for 504 technical aso,tance from age noes within thecommunity and one church has asked for advice in hmldmg in lamp.

It was obvious flow the beginning that if our ptomain was to succeed, solunieets would benecessary to implement many of the programs. We has e, at this point, nue:slow,' user titvolunteers and 20 have been trained and unfired in cat r ying out t sei s ices Itoin cictinil activities to helping with the Day Camp for I landicapped Children this past lune. We .in, solunteeiscontinuing to be an integral part of CRC operation.

In conclusion, it is fitting that in NM, The International Vent nil Disabled Per sou, the CR( "sare providing significant innovative services to disabled people. Because our renter is nets, sac ,ireconstantly evaluating our approaches and the services that we provide. Our attempt has been andwill continue to focus on the needs of disabled individuals and not upon our own selfset singneeds. We strongly feel that we have enriched the lives of 'natty disabled persons within our coin-nitwit y and have provided invaluable education to many laymen and leaders in the community.We plan to continue tr) be advocates to all handicapped individuals so that they may enjoy the fullbenefits of being an American ei(ilen.

196

tri Ai . FATioN sERvicF, CENERI he I 'tah Rehabilitation hers ice Center is designed to meet the needs of the disabled in the cora-

l:I:inns «his lime up to this time not been serviced or have been frustrated in their attempts toreceive-se/sues in ton community. The major objective of the Utah Rehabilitation Service Centeris it, be the one source in the communiti where handicapped persons, family members, or otherswho .ire interested in services to the handicapped can go and receive the services they need or bereferred to the tuost appropriate service to satisfy their needs.

1 he stall of the Rehabilitation Set's ice Center includes a director, an information and referralsupervisor, a psyclrologist. an information technician, a referral and follow-up technician, ahaliwne socational evaluator, and a job placement specialist provided through an agreement withUtah doh Service office.

We are attempting to maintain an up-to-date list of all services that are provided to the han-dicapped within out community. We have a computerized information system which allows uscase ac.;ess and update of our information. We find this very important since in our communitythe ropiest Isir 111101mation and referral has been for more than one service per each client. For ex-ample, a request might include assistance with accessible housing, transportation, and employ-ment I he Inlunn.rtion on the computer is available to anyone in the community, including thosewho are 11.1.1(11e:1/Wed or family members. IrielldS, Service providers, etc. The Center also has acce,.s to over 150 information data bases, including psych, abstracts, sot, abstracts, Nric and Eric,Tsceptional (.1i1d. etc. This service is also available to anyone in the community. The services

rlr nigh I N.: K ate described in the following paragraphs,Follow Alp Services, When a referral is made to one of the services listed with the Information

('enter, one of Me technicians follows up with the client who requested the referral and also withthe service prosider. . I his is done to assure that the initial contact is made as well as to help determine the appromiateoess of the referral. If necessary, the initial contact is made by the Center per-sonnel, and on iiccasion %shoe it is seen as appropriate, a technician might take the cheat to theagency for the initial contact.

Fv ablation Services. Two evaluation services are available through the Center. One isPsychological Fs aluation. This service is provided by the Ph.D staff psychologists. The evalvdtion111,111,1c., the full range or psychological tests, including any special testing that might he necessaryunder certain circumstances. Second is Vocational Evaluation. This is an eight-day evaluationgenerally, and tit lutes paper, pencil, tests. as well as work samples. It is flexible enough to be ableto evaluate special circumstances when necessary.

Cnun,eling-Esycholoitical and vocational counseling are both available with the psychologist sirthe rehabilitation counselor. After the counseling sessions, appropriate referral can then he made10 eSiditig agencies for treatment sir rehabilitation services.

Consultation. Mere are a number of consultation services available through the Centel to thecommunity. These consultation services include the following:

Blo.NleslIC4'Unginecring (through an agreement with the University of Utah EngineeringDepartment)

iccupational TherapyMedi I

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation ActJab Placement Assistance. Through an agreement with the local Job Service office. the Center

has a ft:11101:e job placement specialist on the staff of the Center. There is a computer tie with thetub Ser vice computer so all services of lob Service can be provided from the Rehabilitation Ser-vice Center office. This imludes accessibility to all job listings as well as the ability to registerclients. .A set.% ice that is presently being provided to the Rehab District Offices, and is planned forother agents offices, is the provision over a %Wetland radio station of the most current job list eachdas. 'FIns op to date list goes over the sideband radio station each morning between 10410and 11 no a in. It usually includes an overage of 511 lobs.

stlAINIA111"

At this pi tl ill, the Center seems to be getting some recognition in the community, although westill halt' .1 way to gin RI weer nor (Miceli% e of being the one resource In tbe community wheresomeone can call and receive necessary information and referral services. We have had booths in

2 O

197

different fairs in the community, have posters displayed in the buses and at community agencies.We have also had a number of articles in daily and weekly newspapers. We are in the process ofdeveloping PSA's for both radio and television. Each time we have a campaign to publicize theCenter, we receive more calls for assistance.

At this point, we are receiving about 60 requests a month for information through the Infortnabon and Referral Center. The psychologist does 20 evaluations per month plus consultation andcounseling. The job placement specialist is making referrals of about 250 per month, and is making between 20 and 25 placements per month. The other services mentioned have been used less,but it is anticipated that as the Center continues to be publicized the services will be utilized to agreater extent.

ajj

198

CALIFORNIA - LOS ANGELES COMPREHENSIVEREHABILITATION CENTER

The Los Angela Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center is a cooperative venture of DanielFreeman Ilo.spital Medical Center, the Inglewood District of the California Department ofRehabilitation and the Westsidc Community for Independent Living, to establish a center ofresources and services for people with disabilities.

The CRC serves as the focal point for providing information and referral services throughoutthe area. New communications networks will be established in cooperation with those already inexistence. The goal at all times will be to eliminate duplication of efforts and to ensure quality andcontinuity of services and resources.

The CRC is committed to establishing new and innovative programs within the community andto working with public and private sector resources in ensuring maximum opportunities for in-dependent living. The CRC will serve as a model for creative projects in the areas of transitionalliving, employment preparation and independent living skills training. The CRC Public Relationsproject will focus public attention on the needs and the potential of people with disabilities.

The CRC will implement new programs through education, consultation and coordination.Educational projects will be major component ranging from specific training workshops topublic awareness activities on the special needs of people with disabilities. The CRC will offertechnical assistance and consultation on such topics as physical accessibility to employment andhousing and implementation of Section 504 mandates.

The Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center is funded by a grant from the U.S. RehabilitationSCI OLT% Administration in order to provide a comprehensive, cost-effective and dynamic ap-pioach to service delivery. Daniel Freeman Hospital Medical Center, the Inglewood District of theCalifornia Department of Rehabilitation and the Westsidc Community for Independent LivingMenisci% e. represent a broad system of direct and supportive services. As the CRC expands, othercommunity based organizations will become part of the ongoing network.

SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIESThe l.os Angles Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center is unique in that, in addition to the In-

glev.00d District of the State Department of Rehabilitation, it combines a well established In-dependent Living Center and a recognized hospital rehabilitation facility. Although, along withother CRCs. coordination and identification of gaps and duplications in services to people withdisabilities is part of our onssion, a portion of our responsibility is to provide education to,:insurners and professionals in efforts to bridge the gap between them and to guarantee a con-thritun of care aimed at independent living. We do not duplicate any services available in the com-mtnity, indeed, we only provide direct services through the independent living centers with whichwe ::re associated.Our .rceomplishments in the education field include:

1. Sponsorship of a series of seminars for professionals at the Abilities Unlimited Expo inApril of 1981. These seminars drew almost 400 professionals as well as requests for moresuch programs. We are currently planning for the April 1982 Expo series.

2. Installation of a Telephone Tape Library (there are only two others in the country. both inthe East) providing information on disabilities.

3. Sponsorship of a community education series dealing with housing, employment. personalcare and other needs of persons with disabilities. This first series is aloto.st finished and a se-cond series on more specific topics will begin in January 1982.

4. Another key aspect of our education efforts is development of a Personal Care Attendanttraining program. This project has taken some time to develop and we will be providingtraining to Educable Mentally Retarded adults. In this project, we are serving both theirneeds to find a decent and continuing vocation as well as those of the severely physicallydisabled who depend upon such personal care in order to avoid institutionalization.

In general. we have targeted the private sector for development of programs that are self sup-porting. but this is a slow process and will take some time to finalize. Our involvement in the

199

White !louse sponsored PROJEC !'AR 1141iRSI III' has been part of that effort and a CRC staffmember played a major role in pt epar Mg the section of that report emphasising the no cost stepsthat could he taken to change attitudes of prospective employers. We have been exploring withseveral :major corporations the establishment of high level skills training programs for people withdisabilitie;, but this too is a time consuming task.

A major success of the CRC has been to have October designated as DISABILITYAWARENESS MONTH by the Governor and many of the major cities and counties throughoutthe state. This effort has been aimed at the public in an attempt to change altitudes. Public ServiceAnnouncements, talk show appearances by persons with disabilities including celebrities, presen-tations of proclamations to the disabled community and an art contest co-sponsored by TheBroadway Department Stores arc all part of the October schedule and the month has been pro-claimed as the first annual observation. In addition, sotne of the private utility companies are con-sidering placing inserts in their October billings accenting a positive approach to the capabilitiesand potential of:persons with disabilities, Several major school districts across the State are par-ticipating and special programs are being planned including interaction between ablebodied anddisabled students as well as field trips to independent living centers and role model visits by disabl-ed members of the community.

Because Los Angeles County is so large, with a third of the State's population residing in it, amajor task has been to identify and evaluate the services currently being offered for persons withdisabilities. We have been amazed at the complete lack of knowledge one agency may have aboutanother, and the need to provide direction and coordination is obvious. Given the demographicsof this area, that in itself is a major task, and one that cannot possibly be completed within thenext year.

We are confident that within the full three year period originally planned we will he able todevelop programs that meet the needs of the disabled community and are self supporting.

200

rininDA coNwnEmNsivE REnABILITATIoN CENTERDade County Center for Survival and Independent Living (C/SAIL)

OVERVIEWSouth Flotilla's first C'omprehensive Rehabilitation Center, the Dade County Center for Sur.

1,..11 and Independent Living (C/SA IL) is alive and well after six months of existence, and happi-ly, is exceeding its lialfyear objectives.

LOCATIONcvsAl I, (as the Center is now well known in South Florida) with the support of Dade County

Government, its.officc of Handicapped Opportunities, and its Department of Housing and UrbanDeselopment, is now located in Singer Plaza, 1310 N.W. 16Street, Miami 33125. "Little" HUDand County Management have arranged for the rental of two two-bedroom apartments in this10.1mit Section 8-funded accessible complex for disabled people. Dade County allocated rentsupport of S100,000/year for the two units which houses the eight staff members of C/SAIL.While the Center exists for the quarter of a million disabled citizens of Dade, it is coincidentallyfortuitous that we are housed in a large residence for disabled citizens which, in an inter-agencyagreement, affords the use of lounges, craft room, large social room with kitchen, etc. to betterimplement our in-house programs.

To add to this coincidentally fortunate situation, the County and "Little" HUD have agreedskill] Jackson Memorial Rehabilitation Center to set aside some of the apartments on the secondfloor for a transitional living program (Marathon House) where newly disabled people can leaveJackson Rehab arid "Nlainstream" for a period of one to six months while adjusting to their newlives with psychological support, life skills and home and self-management training, etc.

While Singer Plata and Marathon House provides C/SAIL with in-house clients, our programhas already impacted on the large disabled population of Dade as following details will indicate.

During this period. additional funds (total now $548,000) have been allocated by the County forC/SAIL's permanent facility, and the interviewing and proposals by local architectural firms havebeen completed. The choice of the three finalists is presently in the County Manager's office.

norrom LINEIn six months of existence of which four months are actual operation, the impact and ac-

complishments of C/SAIL have far exceeded the writer's hopes and the program's to-date objec-tives.

The entire staff enthusiastically jumped into the concept of motivating and assisting disabledcitizens of Dade County out of the traditionally supportive concept and into the cost-effective andemotionally satisfying status of joining the "real world" of community life.

While all the staff has been indoctrinated into this concept, it is particularly satisfying to thewriter to constantly sec even the support staff involve themselves in providing information, refer-ral, and sometimes, even basic assistance to those needing assistance.

The following will indicate activities to date:

IN-HOUSE POGRAMSI. Fnglish language classes (three times weekly, 9-11 a.m.) for the disabled foreign born

started in May and twelve of the fifteen disabled Hispanics will continue with the advancedclass in early September.

2. Horne skills classes for the disabled started early June (once/week, 3-5 p.m.) where cook-ing, budgetary, shopping, sewing, dietary, etc., skills are taught. The social-room kitchenarea is utilized for this class.

J. Arts and crafts classes for the disabled started early May (twice/week, 9-11 a.m.). This classhas mainly appealed to the older residents of Singer Plaza.

4, I-our guitars have been donated and were repaired for use in late June. Classes for thedisabled start September.

201

5. Citizenship claws for the disabled (teacher volunteer from Dade County Latin AffairsDepartment) starts in August (once/week, two hours).

6. A discussion group for Dade County residents afflicted with Multiple Sclerosis started Mid-May and the once /month meeting became so successful, that July will start a twice/inontligroup. August has M.S. programs for families and children of people with MS as well as apresentation of a S, xuality Workshop. Thew types of programs will benefit extant andfuture disability groups especially with the utilization of audio-vision equipment.

7. C/SAIL has organized and incorporated the South Florida Chapter of the National Hand-icapped Sports and Recreation association. Twenty-five members (21 disabled) presentlybelong and a late August picine meeting is planned to attract many more members withdemonstrations of SCUBA, water-skiing, etc., by and for disabled people. In this vein, twoof C/SAIL's Advisory Board Members are participating: one, an attorney, represents thelargest licensed SCUBA business in the Keys (which will participate), and the other, anar-chitect well versed in barrier-free design is the Chairman of the South Florida RowingAssociation and is planning those types of activities for members.

8. C/SAIL has been most fortunate in recruiting a broad-based Community Advisory Boardof 24 members (representing disabled people, families of disabled, government, profes-sional, scholastic, rehabilitation professionals, and the private sector), all also representinga cross-section of the ethnic and racial groups which are C/SAII.'s target groups.

PROGRAMS IN PLANNINGI. In early September, a sign language class will start at C/SAIL, cosponsored with Miami-

Dade Community College.2. Discussions with a psychologist who has dealt with newly disabled young people (mostly

spinal-cord injuries) will hopefully lead to Assertive Training classes for the disabled in Oc-tober.

3. A discussion group for the blind, oriented particularly to those going blind or newly blind(similar to the MS discussion group) is being organized with the Florida Division of BlindServices.

4. C/SAIL, through local media exposure, has had six wheelchairs, 14 walkers, and a myriadof other apparatus donated. A "loaner" program for indigent disabled people has beenorganized and will be made public in July. A low-cost non-profit repair program l'or suchequipment is planned for October.

Always with the thought in mind that the measure of our success is determined solely by thedisabled people of Dade County for whom we point out the doors to independence but do not pro-vide another dependence, the analysis of our six months of existence follows:

ATTITUDINAL BARRIERS

Believing that media exposure would be a catalyst to reach our target groups as well as enlightenand improve community attitudes, the staff has created or participated in newspaper articles,television interviews, radio interviews and television spots for this International Year of Disabledpersons.

AGENCY PRESENTATIONSIn keeping with our designation as a Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center and with a stated

goal of eliminating gaps and overlaps in local service delivery, C/SA IL has made presentations toover twenty-six (26) different agencies, in order to acquaint these other agencies with our pur-poses. C/SAIL provides direct services to those who "fall through the cracks" of eligibility aridcriteria imposed on or by other agencies.

In addition, as a highly visible Information and Referral organization C/: :All- in turn refers tothose agencies when apropos. This kind of coordination will appear later in such sections as JobDevelopment.

0

21-974 0,--811--14

202

INFORMATION & REFEERALThrough media and agency exposure, C/SAIL has become a prime source of information for

disabled citizens.C/SAIL's original concept included a rapid retrieval system for resources arid referrals as well

as client records, etc.This is still planned but was delayed by the necessity of Met ro-Dade's Office of Computer Ser-

vices issuing Requests for Proposals to hardware manufacturers in order to standardize thevarious levels of equipment county -wide.

C/SA IL its already been surveyed by Computer Services for our needs and we expect theirrecommendation momentarily,

JOB DEVELOPMENTIn keeping with our theory that community involvement and independent living include the

financial security of a job, C /SAIL has actively developed (and surve,,,, aumitecturally) jobs inover twenty (20) different companies.

Pursuant to vocational placement for the disabled, C /SAIL has published a local EmployersHandbook, enumerating the responsibilities and advantages of hiring the disabled. The fundingfor this publication, S 1,300.00, was donated by Dadc's Employ the Handicapped Committee. Thebook will be used as a working tool in workshops to be conducted by Metro's Office of Handicap-ped Opportunities for supervisory County personnel as well us by C/SAIL for private employers.

To enhance our coordinating efforts. C/SAIL has been instrumental in organizing a Job Infor-mation Exchange in order to pool job leads and placement for disabled persons. Twenty agencieshave joined together and meet monthly to eliminate duplicated efforts.

ARCHITECTURAL BARRIER SURVEYSIn addition to those surveys specifically made relative to job development, the following ac-

cessibility surveys were per formed to date by staff: Metro Justice Building (exterior) ,

Jackson Rehabilitation Center (exterior)

TRANSPORTATIONAside from transportation referral assistance, C/SAIL is represented on the Metro Elderly &

Handicapped Transportation Advisory Committee (E & II TAC). E & H TAC is a broad-basedgroup which deals with the problems and accessibility of and to the Metro Special TransportationService as well as the in-construction rapid transit system.

VOLUNTEER RECRUITMENTTo date, C/SAII. has recruited four disabled and four non-disabled volunteers to assist in

various ways.As a final note, the cooperation and support of the Office of Vocational Rehabilitation in

Tallahassee and District XI in Miami has been and is very much appreciated

203

PENNSYLVANIA - COMPREHENSIVE lammuuTivnoN CENTERSI hr PC1111q1vania Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation (IIVR) elected to sub -grant Section 305

funds to our private, nonprofit community based, rehabilitation facilities, The selection of thefour CRCs followed a 10/0 request for proposal that described funding four CRCs at a-E50,000Ics el for each, with 512,500 required from each applicant as matching funds, The CRCs arelocated in Scranom, Elwyn, Elizabethtown and Pittsburg,

Each Comprehsive Rehabilitation Center is housed in a rehabilitation facility that has a pro-se!' track record of service to severely disabled persons and has the resources required to supportthe centers.

The four Comprehensive Rehabilitation Centers and their services are listed separately.

C()NIPIZEIIENSIVIi REHABILITATION CENTERVocational Rehabilitation Center of Allegheny Comity, Inc.

The primary objective of this program is to enhance and expand services to the disabled throughthe establishment and operation of the Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center. Within this broadmandate it was anticipated that the CRC wo.,:d serve to initiate, coordinate and modify those pro-grams and services required to assist disabled residents of this region to utilize their full potentialfor remoncrative employment,

The basic approach taken in the operation of the CRC was to provide and coordinate servicesrequired in the vocational, social, and psychological areas, medical and recreational services,health maintenance, education and housing arrangements. The CRC also acts as an informationresource on the available specialized services such as interpreters for the deaf, readers for theblind. architectural and prog,rain accessibility, and as an information resource on the availability01 and mn vices required to establish an appropriate vocational plan. The CRC also servesas: I) a focal point for the identification of unmet needs; 2) a site for the coordination of publicand pi is :ire rehabilitation efforts and 3) as a base for the establishment of a coordinated systemutilizing facility programs and services in this region.

COMPREHENSIVi, REHABILITATION CENTERAllied Services for the Handicapped, Inc.

The Buteau of Vocational Rehabilitation, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, awarded fourS50.00 grants to establish Comprehensive Rehabilitation Centers within the state. Such a grantwas awarded to Allied Services for the Handicapped, Inc., Scranton, Pennsylvania. A CRC officewas established in downtown Scranton, in the county administration building, Lackawanna Coun-ty, which has an approximate population of 250,000 people.

The Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center, known as ALL-CAN, Allied Community AccessNetwork, serves as a focal point within the community for the development and delivery of ser-

,vices to individuals whose primary disability is physical. Serving individuals of any age, the CRCaims at strengthening the capacities of the disabled'individual and/or their family in meeting thecontinuing services; finding and/or creating new outlets for employment; overcoming transporta-tion barriers to maximize mobility; insuring accessibility and compliance with Section 504 of theRehabilitation Act; insuring adequate social/recreational programs; dorking with individuals iodevelop alternatives to dependency, and advocacy on behalf of the interests of the disabled in thecombo) it y.

ALT-CAN is staffed by two professionals. Georgianna Cherinchak, Project Director; arehabilitation out-reach case worker, Ann Graziano; and a half-time secretary/receptionist, CarolGonzales.

The following services are made available through the CRC; technical assistance on Section 504and compliance services for the disabled.

Information and Referral Services. Acts as a centralized contact point through which disabledindividuals may obtain current and accurate information on health, social, and recreational ser-vices available in the area. Routine follow-up of cases is carried out to assure success of the pro-.gram.

r,4

204

Recreational and Ile enrichment &divines. I he (..}(C pIOVIIIQS ads ocacy litt ,accessibility to

these services, and helps in planning for expanded [cot:alum:II pi ogiams .1111 1,1,11111es.

(1)1111'ItEIWNSIVE 121A1/11111,1TATI()N ENITEltilospitui for (.1111ilren and Youth

The Iditabetlitossin Hospital for Children and Youth is emerging as a leader in the held of torn.prehensive rehabilitation services designed for individuals with complex multiple disabilities ofcongenital or acquired nature. The hospital provides orthopedic, neurodeyelopinental, andrehabilitative services for children, youth, and young adults. It [low accept., people of any age vs hohave spinal cord injuries.

The facility has a history of working closely with public and private nomproht commtinitybased agencies is Central Pennsylvania and is affiliated with the major teriaty and acute call:medic.1 ecnters within its iTrigraphic location.

individuals who are se, rt7ly physically handicapped and yet cognitively intact louse significantdifficulty identifying, and securing appropriate rehabilitation services and suitable competitiveemployment opportunities. To meet the needs of this group and to coottlinate existing coninititutyresurce for handicappitd persons, Elitabethossai Ilospital for Children and 'eolith has become a

',...inpoYtirnsive Rehabilitation Center, henceforth referred to as -CRC".File. program desciibed is:

A commit t.rited information and referral service of existing programs that set yes handi-earned individuals within the Smith Central Pennsylvania area. This is the only regiOnal I &it s..,:e Inking regional medical specialty services and crossing county lines for servicesfor the ...inlicapped,

2 Heam, ..ocational, educational, psycho-social and recreational services tint:idly to in.titt4', who MC severely physically handicapped and yet cognitively intact.

le.ltitical assistance to local private and public nonprofit organitations conceining SectionSi rt 4:1,1 any t.1 the range of services required by handicapped persons.

4 l'ocatiolittl placement for ottatirgilegic spinal cord individuals.5. Technical assistance for providing I ecreation to the handicapped.Elit.altethosvies thrust will be to the I & Ft system as this is felt to be the major need in this

geographic area.

COMPREUENSIVE REIIABILITATWN CENTERElwyn Institutes

Elwyn Institutes was founded in 1852 to serve handicapped individuals from its location nearMedia, Delaware County. In the early 1960's, Elwyn began the evolution from the traditionalcustodial care institution to a modern, educational and rehabilitation facility. Over the past twodecades, Elwyn Institutes has built a network of rehabilitation programs which give evidence tothe ability of the Institutes to carry out its goals and objectives of the Comprehensi Clion Center. This network forms a solid foundation upon which the information and referral flute-lions of the Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center tnay he built. In addition, Elwyn has thecapability to provide a comprehensive range of direct services and flexibility to expand that servicecomponent to fit the needs of the community.

Handicapped individuals now have easy access to in forination about services available in 'heircommunity. Elwyn Institutes' Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center (CRC) is a centralited infornation and referral system, designed to link disabled consumers to human service prosidell in theDelaware Valley.

Information and referral is available by telephone and upon rceeiving.a call, a trained counselorwill access the information and needs. All services are provided at no

265

I he Comprehensive Itella 14111,111ml Center assists individuals (11. all ;let's who 'lave physical orMenial handicaps to locate services in the community. The CR(' also pin. ides its infoi)nation andreferral services to families of handicapped individuals, advocacy groups, and to other communityPlugrams.

I'IIE. CONIEREIIENSIVE REHABILITATION ::ENTER's MAIN SERVICES ARE:I ill rt,rilltli il/I1 and referral

2. I echincal assisrance an Section 504Clu"s Information and Referral SystemI he information and referral system is designed to especially meet the information needs of peo-

plc %silo have disabilities, This computerized system offers a comprehensive approach to research-ing today's complex network of human services - just by calling the CRC, The CRC staff con-tinually updates and expands the computerized data bank,

Information and referral topics include:I. Advocacy /Legal2. Children's services3. Education4. Employment5. Evaluation6. Group services7. Health8. Housing9. Material assistance

10. Rein canon11. Specialired services12. Vticational trainingAll reirocsts for information are handled confidentially by a trained rehabilitation counselor

who evaluates each request on an individual basis. A list of existing community agencies is sup-plied to each caller according to his or her specific reeds.

'Technical assistance

To assist agencies in the community with the fu,filment of the requirements under theRehabilitation Act of 1973, the CRC staff lends books, compliance manuals and handouts, andalso provides a limited amount of technical assistance on Section 504. A list of professional con-sultants who offer workshops on Section 504 is also available through the CRC.

Information about Section 504 is particularly important because it was the first civil rights lawguaranteeing equhl opportunity to more than 35 million disabled Americans.

Section 504 covers numerous community programs, including schools, colleges, hospitals, andgovernment service. Since it influences so many community services, it is important that in-dividuals arid programs covered by this law have easy access to information. The need for a localComprehensise Rehabilitation Center was identified in the Rehabilitation Amendments of 1978.In the Pall of 1980, funds were made available to ten states which were selected through a com-petitive process. The CRC at Elwyn institutes is one of four such centers located within our state.

206

fl A It i

I Ili' howl' I, of the t rn CMInprOlivW, i VI! i101Ib i Hon enter.

P. d" ' riled 1"1" it, I by grants l I a tile under Set f. inn

the Rehab 'tat 1,1i1 Al t.. I ht",l' (...111 or., (I.k..) have been de toned and opecat e

to 'noel the unique needs of the handicapped populations In the 'Oates In

which they Are located. During the two year', the proect'. were IgodAd the

Primary objective of providing "A focal point in the iommunitie. fur the

development and delivery of serviAes designed primarily tilt hundiraPPod

Persons. " has been met in each location. The resolts have been to reach

more of the handicapped popqlatinn, by matAhing noel '41fh available serviA.e

through tfo, nandicaoiwd InformAlion and ll-forral, [valuation,

Comunily Education, laid Technical AssistanrA., Rehahilitation Tngineering,

Recreation Programs, hib ',kills, Job information rAy'.tecri,, Job

DevelopcentiPlacoment. Adantive Tquieuwnt, And Device lnforw.tion, Need;

Avdeni And Identitiration of MAndicappnd iwoup[ other technical Assistance.

and An incre.r,ed awareness Of Voaational Rehabilitation Services with an

inrrease of foifetril. io local VP liAorame- Providing a focal point has also

aided in prevwojwi f!!)1 I( at OM .1nd over] f.g of servcies as well as

improved coordination of serviAos the community.

The Centers (CPCs) havo provided over 611,000 services to more

than ?LOCI() nandicapped perswis during the two funded years of operation.

Because of legislative oversight, the third year funds were withheld. This

oversight has resulted in severe cutbacks in the CkC Programs and two of

the Centers have Wien discontinued. Attempts are being made to maintain at

least ',chin of the prooraw, that were developed but with the loss of the

third funding year, the transition has been difficult and in some cases,

not possible.

The Comorehonsive Rehabilitation CCiinter Program', have proven effectivo,

and Are viewed as comlimentary and necessary, Particularly An helping

Rehabilitation meet its commitment to nerve tne most severely handicapped.

Most strong encouragement is given to continue funding of the Comprehensive

Rehabilitation Center Programs.

207

DIVISION OF PSYCIIOLOGY

1.111h111INI 1111 IN 11:10,111;10

1, 1.1% .tall 1111 A!,, 1110 At IN

1'111 N 1111 N I

I, ol.) l'h 11

rehttiaty Igraf

'1111.11,)111,1,11)1, 1.11,4,1 I Wel ''s1.1' .

ch.!' I man, nut wointn t t oo on I no 0.1nd tt,n.p..c1,jothit o

I !oil ,/11, ,)(1'.110

beat ..,'hater Wicket:

it1111 to t11 Pitt 1'111,1111 NI

The Amerietn Psychological A:;seiation's Invinion on Rehabilitationwishos rl, go on record in !migrant of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973aa amenaed and its reauthoriation for the next four years,

WI' agtee wholeheartedly with the naralato an developed by the Congiess.1nd ur'n' that you keep the original law AN written. We would alsohot, I hat setft ions of t he law t 11 1t Wt'Fi. 11,1 apl.uopriat eel 110w 1,01111,1,111Di o,t .10; 1 ID, rx,n,p,1s orlq i 11,11 ly 11,1,1 intended, Vol example,Admtnisttmion (Section 12), Evaluation (Section 14), Innovationand Expansion (See)ien 120), Construction of Rehabilitation Facili-ties (S,ction 1011, Loan Guarantees (Section )0)), ComprehensiveRehabilitation Centers (Section 105), Reader Services (Section 314),Interpreter Services (Section 115), and Community Service Employment.`)one of the ibovo are luxury items, but necessities as understoodand written by the Congress in the first placo.

We also recommend that you increase the amount of appropriations for"Training of Rehabilitation Professionals" from its latest low pointof 19.2 million to at least 29 million. The trend in the past threeyears has been loss and less students selecting careers in rehabili-tation and unless thin catastrophic trend is reversed, the number ofwell-trained and comtetent rehabilitation staff will continue todwindle. It is aLso 1 simple fact that you can't do the complex jobof rehabilitation without traine0 personnel. Lastly, these fundsare an investment in developing a cadre of rehabilitation serviceproviders. Without them, there can be no viable Program.

A letter is enclosed from Jr. George N. Wright, one of the fore-most leaders and rehabilitation educators in the field and Presi-dent-elect of the American Psychological Association Division ofRehabilitation Psychology. We hope that this letter is made partof the record since it reflects so well the need for more trainedpersonnel in Rehabilitation.

1111-011 DID

1...yenat telnhe, Ph I,Ow, ...Iv,. I Ph,

SUCH!. AtIV

lihbetto H loleuhhhinn 14. I)

EXI-C1 111

II'.

II ARI) tldr, /ans., Ph 11l'h

,.l ho tNhD l'h111,41 14.11:r l'h 1/ 11 .r

Hoy( 1.Demols l'h n 11,41hD 11 / %%%%% h. 1.11 D

I....rote 110,1.0

1

j()I RNA! EI/111)htLava. l'h

ktlwn 1h., hlogh Asu.I.th.nNN.01,1{, [1,

rITER EDITORHID 1.Kr1 Ph I)

.I

WI. 111.11 y .01 011., .°P4,11 12° t'r '1,111°1 111 /IC I °II-, 1 II°tilillt 101,0 I II, 11,131 .1t°1 lit' ri,11 ,141

t Hit 41 t-,11' Itittit.,111!it !IMO) 'fin, ',11ktt tt 11,111 0,0an ,, tttl1,111 I,Iksr I .1,, l'I,II`It+1 01 1ttho vitAlly lotiomoh Thu -i., ottmtn

Appf.01w,1,1 Ind it 10, I

IW I Vll I I I I l i l i I' t' lit, 1111111 I V I

th.u1 1110 ti Ilit 11.10 Lt titi will ht, 1.1111, +,i I t, .tini 1 0.11 t tl Wit, tv., I .,I int 1.01, whit It w,111,1

.111 Ifhproeitt v., 000.110 III 1'll,v, Intl 1,1101y AI I4,1 1 10.1,111PI I311,: n

if; t 1.110,1 OtrII '4.

0,1110 I,ir ..)111 110,1111w1,11111 I I AI 1.11 prOt.,,I,I I , 1,t1 Pull n

Irip,1 ,Ifit , 1It.' I IIir, in,l..11.1 I '1.11 ionopr,ot,tt your tnclt,Oil ctriuir, ,

mittimo 1.1 lo AlwrIc0ri Pr,firt. All it

e111101 Iit,ulk ymi nmOlh.

If can v !lilt I nnI1 111IIii All i ittt t, hint{ nn Ih0 ,.tut 1,,it I flit .11- t11°141 I, .t/I ittil01111°11, 11,11' itt.,111.11 0,111101 1,t

II,Ititct I,iI Iy 11111mI I I, tI

'Vfc,,,"41.'11,0X 621.10.-11611"i

Imunarcl i,. 1.,r1m,tti,

Poh.ibl It t ion vi it/itAmorian htyhOwlicdt

1 Enclwoir,,

t titN, 1101,, I I t ion A ,1

209

Univarsily ol Wisconsin Modionn

II.. '4 .1.1 I, .11,1. ^ .1'1

1111. r 1,, I 1 I iit I 11, 11 I, 1I.1111 1' 1.111 1 1111...1I, . ' I, .I 1,,,I.1/ ,Ii , ,1 , I ,r 1. 1 y l I ilt tilli h, tl I 1 I th I ti .g.it.1.1,1 ,o11, It.. ,,r .1 I

I ,. I r, I 1../ iri.1,,,. I 1,,l 1,1 ,,1-1 .1 11.1 .1,11' i 11.1..1 1,41,

' "11 11 I' '1 1111'1111 .1,1% r, 11,111

i. 1 1/ .1,111111111,1 .11 1.1,., I 11 ,

' I '1'11" .1II I

`1,, ..r, 1 . 1' 1 11: I It IL, I 1, 11 11,11 1,1 11 1,0,1 1,1,0 11 / 11 II

1i", ", I t I tottIll it1 t1,18,111,I 1,1 tio 1..1,o, ',I. t. .,/ /hi lit .,t ,,,,,Ii1 .11' 1111.11,1 tr I...I I 1, 1,41 I., I% I., w.1\1

`11, ,.' 1. ,1 r 1,11,11 I I .11 'II ,,111,..11, 1,1114 li y li.,1 tIr11'.,1111111 11,1, I it.1.1 I 1,.. ..11.1 it t.I . 'it 11 1,41111 N r I 0,1111

`,I', 1110 1, 1 ,,. I ' 1.1 , IC,' I 1 1101 0,1 I II II loli o I 111 1,11. I, 1,, 1,1 1,, I, ,11.0.111

.it 10. , 1 i.flt in,' 1,11 loii.r1 iiif 1;1...1% 0., tow .,,, ,Itoitrtt! t I ..,, t 114.1111 who 11,111i r. hrol..,Nio.11

iow, .,/ I 1.1i r)1111.1, 1hr v111,1111, 01.111.. r 1,111111v% 1,.1 in I /1,., / rt, reh,,hilit .0 hot t I ich,s,

I., ,r1 1.11 ',.'.'.//. 1./..1,./hi I ...

I /41 0, A!,,1,1`, .nrint / 11111vt.r.; I I,l 1111111v, 111,1 1 I Ir. I 111,11,...i..11.11., 1 i,.1, 0,11 if jt, 1

11'1 1'11'11'111' 11 '.111 .1,11.1111/w I r tc

N. 'A', 101! , 1.11.11.

I.N.1111 .111 Ili

4

210

AMENICAN PEIISONNEL AND OUIDANCI AOSOCIATIONTwo 40,,,, Mao Co. 400 11)9114404444qP.IINit Clwack %Nem. AAQ1. 4 PINortO 1044110 AA

1.frA1r142n. tilt

MiltttN1 II:Ifttt kit r 415,

41411

ANt7tIC.N1 itY3INtt1.1'17,4 VP 11 41 411r4y,4,4 A;:11.4A144 444

ty 1)11. 11411(141 J 4,441utste7iANI41',A.11: tXtAl?I'IVE VI( Mtn n441

m104.4(114 co, 4%,4444 414vild410t/14 AITA [Iv;

N't NAL t4 wr Im, 111 hW 2A 17'

preparn1

(TttillTtl: AND 110.0.19 III tnl r;!AIltNtit411'111: IN 'NE IfAIII)1("U`111)lYNITEI) ::TNIIII IT ATElire4)M11111 1.434,1114 41tAlittV4

Mares Li, 1%11

Ottookao fter,On.41 end OtOclonCO AstioCOblion 1. ConvnelloO to Etzoot Oppottoolty

211

The American Wrsonnel vrS alidance Association (APGA) and its 41,000 members,

including the:American Rehabilitation Counseling Association (AacA), a division

of APCA, appreciate the opportunity to present our views on the reauthorization

of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.

Our statement is directed toward the need for realistic authorizations of the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as wended, for at least a three-year period. This

extension is vitally needed to add a measure of stability in the Rehabilitation

plugLams that span our nation and serve to develop the potential of millions of

disabled people.

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is a model of positive thinking and direction of

what can be done in the area of human services. The State-Federal partnership

and its effects over the past six decades stands as a shining example of the

importance of Federal leadership in reaching those that need services the most.

We wish to go on record as encouraging the Congress to maintain the mandate as

it currently exists. We are also aware of the fact that several sections of the

law have not been implemented due to a lack of appropriations. Some examples of

Congressionally mandated, but unfunded sections include: Evaluation (Section 14).

Innovation and Expansion (Section 120), Comprehensive Rehabilitation Centers

(Section 305), to name but a few..

A balanced approach to providing rehabilitation services was what the Congres-

sional architects had in mind, and this is expressed in the law itself, Direct

services are stressed, however, the research component and the training section

are sadly underfunded.

212

The trend in the past three years has been less and less students selecting

careers in Rehabilitation, and unless this catastrophic trend is reversed,

the number of competent and well-trained Rehabilitation staff will continue

to diminish. The complex job of Rehabilitation simply cannot be done without

trained personnel.

Our Recommendation: We urge that the authorization for "Rehabilitation Training"

be at least $29 million (up from the currant level of $19.2 million). These

funds would help to reverse the dangerous circumstance that now exists.

We also urge the Congress to increase authorizations for the research activities

of the National Institute for Handicapped Research (NIHR). The efforts of this

Institute are geared toward the development of new techniques and devices to

enhance the independence of disabled persons, thus reducing the tax burden.

Our Recommendation: We urge that authorizations for Research efforts (through

NIHR) be increased to $50 million from its current level of $30 million. This

type of increase, while not overwhelming, would certainly help to generate new

and cost - saving approaches and devices for disabled persons in their goal of

independence.

"Few, if any, resources offer more potential, I think, than our 35 million

disabled Americans. Too often they are relegated to the sidelines in spite of

outstanding abilities. I am proud to participate in this International Year

(referring to the International Year of Disabled Persons,1981) to help increase

the awareness of each and every one of us, committed that we'll make that extra

effort to assist the disabled in moving into the mainstream of American Life."

President Reagan made that statement, and we would have to agree on its worth,

and it is just as relevant in 1983 as we plan for the years ahead.

213

* will not lx.we you with tile well-known statistics of just how much "Rehabili-

tation pays" and how expensive neglect can be to the taxpayer.

On behalf of the 41,000 Members of APCV and the American Rehabilitation Counsel-

ing Association, we urge you to consider the following:

1. Keep the Rahtbilitation Act of 1973, as amended, in its current form.

2. Increage the authorization levels for FY '84 and beyond for Training

of Rehabilitation Staff.

3. Increase the authorization levels for Research for FY '84 and beyond.

4. Do not allow Rehabilitation programs, as authorized by the Act, to be

a part of any Block Grant or "megablook grant" as currently proposed

by Ehe'Admdnistration.

Speaking for our membership, but more braportant, the beneficiaries of the

Rehabilitation programs, we urge you to keep in mind that your deliberations

and action will help millions of handicapped citizens partake in the Aterican

Dream.

Senator WEICKER. The committee will now stand in adjournment.[Whereupon, at 12:25 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

OVERSIGHT OF THE VOCATIONAL REHABILITA-TION ACT AND THE EDUCATION OF THEHANDICAPPED ACT, 1983

MONDAY, MARCH 21, 1983

U.S. SENATE,SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED,

COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES,Washington, D. C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:35 a.m., in RoomSD-430, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator Lowell Weicker,Jr. (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Senator Weicker.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR WEICKER

Senator WEICKER. This hearing will come to order.Our task today is twofold. First, we continue our review of the

Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973, this Nation's principal Fed-eral legislation for vocational training and placement of disabledpersons. This morning we focus on three major areas within theact: Training, special projects (including those for migrant workersand the severely disabled), and the Helen Keller National Centerfor deaf-blind youths and adults.

We also begin a review of the Education of the Handicapped Act[EHA], one of the most significant statutes ever passed to offerhandicapped children equal access to education. Federal programsare serving more than 4 million handicapped children. In manyways these programs are successful. The quality, range and com-prehensiveness of the services provided under the act have steadilyimproved.

But there is still work to be done. Two recent studies, one by theGeneral Accounting Office and another by a private researchgroup, agree that the intent of the law has not yet been fully real-ized. All eligible handicapped children have not yet achieved thefree appropriate public education to which they are entitled.

Today we set the stage for forward motion in guaranteeing theirrights. This chairman does not look on the act as a means of hold-ing on to the gains of the past, though that we must do. Primarily,however, it is a bridge to the future and to our final goal of afford-ing equal opportunity to all handicapped citizens.

The 10 discretionary programs falling under the rubric of PublicLaw 91-230 will be examined during these hearings, as two sec-tions of Part B of Public Law 94-142. We will not at this time be

(215)

aaa

216

considering the basic framework of the act, or the State grantsunder Part B.

I look forward to the hearings today, and again on Wednesday,about how we can better meet the needs of the people these lawsprotect.

At this point we will receive for the record a statement by Sena-tor Jennings Randolph.

[Senator Randolph's prepared statement follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR RANDOLPH

Senator RANDOLPH. Welcome to our witnesses and guests, We are here today toreceive testimony on the discretionary programs of the Education of the Handi-capped Act. These discretionary programs, centers and services to meet specialneeds of the handicapped, training of personnel, research, and instructional mediaand materials, are an essential and an integral compoinent of the Federal strategyto provide a free appropriate public education to all handicapped children. The sup-portive services, training, and other activities provided by these programs havehistorically assisted the States in meeting their obligation to provide special educa-tion services to handicapped children. Since the enactment of Public Law 94-142 in1975, these programs have provided valuable basis of experience and expertise forStates to draw on to meet the mandate established by Public Law 94 -142.

Part C, centers and services to meet special needs of the handicapped, authorizesregional resource centers, early childhood programs, programs for severely handi-capped youngsters, programs for deaf-blind children, and regional education pro-.grams of postsecondary education for deaf and other handicapped persons.

Part D, training personnel for the education of the handicapped, has as its pur-pose assisting in meeting the need for an adequate supply_ of educational personnelwho are trained in the special educational needs of handicapped children. Appropri-ately trained personnel and a sufficient number of personnel are absolutely essen-tial if all handicapped children are to receive a free appropriate public education.

The innovation and development activities funded under the authority of part E,research in the education of the handicapped, provide the information and re-sources essential to the development of full educational opportunities for handi-capped children. These research activities contribute significantly to the total mis-sion of educating the handicapped children of this Nation.

Part F, instructional media for the handicapped, responds to the needs of bothhandicapped children and their teachers by providing educational media, materi-als, and communications technology to assist in the educational process. The pres-dent program is an outgrowth of a program enacted in 1958, which authorized theproduction and lending of captioned films for deaf persons.

The reauthorization of parts C, D, E, and F is necessary to continue the importantservices and activities provided under the discretionary programs of the Educationof the Handicapped Act.

We will also hear testimony from a witness on the preschool incentive grant pro-gram, which was established by Public Law 94-142. This program encourages Statesto provide special education services to handicapped children aged 3 to 5.

These programs are all very important to the handicapped children of thisNation. The testimony received from witnesses will be very helpful to the subcom-mittee as it deliberates on the reauthorization of the discretionary programs of theEducation of the Handicapped Act.

Senator WEICKER. Our first panel consists of Mr. Gary L. Bauer,the Deputy Under Secretary for Planning, Budget and Evaluation,Department of Education. He is accompanied by George Conn, theActing Assistant. Secretary, Office of Special Education and Reha-bilitative Services; and Carolyou tell me if I am pronouncing itrightCichowski, Director, Division of Rehabilitation, CivilRights and Research Analysis.

Mr. Bauer, I imagine you are the leadoff witness here?

4

217

sTATEmENT OI cAlty M. DAUER, DEPUTY 'UNDER SECRETARYFOR PLANNING, BUDGET, AND EVALUATION, ImpAirrmENTEDucATioN, ACCOMPANIF;D 13Y GEORGE A. CONN, COMMIS-SIONER, REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRATION ANDACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR Sl'ECIAI, EDUCATION ANDREHABILITATIVE SERVICES; CAROL A. CICIIOWSKI, ACTING DI-RECI'OR, DIVISION OF SPECIAL EinicivrioN, REHABILITATION,AND RESEARCH ANALYSISMr. BAUER. Yes, Mr. Chairman.Senator WEICKER. Proceed.Mr. BAUER. Thank you very much.I am pleased to present testimony for the Department of Educa-

tion on the subject of reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Act of1973, as amended.

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, authorizes the allo-cation of Federal funds on a formula basis to States to provide serv-ices to assist disabled individuals to prepare for and engage in gain-ful occupations. Significant progress has been achieved over sixdecades to develop a service delivery system in the States to reha-bilitate disabled persons. However, we are proposing amendmentsto the act as part of our reauthorization effort because we believethere is room for improvement in the rehabilitation outcomes thatcan be achieved for the severely disabled.

For example, about three-quarters of all rehabilitants are placedin the competitive labor market; for the severely disabled the pro-portion is about 65 percent. in fiscal year 1981, the mean weeklyearnings at closure of severely disabled rehabilitants with earningswas $148; for the nonseverely disabled, $168. Based on rough data,approximately 37 percent of the severely disabled rehabilitants re-ceived less than the Federal minimum wage in 1981, while 21 per-cent received no wages at all at case closure. In the last 2 years,increasing proportions of the severely disabled have been placed asunpaid homemakers.

Current law simply does not provide adequate incentives forState rehabilitation agencies and professionals to provide servicesthat produce lasting functional and economic independence at thehighest possible levels to the most severely handicapped clients. Re-gardless of performance, the States receive their funds according toa formula based on population and per capita income. The currentmeasure of success used by the program assigns credit on an overlysimplisticbasis by combining into a single category employment inthe competitive job market, sheltered workshops, unpaid work ofhomemakers and unpaid family work. Moreover, the definition ofsuccessful rehabilitation only requires 60 days in employment.

Several audits and evaluation reports have also indicated thatchanges are needed in the current rehabilitation system to improverehabilitation outcomes, especially for the most severely disabled.In 1976, the General Accounting Office [GAO] reported to theSenate Subcommittee on the Handicapped that since counselorshave traditionally been rated on the basis of the number of personsthey rehabilitate and the severely disabled are more costly to reha-bilitate, counselors would naturally have some reluctance to allo-cate a significant portion of their resources to rehabilitating the se-

21-974 15 224

218

verely disabled, which would result, in rehabilitating a smallernumber of clients. GAO noted that rehabilitation counselors be-lieve that a system which accounted for the cost and difficulty ofthe cases would give added incentive to increasing services to theseverely handicapped since the emphasis on sheer numbers wouldW reduced.

In ,1978, Berkeley Planning Associates reported that rehabilitat-ed clients were often placed in jobs that are low paying, unstable,or not in conformity with the original employment objectives. Theyconcluded that if meaningful rehabilitation is to be achieved formore clients, an incentive must be provided for counselors topursue services which assure that clients achieve stable employ-ment with earnings of at least the minimum wage. The Berkeleyreport suggested the introduction of a performance measure thatdirectly appraises the quality of client services or outcomes such asthe wage level or whether the benefits are retained over time.

In 1982, the GAO reviewed a sample of rehabilitated clients infive States and found, that in 35 percent of the cases there was noapparent relationship between the client's job at closure and thevocational rehabilitation services provided. Other problems identi-fied by GAO included failure of State rehabilitation agencies to ob-

serve the requirements for eligibility and case closure as well asidentifying the use of similar benefits. Similar problems have beenreported in 1973 and 1979 by the Department of Health andHuman Services' internal audit agency.

The Department recommends that the Congress consider changesto the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, that would advancethe following principles:

Reward States for good performance in rehabilitating the severe-ly disabled;

Establish a more meaningful measure of program success capa-ble of influencing the talents and energies of State vocational reha-bilitation agencies, which will ultimately produce greater function-al and economic independence for disabled clients;

Provide greater State flexibility in the provision of services; andPromote stricter accountability standards in such areas as client

eligibility and case closure for successful rehabilitation.We propose that Title I be amended to reward State performance

in rehabilitating the severely disabled by distributing part of thefunds appropriated for State grants on the basis of a weighted caseclosure system. Beginning in 1985, one-third of the State grantfunds would be allocated to the States on the basis of their per-formance in rehabilitating the severely disabled. Rehabilitationswould be weighted to maximize the financial incentive for place-ment in jobs that achieve economic independence.

Rehabilitations resulting in employment at or above the Federalminimum wage (which would incorporate statutory or regulatoryexceptions for sheltered workshops and work activity centers)would receive a weight of 1.5. Each rehabilitation resulting in em-ployment below the Federal minimum wage would receive a weightof 1.0. In recognition of the economic and independence value ofunpaid homemaking and family work, these rehabilitations wouldreceive a weight of 0.5. To assure that employment outcomes arestable as well as financially rewarding, the definition of successful

219

relmbilitatiii would la. strengthened to require 120 instead of (i0days of employment.

The remaining two-thirds of the appropriation would be allottedto the States using a simplified version of the current formulabased on population and per capita income squared. To provide suf-ficient time for the States to adjust to the proposed changes in theformula, hold harmless provisions have been included for fiscalyears 1985 and 1986.

We are also proposing changes to take effect in fiscal year 1984designed to provide greater State flexibility in the planning, admin-istration, organization and delivery of rehabilitation services. Forexample, the amendments retain the requirement for a sole Stateagency to administer the program, but eliminate the detailed provi-sions prescribing how that agency is to be organized and adminis-tered. The bill would also eliminate a number of State plan provi-sions which address administrative issues we believe are better leftto State discretion.

The bill would retain and improve the provisions which provideprotection and rights for the handicapped. The bill would retain re-quirements relating to the priority for providing services to the se-verely disabled, the individualized written rehabilitation program,the availability of personnel trained to communicate in the client's.native language, the prohibition against residence requirements,the review of sheltered workshop closures, and affirmative actionfor the employment of qualified handicapped individuals.

The bill would revise appeal procedures concerning State. reviewof agency determinations to include both determinations concern-ing eligibility of an individual, as well as the appropriateness of therehabilitation services provided. The bill would also add a provisionrequiring the State agency to provide client assistance services toall clients and client applicants, including information and adviceconcerning the benefits available under the act, assistance in pur-suing legal, administrative or other remedies unde!- this act, andappropriate referrals to other State and Federal programs. In addi-tion, the bill includes a new provision protecting the confidentialityof personal information provided by clients to counselors and agen-cies.

In order to provide for the continued development of a compre-hensive and coordinated program of handicapped research and thedissemination of information on the most effective practices,. TitleII authorizing the conduct of handicapped research through a National Institute of Handicapped Research is retained under the bill.The bill would extend the authorization .of appropriations forhandicapped research under Title II through fiscal year 1988.

A variety of existing discretionary programs are included in TitleIII under a single authorization of appropriation. The purpose ofTitle III is to authorize grants for projects of national or regionalsignificance, or projects to meet the unique needs of special handi-capped populations. It includes authorizations for the following ac-tivities: Training, grants to Indians, projects with industry, centersfor independent liVing, special demonstration programs, includingprojects for the severely disabled, migratory workers, the HelenKeller National Center, and special recreational programs. Title IIIalso includes authority for the Commissioner to provide consulta-

220

live service;; 1111(1 t1(1111i(.111 assistance, to prOVi(11, for the collectionand dissemination of information, and to evaluate any Of the pro-grains or activities carried out under 11w act,

Although we are not proposing to change the scope or types ofactivities funded under these authorities, we are proposing somemodifications. For example, we are proposing to extend eligibilityfur grants and contracts under these activities to forprofit organiza-tions. We are also proposing to eliminate specified !notching ratesand to authorize the use of Federal funds to pay all or part of thecosts of projects funded under these programs.

In summary, we believe the administration's proposal would int-prove rehabilitation outcomes for the disabled by enhancing boththe incentive and the capability of State agencies to make the mosteffective use of Federal, State, and local resources in serving thedisabled.

We would be happy to answer any questions that you mighthave.

Senator WEICKER. Today you are proposing changes in the Voca-tional Rehabilitation Act, to give more Federal direction to theStates. Yet, just over a week ago the administration proposed ablock grant for this program.

Did the Department prepare both of these proposals?Mr. BAUER. Yes, we cooperated in preparing both of these propos-

als.Senator WEICKER. Well, maybe you better answer the question as

to whether the Federal Government intends to provide more or lessdirection to the States.

Mr. BAUER. Well, Senator, although I have never been very goodat predicting what Congress will do, I suppose there is an outsidechance that the turnback proposal which the administration hasmade to Congress will not be acted on favorably.

If that is the case, the proposal we are talking about here todayreflects how we would like the program to work, if in fact it re-minds a program administered by the ,apartment of Education.

In addition, as you may know, under the turnback proposalwhich has been sent,to the Congress, States have the option to par-ticipate or not to participate.

We would anticipate that some States may not participate, andfor those who do not, we are proposing that this legislation governhow those States conduct their program.

Senator WEICKER. Which is the number one choice? You arethrowing two situations out here. What is the administration's firstchoice?

Mr. BAUER. Well, I think that the turnback proposal is certainlya high priprity, and one that we hope Congress acts on favorably

Senator WEICKER. Block grants?Mr. BAUER. Yes.Senator WEICKER. That is your first choice. If that occurs, then

what is being proposed here is not necessary. Is that correct?Mr. BAUER. Well, no, that is not correct. Under the block grant

proposal participation is optional. States would not be required toparticipate, and we think it is probably unlikely that every Statewould want to participate in the block grant proposal.

In Ilou rn,e 1104,e Siatei who opt not 1() participate would beable to conduct thii program miller the legislative proposal we aremaking today,

Senator WEickEa. Now, in your testimony you suggest severalways in %OH) the rehabilitation program might be strengthened,Ihr example, awarding States for serving the severely disabled, andightening the definition of successful rehabilitation.

Yet your Department's Own memorandum of September 1,1, 1982,is replete with references to the fact that the principal impedimentto warrant successful rehabilitation is a lack of funding.

Given this fact, how do you justify requesting an authorizationfar level funding in 1984, in such sums for the out years?

Mr. BAUM Well, Senator, as you know, all the proposals thatthe various departments have submitted to the Congress weremade in the context of the very difficult economic and fiscal situa-tion that laced the Federal Government. We feel rather good aboutthe fact that at a time of budget cuts, we were able to maintainlevel funding for the program.

If we have the kind of economic recovery that the administrationexpects, we are getting increasing indications that it is underway,it is certainly possible in the years ahead that we will be able tomake a larger commitment to a variety of programs.

But again, we think level funding at a time of budget cuts is apositive proposal to make.

Senator WEicKER. Do you think it is fair to impose the same limi-tations on the constituency which you serve, as it is those thathave no particular impediments? Do you think it is fair to imposeupon them the same limitation, or limitations, rather'?

Mr. BAmt. Well, I would not, at first glance, interpret levelfunding as placing some sort of severe limitation this year.

Senator WEICKER. You have already done that. I do not thinkthat is disputed. Because you already indicated, by your own inter-nal memorandum, what is holding you back from successful reha-bilitation is a lack of funding. That is your statement, and notmine.

Mr. BAUER. Well, I would certainly agree that there are a varietyof programs where we would be able to serve more people in betterways if we had more money.

Senator WEICKER. That is what I am trying to do I am trying totalk about your program. I am not trying to talk about any otherprograms in any other departments, or the Government as a whole,the Congress, the Defense Department, but I am talking about yourprograms.

I do not think there is any solace to be gained by the person thatis in need of rehabilitation because somebody over in the Depart-ment of Transportation is suffering a little loss, or somebody in theTreasury Department is suffering a loss, or that the CustomsBureau has to be pulled back. That has nothing to do with what weare talking about here today.

I would like to know, considering your memorandum.Is the justification for the level funding strictly a justification

born of the overall belt tightening in the Federal budget, is that it?Mr. BAUER. Well, Senator, I would have to say that there is no

program in the Federal Government, including the ones that we

' 24 3

are here presenting 1(1 you today, the funding levels of which weredecided in it %lemon,

So, yes, all of the programs, includiag this one, were examined inthe context of the fact that the Federal Government is undersevere fiscal and budget pressure, and that certainly was a factorin deciding vlutt to do with h every program.

Nonetheless, we feel, relatively positive about the fits( we haveretained level funding lOr this program, and that if' you look at theentire budget of the Department ()I' Education, a significant portionof that budget is going to this program, as well as to aid to thehandicapped.

Senator WPacioat, Here I sit, a U.S. Senator. There have beencutbacks also in the legislative branch currently, which also ema-nates from the same holt tightening process. Here I tun 6 foot 6,235 pounds, at least at this point, in a condition where I have goteverything going my way. Here sits my good friend over there,Robert Williams. Ile has been a member of my staff. Robert has afew more problems than I have got. lie has got a far better mindthan I have got, There is no question about that.

Do you think that it is fair that Robert and I go ahead and sortof share equally the belt-tightening process?

Mr. Ilmmt. Senator, I do not believe we are asking you to shareequally the belt-tightening process. I would point out again that wehave asked For level funding. We have managed to protect this pro-gram from the relatively larger number of budget cuts that wererecommended by --

Senator WEickEa. No, no, no, let us be candid. You have not pro-tected. You have not. The Congress has protected. You have finallyfallen into line with the Congress this year.

Mr. BAUER. No; I am talking about the process we went throughthis year, to come up with the recommendation that was made forthis program, and that recommendation is basically level funding.

Senator WEICKER. Which means that there are those that aregoing to be unserved, or underserved, right?

Mr. BAUER. Well, to the extent that there is unmet need, thatobviously is true.

Senator WEICKER. Your September 14 memorandum reads:Caseloads of severely disabled persons have, until recently, been largely shielded

from the effects of the declines of the purchasing power of the rehabilitation dollarsand various economies, because increasing State agencies have focused on the sup-port groups However, their numbers, too, have shrunk in recent years, albeit atmodest rates. The State agencies have targeted ever higher proportion of their ini-tial resources to the severely disabled of fiscal 1982. This would likely moderate theexpected decline in such cases.

So what you are saying is that the States do not pick up the ball,you have got problems, right? That is your language. It is not mine.

Mr. BAUER. I have not had the pleasure of reading the memo,which you apparently have gotten from my Department, but takingit at face value, Senator, I would stand by the fact that we havemade a level-budget proposal.

I would certainly agree that there probably is unmet need. Tothe extent that States cannot help meet that need this year, thenobviously there will be some people who would not receive all the

22J

HMI/C('4 IllOy 1111011 1111VO ITOOIV011 if WO C0111(1 IIIIVO ('0111O 1101'11 With1WIC(' Its 1111101, Or 111TO 111104 1111 11111(11,

1 01111101 argue with ,Yett thill if' you triple, quadruple, double, orwhatever the size of it budget proposal, that you lire going 1_11 NOI'VO1111)11' people4. I lowvvvr, We 11011OVO, /111(1 t

801111h/1 WEICKER. Not necessitrily, Not neepssitrily. I do not be-lieve that throwing money is the solution to the problem, I realizethud is how we ite supposed to get it better defense right now, Any-thing and everything goes out for defense, nod that makes us moresecure, I think it is it rut hot. foolish proposition. And I think it isjust its foolish as if I sat here mid snid, by throwing money in thiswelt that, we necessarily achieve success.

I ant not buying dint, 'Hutt is not the point that I and trying tomake. The point that I ion trying to make is that clearly, by virtueof your own inentornilttin, it memorandum sent by the Depart-ment of Educnt ion to the States, it wits not anything that was dugout of your files by my staff members. It is a public document thatdourly states what is going to happen either in terms of those whoare presently being served, underserved, or not served, or indeedwill hove, if the States cannot pick up the slack.

Again, I repeat, your job, as I see it, and this is where we havefallen into some disagreement with those that come from the De-part ment of Education Center, your job is not the Defense Depart-ment, your job is not any other portion of the budget, except thejob given to you as a Department of Education on behalf of particu-lar constituency, depending on whether a law is before this com-mittee and the Appropriations Committee.

I really get tired, as I am sure you get upset with your constantlyhaving to refer to your part of the whole budget process, ratherthan being an advocate.

Now, maybe it is that certain parts of the budget under you,where advocacy is capable of being generated by the constituencyitself, but not in this particular case. This case which comes upunder the Rehabilitation Act, frankly, your advocacy is everything.Without it these people are going to get left to the side of the road.That is why I hit this as hard as I do.

I am just not interested in the overall economic argument whenit comes to the disabled. It is an effort on our part, some sacrificeon our part, some money on our part, planning on our part. Clear-ly, you get up in the morning, and you have the same kind of hopethat you and I share when we get up in the morning.

Mr. BAUER. Senator, I understand your position entirely, and Iam sorry that we cannot come up here as freelancers, and give ourown independent views, as though we're in a perfect world, inwhich everybody comes up and talks about whatever they want.But I do not think the Government would run very well that way.We have to develop these proposals in the context of this adminis-tration, and we believe we have got a good proposal.

Senator WEICKER. Try freelance, you know. I love it. I do it allthe time with my own party. I grant you, there is a tradeoff as towhat you get and what you do not get.

Every now and then, some one of the independent commissionsunder the aegis of Labor, HHS, will come forth, and really speaktheir mind. It is usually someone who is not being paid by the ad-

2

22.1

1111111S1 l'111 1011 '1'11+'y 111.4 11011111,1011,111, 111111 they will speak theirmind. But it IN 1111 111011, ll(1 I 11111140 11114 eo11Strnints, Mr, 111111111,

that you are 1110101, 1011 I just feel that there are those exceptionswhich so dominate in the public mind that there would in no wisehe any 104111 iVO V11110111 115 l'111' 115 1111 11011014 OXKOSSI011111 opinion isconcerned. Because I think the public 115 0 Whole is going to do allit r1111 11) 1.1110.11.1(4,, but more important, the piddle is willing to gothe extra measure for the person who has difficulty, and these arethe people we are dealing with.

Mr, linumt, Senator, 111 the 1.1/4k Of earning your ire on this (pies.tin, if we were freelaiwing this morning, we would he bringing the5411110 10'0110H11114. We WOO( very closely with OM It MI these, and Wefeel that these adequately address the needs in the context of theoverall priorities of the administ ration and the economic and fiscalsituation.

Senator WP:IcKt.31, You are not working for OMB, that is thewhole point, OMB has 11 place in the process.

Mr. Mum. Indeed they do. And it was a give and take process.We are all working for the President.

Senator WEicioat. Well, I would prefer, very frankly, that youknow these changes of heart, of action, emanate from your side ofthe table. That is why I try to be reasonable, and try to convinceyou of this.

But in the final analysis, the change needs to take place on thisside of the table.

In Senate mechanism proposed for distribution, one-third ofState grant funds provide the greatest award for competitive jobplacement following rehabilitation.

What safeguards will the administration use to prevent Statesfrom serving only the easiest and cheapest cases for the severelyhandicapped'?

You know, it would be a great thing if the Washington Redskinscould play the New Orleans Saints 10 games a year. Our recordwould be pretty good. But try playing the Dallas Cowboys 10 gamesa year, and there are problems.

What, under your system, is going to prevent that type of situa-tion from compiling a table of success that looks good there inblack and white, and achieves a sense of being the easiest case tobe resolved?

Ms. C1CHOWSKI. Senator Weicker, I think you are concernedabout the creaming problem that has been identified in the pro-gram. Although we have not included a specific safeguard againstcreaming, I should point out that the performance based funding isfocused entirely on the rehabilitation of the severely handicapped.

So, in effect, we have guarded against creaming, by distributingfunds only on the basis of performance, in rehabilitating the severe-ly handicapped. These are the most costly to rehabilitate. To theextent that the States focus their resources on those easiest amongthe most difficult in the target population, they will have thatoption, but we will avoid diverting resources to those individualsthat are marginally handicapped, or perhaps not handicapped atall.

We feel we have gone at least part way toward addressing thisproblem.

23

;$.1111ti1 W1.1, h1.11 Whet'' 1", at.11141t1ifit fit severely Iiimil-cappeifi ls that in the veer,'Nis ClcnioNsiit We have ma made any changes. There is ti still0-

"" ttv"niti"" '1,'%.4'1.4.1Y 111111 1144111 1110 111111Mtiedchanges to that.How,o,,,,r, we do anticipate regulating to ensiire thot Ve 'MVO awrirloilde detinu ion for the States Obi:line-4 it will be critical to

have a delinit ion that is clear and haw( %moil.%,', have roomed authority for the Secretary to regulate on this

point, and would expect lo.Senator Wvacimi, Natalyn points out to tne thin the definition

relates to handicapped, and not severely handicapped, is that in-Ms. Callowsst. Severe disability is also included as a definition

in the hill.Senator Vrasrat. What about rehabilitation, have you explained

the proposed chimees in the definition of rehabilitat ion?Ms. wstit. Basically \VP have incorporated into the proposed

amendments the definition of rehabilitation that the program hasbeen using by regulat ion. We have nook' one significant chtinge,

As Far as the per fornmucc based funding is concerned, we havestrengthened the dfinition of successful rehabilitation to require120 days or suitable employment rather than the till days that iscurrently required in our regulations,

Senator WEICkER. III your proposed amendment, you proposeeliminating the directions Congress has provided as to how discre-tionay money may be spent, and also virtually eliminated anyadvice from the National Council.

Why do you feel that only t he administration should decidewhere. when and how rehabilitation dollars will he spent?

Nls, CWHOWSKI. Senator Weicker, we did not eliminate the statu-tory provision that requires the Council to provide advice to theCommissioner in the development of policy for programs.

Senator WEICKER, Counsel tells me that the ability of the Councilto advise has been changed considerably, in your proposal,

Ms. elUOWSKI. Only with respect to the National Institute ofIlandicapped Research. Currently the Council has the responsibili-ty to establish general policies for NIIIR, and in addition to provideadvice to the Commissioner on the administration of other pro-graIlls administered by RSA.

We have not made changes with respect to the Council's respon-sibility for advising the Commissioner On the rehabilitation pro-gram. We have modified the Council's role vis-a-vis NIIIR. We havealtered that, to be consistent with its advisory role, vis-a-vis theCommissioner.

Senator WmictiEtt, Further questions will be submitted for re-sponse to the record, and thank you all very much.

IThe following was received for the record:I

2 3

226

Question 1: A year agu the National Council on the Handicapped,then chaired by the distinguished Dr. Rusk, presented a Report toCongress which took sharp issue with the Administration's proposals

for disabled Americans. Congress a reed with the Council and re-

Administration's ro osals. Now ou are ro osin that

the Council s policy _MakIllg authority be eliminated and the scope

of its annual report 1.212vs_rely limited. Doeia't the Administration

want the views of res pected rehabilitation professionals and disabled

advocates? Should the Council be muzzled on what it can or can't

recommend to Congress?

Answer: The Administration is not proposing to eliminate theCouncil's role in advising the Commissioner with respect to thepolicies and conduct of RSA or the Department on the development

of programs carried out under the Rehabilitation Act. The Adminis-

tration believes that the Council provides an important vehiclefor obtaining the views of rehabilitation professionals, disabled

advocates, and others concerned with these issues. Although the

proposed amendments would no longer require the Council to includespecific recommendations in the annual report they would continueto require an annual report to the Secretary, President and the

Congress on the activities of the Council. The Administration isalso proposing to change the Council's responsibilities with respectto the National Institute of Education from a policy-making to an

advisory role. This change is in keeping with NIHR's currentrelationship with the Council.

ected the

Question 2: The incentive mechanism proposed for distribution

of one-third of state rant funds would .rovide the reatest reward

for competitive job_placement following rehabilitation. What safe-

guards will the Administration use to prevent States from servinPz

only the easiest and cheapest cases among the severely handicapped?

Answer: One of the Principal objectives of the proposedamendments is to promote the competitive employment of the severely

disabled. We would expect the States to emphasize the placement

of these severely disabled who have the greatest potential for

competitive placement since the proposed amendments would give the

greatest weight to such placement. However, the bill does not

propose to change the eligibility requirements of current law so

as-to allow States to serve only the easiest-and cheapest cases.

In addition, the till: would require independent financial and

compliance audits every two years and a program review at least

every other year including review of adherence to statutory stan-

dards such as client eligibility and case closure requirements.

Question Please explain the proposed changes in the defini-

tion of a "rehabilitation". What are the costs and benefits of this

new definition?

227

Answer: Thy ptopilnyd changes to the definition of the term"rehabilitation" are intended Lo improve the quality of rehabili-tation outcomes. The definition would require a successfulrehabilitation to he demonstrated by 120 days of suitable employment,60 days longer than the current regulatory definition. The proposeddefinitibu would also assure that the achievement of a vocationalgoal is consistent with the handicapped individual's Individualized

Written Rehabilitation Program (IWRP) and that services have beenprovided in accord with the 1WRP. The proposed definition wouldbenefit handicapped individuals by promoting more lasting andstable employment outcomes consistent with the objectives and ser-vices of the IWRI%

Question 4: In your proposed amendments, you propose elimina-ting the directions Congress has provided as to how discretionaryprogram money may be spent and also virtually eliminate any advicefrom the National Council. Why do you feel that only the Administra-tion should decide where, when, and how Federal rehabilitation dollarsare to be spent? What problems has the Administration encounteredin sharing this responsibility with Congress, and how would Administra-tion priorities vary from those currently established?

Answer: The proposed amendments to the Rehabilitation Actwould place a variety of discretionary programs under Title IIIunder a single authorization of appropriation. The Administrationwould, as it does now submit a justification of appropriationestimates which would provide specific data and justification forproposed activities.. Spending plans under a continuing resolutionor appropriation hill would take into account Congressional adviceor direction. Administration priorities would continue to beconsistent with the purposes of the existing discretionary authoritieswhich would be placed under Title III.

Question 5: Why is the minimum State grant allotment proposed forreduction to $2 million? Would this not place Lirlunfair burden on thesmaller States and make it more difficult for them to compete for fundsunder the incentive mechanism?

Answer: The proposed amendments to the Rehabilitation Act wouldprovide that each State would receive no less than two million dollarsunder the allotment formula. The minimum allotment has been reducedby one-third because one-third of the funds would be distributed on thebasis of performance. :However, to ease the transition to periormancebased funding the proposed bill also includes a hold-harmless provisionfor fiscal years 1985 and 1986 to phase-in the formula revisions. In

fiscal year 1985 no State would receive less than 90 percent of the totalamount allotted in fiscal year 1984 and in fiscal year 1986 no State wouldreceive less than 75 percent of the amount allotted in fiscal year 1984.These provisions are intended to provide an adequate transition period anda base allotment for the smaller States to enable them to compete on anequitable basis under the weighted case closyTe system.

Question 6: Some of the unfunded authorities of the RehabilitationAct may be considered for funding as the economy improves. Why is theAdministration proposing that all unfunded authorities be deleted forthe Act?

Answer: The proposed amendments to the Rehabilitation Act wouldremove a nembar of unfunded or duplicative authorities. in general,these authorities have been proposed for deletion on the basis that theyduplicate other existing authorities or that the authority in questionis not an appropriate Federal responsibility in view of the limitedresources available to support the primary employment objectives ofthe program.

228

Senator W EICK En. The next panel to appear before the Commit-tee consists of Richard Verville, counsel, American Council of Re-habilitative Medicine, American Academy of Physical Medicineand Rehabilitation; and D. Kenneth Reagles, president-elect, Iss,--tional Council on Rehabilitation Education, Department of Reha-bilitation Education, Syracuse University, N.Y.

Dick, welcome. Why do you not go ahead and lead off here'?Everybody's statement, in its entirety, will he placed_ in the

record at the appropriate point.Why do you not proceed to summarize your statement, so that if

we have questions, we might have time?

STATEMENTS OF RICHARD E. VERVILLE, COUNSEL, AMERICANCOUNCIL OF REHABILITATIVE MEDICINE, AMERICAN ACADE-MY OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, WASHING-TON, D.C., AND D. KENNETH BEAGLES, PRESIDENT-ELECT, NA-TIONAL COUNCIL ON REHABILITATION EDUCATION, DEPART-MENT OF REHABILITATION EDUCATION, SYRACUSE UNIVERSI-TY, NEW YORKMr. VERVILLE. Thank you, Senator Weicker.Let- me just take a moment to thank you on behalf of, not only

the groups that I represent, but I am sure the entire rehabilitationcommunity, and the special ed community, for having these thor-ough and thoughtful hearings.

It follows somewhat in the tradition of the program which everynow and then gets broken, but which was started by Mary Switser,and obviously comes through to today, that we get a thorough lookat the programs.

I am here representing organizations that deal essentially withthethey are the professional organizations dealing with physicalrehabilitation, in other words, the health related rehabilitation pro-fessions. I am testifying on the training program largely, althoughthere is no way that you could testify about professional training,without testifying somewhat about what rehab services are, be-cause the professional training program operated under the Reha-bilitation Act is the only program that provides for the training ofthe professionals that serve in the adult rehab field: It is the onlysource of support, though people may not realize this, for the train-ing of physicians, physical therapists, occupational therapists,speech pathologists, audiologists, prosthetics and orthotics. Andthose are just the six disciplines that deal with the health side ofrehab.

It is very fair to say that training is simply an adjunct to a serv-ice program. If it came down- to a tradeoff in order to assure ade-quate services to handicapped people, we trade off training moneyagainst service money.

On the other hand, it is obvious that you have got to have welltrained professionals in order to deliver an effective service. Clear-ly rehab is a very specialii,ed kind of service that focuses on thevery severely handicapped, to a large extent. I disagree with themajor implication in the administration's testimony, that the pro-gram does not do that now.

230

299

I think tr lot of evidence cited in their testimony'which I justread a few moments ago is material that was looked at before 1978.And in 1978 the act was changed to require, by law. that prioritybe given to severely disabled people.

Therefore, it is quite logical to assume that beginning with thereal implementation of the 1978 amendments, probably in 1980 andthereafter, that the program would be operating differently. Inother words the problems they were citing were problems based ona look only at evidence that came before the 1978 amendments.

We think the program is dealing with severely disabled people,but we are very afraid we have reached somewhat of a criticalpoint in the training program. The resources of the training pro-gram for professionals are two thirds devoted to support to univer-sities for the training of professionals that will come into the fieldand one-third for continuing education and inservice training forthose currently employed. That ratio has stayed about the sameover the years.

However, as the total amount of rehabilitation service dollarshas grown, and grown as it should, byfrom the mid-seventies tonow, close to lit) to GO percent, the amount of money devoted totraining people to serve in the field has actuAy decreased byabout 50 percent. That is not to say that we should be held con-stant, necessarily. Training is a function of what the service systemneeds, and what the manpower system needs,'

And it well could need only something in the order of what hasbeen funded 2 years ago, $25 million. It might not need the 32 mil-lion that it was funded at in 1978. It is fairly clear that if you tryto hold the training program constant in 1978 dollars, you would beup to $40 million now.

We think the major problem is, we have reached the point whereat $19 million, the overall training program is really not respond-ing to a very serious need. The evidence of shortages in fields ofthe health professions in rehab is substantial.

The RSA is required by law, because of the 1978 amendments, tohave a manpower training plan that looks at the service systemneeds, comes up with shortage figures. That plan or report wasissued in 1980. It has not been updated, to my knowledge, recently.But it showed that there were substantial shortages of physicaltherapists. occupational therapists, speech pathologists, physiciansand prosthetics orthotics, as of 1978, 1979 and 1980.

The Graduate Medical Education National Advisory Committee,one of those independent commissions that you were talking about,that was set up to advise the administration on physician needs,basically concluded, 2 years ago, that we had an oversupply of phy-sicians generally, but that in some specialties there were seriousp.ohlems. The specialty of physical medicine and rehabilitationwas one in which they found they actually needed twice as manypeople by the mid-eighties to 1990 as you had now.

I think that also corroborates the data that exists on the otherareas, PT, OT, speech audiology, prosthetics and orthotics, becausethe practice of rehab as a health service is a team process. I thinkthere are similar needs for the allied health professions as thereare for medicine. Yet we are now getting in all of those disciplinesabout 4'/2 million. In the period of 1977 to 1979, those programs

2 3

230

were generally getting about $' to $10 million. I am not here justto request money for institutions. Iltjt I really do believe that weare reaching a critical point where the training programs are notdealing with the shortages of people that are necessary to deliverservices out there. And putting money out there to buy services,which is by far the most important thing, will not be buying whatwe want to buy, if' there are not people trained in the specialtiesthat we need. They have to be specialized more and more sincecare is getting very specialized, and severely disabled people are,thank God, living in larger numbers. The issue is what is the qual-ity of life and the function of the individual.

And if' you do not have a specialized group of people out there toserve the handicapped, you are in trouble. I would just like tomake one final comment, and that is in looking at the administra-tion's proposal, I would say that the organizations that I am repre-senting would oppose lumping together all of the Federal discre-tionary rehab programs into one pot, and that is because of what Iwas just saying, really.

We believe that there have to be stricter standards, and bettertargeting of training money now, not looser ones. We would alsooppose not only block granting, or at least the two organizationsthat I specifically represent would, but also reducing the standardsthe way the administration's proposal today would, because theystill loosen them. They talk about loosening standards for peopleemployed in the agencies, and about not requiring certain mini-mum Federal standards.

I think the professions believe, and this includes medicine, whichhistorically has not been for Federal standards necessarily, thatyou have got to have Federal standards in these programs.

Thank you.[The prepared statement of Mr. Verville follows:]

231

TENTIMoNY OP

RICHARD E. VERVILLE, LEGAL COUNSEL

Pot The

AMERICAN CONGRF or PEIIAHILITATION MEDICINE:

And The

AMERICAN ACADEMY OP PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION

A. The ffectivne:;!-: and value ol rehabilitation services to ahindiappa person depld!: wholly, in Ty opinion, on three factors:(1) the and dedication ut the professional providing the ser-ice: (2) the tir,,linen,. (0 the service; and (3) the opportunitiespresented by the economy and the physical environment.

a. If a :;killed and dedicated professional or team of pro-fessiondls ,} either the health care or the vocational rehabilitationsyntem can deal with d client or patient at the time when thatservice is needed, rather thin too late, that service has a subs-tantial likelihood 6f miking a difference assuming there are jobsto be had dnd that. the social, economic and other systems areaccessible.

b. However, if we do not have either appropriately trainedprofessionals, in sufficient numbers,as well as a system of adequategovernmental financing toznsint in paying for the services, thereis no way that rehabilitation services will be effective.

c. Financing for nervice in a system without adequate numbersof appropriately trained people is not going to buy much and like-wise large numbers of well trained professionals without financingfor the services is a waste, This is true in any area in which wedesire to have a personal service delivered to-.an individual inneed as opposed to a cash payment or a product such as food orhousing. It is true of education, health care, mental health ser-vices and clearly true of rehabilitation which is essentially acomprehensive set of all needed services whose goal is improvedfunction.

SES1

232

11. the 111'1 1 /.'1'11' it a 1,1101/1 I II .11 11.11 r11.1 i. CO, (oat aordi saylski II and tiedic,t t ion I ill CA.!: y . lay I am s1,cnk I tid Lo the are,,of the health &are rehabilitation team and my fellow witness inspeakirol largely to the area of vocational COlInnel int; and job place -Mont. 1::1(11 of 111".10 1' I ortolit !: in critical to the necessary outcomeof thee tier v ce del vci t,t1, On t he health care side of the equation,the loco., in upon the phyn itst I psycho toiled I and social function-ing of t tic twit v Iona) ant t lic i nt cgi Lit ion (-) r those areas withvocation,,( eutitinel i and lob p I acciogit Thin Leius involves

i I Its) Lliet aptid n, physicians, n111 '.;1!;. 1111C.Ci f ea 1 1Y, we are

t lk ina today t eta t I ned. lot mil I trained professionalsin t at eat. tit lfiy t ,11 11 II, 1 11.0 ion 1110(11.(li 11t!, 1111y:11C:11

i l l , ,,,cniAt 1,,,.11 L11,1 ,1117, pa I hod ogy , audiology andF o c i : i t bet ics, ;or! 01 hut i The teliabi I i Lotion nervier., paid forby whatever pays, , t (voLsit (111.11 rehabil tat-ion ,. Medicareor Montt r'a t, i .1 I 10/1, (.1.C. 1 1 not be effective or

th investing in it at c nut able to supply trained peoplein th..te lel di, in atisina c nlI l t ..1 Liter a ctonera 1 practitioneror mint lei lie ;. tt /111 it j i rittI tintra1ne,l 111 0101.111 special areascan make ill., ncesnat y cunt t that ion I,. the care of the patient or client.

C. What I t; t hen f .1 01,1(.0i? '1110 pn,l,lem i that the budget for1 1, In n I la 1111.1 111 11211.1111 1 i

t H Ili 1, 'int CC".1olll'cOS are not available! t, t, en.- ", I !y ,r().-.11-.Irrif; or the ntitclent.

I n t o . . , , , f t elitht It tat i on mhnlicine, physical therapy,, I Fa0,11 1,1111( an:1.101(nly and prosthetics,11 1 urtlrtt. ., t It,. nts'd ,.! award'; and the amounts providedhave dee, i ti,hc IV n. I, !tit Year the total traininglitulact 1 y :'j I I al .1r, I to tutu tia,:;c. fields receivedonly I

, t led to believe that these!wit,' I I V4 1,',. 111,111 million and that

csscnti,,i It/ the pr cm a /,/tc., -out. plan. in FY 1978,the ai cuti; ,,f rehab: t medic ni., ica 1 therapy, occupa-tional the: .tpy, speech pathology, att: I oloay and prosthetics andorthut ion i ,,,,teivc..1 a tot al of cal. In constant FY 1978dollar:;, i t. w,a1.1 tab, $1I rut 1 I ion in FY 1983 to supporttraining at Oa, sari, It vel FY 197EI for ttit.e 6 disciplines.It would Lake about ;2 1st I I ion to FY 19(13 using constant FY197( dol I art; to keep the wli,t) c program at the FY 1978 level.

There ;ire al sc., ns other programs available to sup-port trai tong in reli,11,1 I itaL ion tit:; for these disciplinesI have stint ioncd. no p!,...,Lician training support in thefield of rehatii I tat ion met: i ci ne itrtitr the Health ProfessionsEducation prograr,,, The recent. Senate Labor & Human ResourcesCommittee rep, rt on health stanpo.,.,ir proitt ams indicated a majorneed for the training of .11: F; t in physical medicine andrehabilitation and recommendd that f units esp..-.nded for that(held, but under Lhe Rehabi 1 i tat ton Act. pro:trams (Senate ReportNO, 97-124). Allied health suppurt his n completelyeliminated from the budget

4ZESTBrST r,"':ILF2LE

233

U. llowo i , t neil lul t r (main is still tliereand it ley,' 1 5; 11,, hod. thin In Y 10/1i. 'Phis; it; no blind ansurtionbut i ti own t,t ud done in 1'1110 on manpowerned:, in iii0ponhe to .1 Conoretaiiona 1 iliii i't joy in the liehabi ita-t ion A, t . That :it idly t hit lhotio ii n sipl inen I11,15., nl, nt ii.ned (and coans,. 1 i ri,;) had hhorLagiiii. Itecently datat rem the id tidy of tIi, Graduate Helical 1:duea lion Nat ional

e it In I 11117 eoi ohor..15ed I5:1A udy in the fieldid ;do/ . V1,111.: kind i111.11.i I lI.it 1,111 MI a dramatic shortageof phy:.ic,lani. in the lield. SIu II, . generally nhow that thecuilnt hunply id phyhieianh ;1,,iallind in rohabilitation mgtdlv,;.5 be doubled by 1090, The numb,' of phytiieians have notI net .1,:eI :.L111: th, vid,nf,' rat ../nu t otntt; .11'0!1e. The number of0,001,11 t hei api i.ts; trottielint ti .1,11.11t roh,ibil itation pro-

.1ov; hat; actual I y deore,i5;eil by a imont 20% i nee 1777. Tn addi -t tin, thy; iitirt51,e; 1'51 In ocr:ttinit ional tliorapy programn11.r. ;.11yr1 evtli 1017.

In t he 10/11 Itell WI I,1 it it tit ...11'11,1,111.."., the Ciiniiressappi opii.it,dy man Hi t hat 1u:A 1 oo 1 flat ion iiiri3f cts-i lona 1 rim!, I plan in i rd, 111;,,1. to the v,ir10051 pi-of er.siorial<it aft'. 1,1 1.'1 t 111011 '111.1t

1 in 1,,,1 1 ra t ;on il beyondt he alma., 1 'IL aduat 'Eh, /3Tii iL:;cll silyijost.5; a needI .,1.. ohy,..1,., 1 t is: at least 50% above

Th It' ' n t ,.,t lilt tiler (5 will be aI: 111 ()Licit, 19115

I I, h tr ttt.,it 111 t ief;I . , t I n t II,. t 1.1111ne.t for OCco-

p it I, I I to I .II, .1 I n Inild e 11,..;! t 11 11..1 V 1,10 tey1; during 111010 .31- Th, t .1 I !. 1:1... .1 I .1 I- t. 110."

1,1 ; :'() ,1)(10 (pi ',II. IP: t :it t Y. 111

t i 111.1 ,! h''t 11. t II. I I com-p o..ido 5 5 it it i I, I ' i . n ' .; t for 3200 to

.1:,.; ,1 tt in it 1'. that Up to41110 ...p.,;1.;11.511; ; III it.da lit it r; eilici Ile wereni I. I4. i I1.. I'ItIU 16110 . 1,1 that field

1

it ,tt t. I.'t,. 1 1,.,,i ti ul, . 1.int!Ci itled.itn I t ,10 )7 . r.itt ,t'., I In; 1.1;,1;11',. t 7.. f acLcirr, re-qui / t:,.. i .111,1 X1,.1111,.1 t n.41:11 ; r tipeci t 1 Universi-t .1/ e iloiler ally unahlo to oxpenil funilh I 01 i 014 OVed ptoryrani:In I t'' 1I ,11. e,e; wit ittnit, 1.1,clei .11 .1;.!, t1X.iit.1,1 en Of such11,1,, .In .l ftin..C1.1117.e.t oar, Ore 1i .11 for the

1 151 1.1 iii Itii i, ,111. 11,0:0, Hi 10-.11 n ,; lt,It'11 t. r.11.1ttl,I.

21 97.1 - ;:1 - - -If

1

234

Senator WEicK lot Last year was one of the problems we con-fronted, and it nuittifested itself, as you pointed out in your testi-mony, but last year in the market, Labor, MIS portion of appropri-ations, the administration's position was in fact that there is agreat surplus of teachers out there.

So we were told not to worry about the shortage of special edteachers, because those teachers could just handle special ed. It is atotalthat is a problem we are dealing with herelack of recogni-tion of the special teachers that are involved in the additionaltraining that is involved.

One is not the same as the other, by a long shot. I am sure aregular teacher would be the first to come up with that same con-clusion.

Mr. VERVILLE. That is very clear in the health care field, and Iam absolutely convinced of it, not just for rehab, but generally.There is an overstatement of a problem, that is that we have toomany X and too many Y.

Well, we may have too many X, and too many Y, in general, butthe issue is a hell of a lot more sophisticated than that. It is whatyou need specifically.

Senator WEICKER. You could probably, in the matter of positions,you co'ild probablylet us go to another area. I would dare say inthat Lame study, since there are too many physicians, I will betyou there is a great shortage of them in rural, poor areas, so it istaking them out of the field of our interest. I will bet there is nogreat surplus of physicians in rural, poor communities.

The problem, as you well knowand were it not for the Federal.Government getting into this act, through subsidy and payment, toget the graduate to go back to his or her communitywould beeven worse than it is.

Mr. VERVILLE. Absolutely.Senator WEICKER. You are absolutely right. This generalization

sounds great, thrown out there to the public as a whole. It does re-quire a little bit of sophistication. As you demonstrated before thecommittee, to bring forth the full stated facts.

Mr. VERVILLE. We have got, and I will supply them for the recordlater, but some suggested amendments that might try to have theFederal role played more specifically; so that, for example, when abudget comes forward in January, the administration would haveto identify specifically what their shortage findings were for partic-ular disciplines in which they are investing money. Because I thinkthat is really critical.

There is real leadership needed by the Federal Government interms of what manpower needs are for rehabilitation. Because theStates cannot be responsible for training people, due to the mobil-ity that people have once they get out of the training programs.

Senator WEICKER. Thank you very much. We might have furtherquestions, but let me move now to the testimony of Mr. Reagles.

Mr. REAGLES. Yes, I represent the National Council on Rehabili-tation Education, which represents the interests of not only pre-professional but continuing rehabilitation education programsprograms which serve aS a vital link in the tripartite of research,training, and services.

2:15

We are very well aware of the value of training rehabilitationprofessionals, especially if the administration's suggestion thatthere be increased focus on the severely disabled was made part ofthe 1978 amendments,

The severely disabled, in our opinion, are individuals whoseneeds for rehabilitation are the most severe, not necessarily indi-viduals in any particular disability classification. It is very clearfrom research evidence that trained rehabilitation personnel aremore effective with the severely disabled, given the complexity oftheir needs, than are individuals with little training and little ex-perience.

While the capacity of the State-Federal program and other alter-native rehabilitation ventures, the private for-profit rehabilitationsector especially, is estimated at approximately 250,000 individualsannually, yet more than 600,000 individuals annually become dis-abled or limited in substantial ways that make them unemploy-able.

Because of the insufficient funds for rehabilitation services andinadequate numbers of trained rehabilitation personnel, literallybillions of dollars annually are required in subsistence payments tothe unrehabilitated. Increasing the supply of trained rehabilitationpersonnel, coupled with inc;;eased moneys for services, would helpalleviate this enormous drain of tax dollars.

While the State directors of vocational rehabilitation, the clientsof rehabilitation agencies, and rehabilitationists themselves advo-cate the master's degree as the entry level for rehabilitation prac-tice, fewer than half the rehabilitation counselors, for example, em-ployed by State agencies, have a master's degree.

I have already indicated that the quality of rehabilitation serv-ices is assured by having persons with more substantial degrees oftraining. I can tell you from my own personal experience at Syra-cuse University, that as the funds for vocational rehabilitationtraining have been reduced, the number of individuals entering ourprogram has also been reduced.

A graduate student at Syracuse University spends approximately$10,000 in tuition costs alone to complete a master's degree in reha-bilitation counseling, communication disorders, special education,ac.d other rehabilitation disciplines.

In order to attract qualified persons into fields that serve the dis-abled, the federally sponsored financial incentive for tuition assist-ance and educational service fees is necessary. Otherwise studentsare opting for programs in other behavioral sciences, not necessar-ily serving the disabled; other areas of science in which the salariesare more substantial and educational benefits are more lucrative.

The administration has advocated the fiscal year 1984 budget forrehabilitation training be frozen at the 1983 level of $19.2 million.This is the third consecutive year that funds for training have beenfrozen, representing a real loss of nearly 20 percent from the fiscalyear 1981 appropriation of $21.68 million. The impaCt has been es-timated by the Department of Education as a 6-percent reductionfrom fiscal year 1983 in the number of rehabilitation personnelwho could be trained in fiscal year 1984.

As rehabilitation case service moneys available to the States arereduced, rehabilitation counselers in some States have, in fact,

236

been had off. Those vlio are retained working with larger case-loads, and being asked to perform tasks that they perhaps have notbeen prepared for at the graduate levels, Therefore, the need forcontinuing education services is also recommended by NCRE,would make you aware of one situation, however, that is of concernto NCRE: that is on some States, because it is cheaper to hire indi-viduals trained at the baccalaureate level than at the graduatelevel, States hire rehabilitation personnel trained only at the bac-calaureate level, and then use continuing education moneys totrain them; this is in lieu of the formal graduate training, which isagreed upon as the minimum entry level for the practice, of reha-bilitation counseling.

Finally, our recommendation is that the following authorizationlevels, to confront the shortage of rehabilitation personnel andmaintain quality services, be $25.5 million in fiscal year 1984, $30.5million in fiscal year 1985, and $35.5 million in fiscal year 1986.

We also recommend reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Act toinsure that the rights of the handicapped are assured by law.

Thank you.!The prepared statement of Mr. Reagles follows:]

237

Ilfl Iblen i.nby II ,o/ RID/API! 11AIION Iblk:ATION

lia/

NA ',UBCOMM11111 UN 1111. HANDICAPPID

Mr, (iii Imam Mi.1,11,1,r., of the ',IIIWilnittcP: My name is Dr. Kenneth

Peagles, Professor nt Rehabilitation Iducation at Syracuse University in

New York State and President-I lect of the National Council on Rehabilitation

IA/cation, The National Council represents educators and trainers of

rehabilitation protessionals who assist d portion of the estimated 21 million

Americans with disabilities who require their opportunities to be equalized

so that they may compete with the non-disabled, to find employment or to live

WI independent lives as possible. While the recent economic recession has

had a devastating effect on all Americans, its effect on the disabled and

handicapped has been even greater. More of them are unemployed and on some

form of public, assistance than the nondisabled. Their needs for rehabilita-

tion services delivered by competent professionals has never been more sub-

stantial. It is for this reason that I are especially pleased to have the

opportunity to testify before the Committee and to submit our statement

for the record in support of enhanced levels of funding for rehabilitation

education, training, and research, and for the reauthorization of the

Rehabilitation Act.

Nature of Rehabilitation Research, Training, and Service

Since 1920 a state-federal partnership known as the Vocational Rehabili-

tation,Program has existed to assist individuals with disabilities to reduce

their vocational handicaps, to find employment, and generally improve the

quality of their lives. The hallmark of this program has been the individual

approach by rehabilitationists to meeting the unique needs of each disabled

person. It is a program with both humanitarian and economic justification.

As a nation we have committed ourselves to assisting the disabled and in

doing so we have turned tax consumers into taxpayers the program has

returned approximately 10 dollars for every dollar Congress has wisely in-

vested. In few programs has the complementary relationship among research

(to develop innovative techniques and methods, such as the use of computers

4

28

'r.y111 t 10 0.1 o .,1,111,11 Ohl 1111111'1W, pv1101111

.11,r 1,1 1,0','.1111, 11111 1, 1110 education ,1/111 t 141 ir111111

011 10 !Ple. rt, 0? successfullY

11 1F,11,1111,, 111111,,1 ! h, ! onro..', in 1954 and since

ito.n 11,111 it hind', hAp mpilwntnd 'AA!, In ,.'I rI.JOIWCW, to support pre-

, P.110.0.1MI indlviduok In 1 vattety of rehabilita-

tion tek.In4inq rvhan11114liott itmh..Ith9, job placement

ialr.ts, rehabilitation h'il'ly administrators, physical and occupa-

tional tnerapP,ts, audiologist', and speech thrrApir.,ts, mobility and orienta-

tion specialists for the blind, pnziclow, specializing in physical medicine

and rehabilitation, nurses, social worlers, and others. In addition to

supporting pre-professional education, Ifehabilitation Training funds are also

used for continuing education and in-service training of practicing rehabili-

tafionisfs to keep thou' abreast or innovative technological developments. The

result has been an impressive neti,ork of educational programs based in U.S,

colleges and universities, continuing education programs, and in-service

training resources of state rehabilitation agencies, with which the cadre of

rehabilitationists needed to impl.-ient tho comprehensive program of services

for this nation's handicapped are developed.

Impact of Proposed Funding

On behalf of disabled indivi.'cals and professional rehabilitationists,

wish to share with you my cancer's for the future of rehabilitation training

and the supply of trained persanne!. While the research evidence is clear

that trained rehabilitationists essential for an effective, efficient

service delivery system, the fundig patterns of the past six years, in which

funds for rehabilitation training nave been reduced from $30.4 million in FY 78

to $19.2 million in FY 83, threate's the viability of rehabilitation programming

and the quality of services to the disabled, The following are documented

areas of impact:

1. While the capacity of the state-federal vocational rehabilitation

program and alternative rehabilitz:ion ventures is estimated at approximately

250,000 persons annually, mbre th: 600,000 individuals annually (Trietel,

239

Hit (re eial le I PI I no el ul ioileit lilt di( that nb11r then)

iu (0 insuffh Ieflt. fund.. lid iehohilitolion services and

Inodegodle ngniher gt trained rehabilitati,n rei%ohnol, billion', of dollar')

mingol ly one ',owed In unrehabi 1 I ted In-u r,uri Ito l.,ppl, of fial teal rffllhlllt it I it I,f would help alleviate

enontiotei di OIM Of tO,

While the direitniii (0 .late lio(ohilitotinn agencies, the cltentS

of vocational rehohilitation srrvtces, dnd rooldhilltallohi,it,, themselves

advetate the master's doree as the entry-level for rehabilitation practice,

fewer than half the rehabilitation counselors employed by state agencies

have a Hoi.ter' degree. ',info rehabilitation counselors with graduate

degrees hove shown in reworch (Iber; Wright & Butler, etc.) that

they are more capable of working with the severely disabled, those persons

with severe disabilities especially suffer from the present personnel

shortages in rehabilitation. lhus, as the supply of trained rehabilitation

personnel is reduced by fewer gra& ites, attritions to other more lucrative

fields and other factors, the quality of services is diminished.

3. the Adminitrotion has advocated that the FY 1984 budget for

Rehabilitation Training be frozen at the fi 1983 level of $19.2 million.

lhis is the third consecutive year that fund', for training have been frozen,

representing a real loss of nearly 20. from the FY 1981 appropriation of

$21.68 million. The impact has been estimated by the Department of Education

as a 6. reduction in the numbers of rehabilitation personnel who could be

trained in FY 1984 than in FY 1983.

4. I can tell you from personal experience and that of my colleagues

whose careers have been the training of rehabilitation personnel, that as

the funds are reduced by appropriation levels and inflation to assist

students with their rehabilitation educational costs, students who would be

encuraged to pursue careers in rehabilitation fields opt for careers in

fields which are more attractive because of better salaries, educational

benefits, and other factors. Thus, we encourage you to consider -ligher levels

of funding for Rehabilitation Training.

5. With cutbacks in rehabilitation funding nod staff, employed rehabili-

personnel have been asked to assume responsibilities for which they have not

240

a.tlint(t.,, education and

tidinin(; to give ielsihilitationists

nd 11.:Aro the cinality of service.

!Ik alhori::atiiiIevels to

co!ilionL IH,,1,111tALlo1; and maintain

in FY 190 '10.5 million in

FY 11111'i, :ma 5 Mulch in FY 1986. Finally, we recommend

:aauthori...atin a! the Rei.abilitation Act to ensure that the

titthts u: the handicapped arc assured by law.

ot all the proiams atahorized under the

Rehal,11.1tati:,n Act, trainir,, has taken the r.rentest percentage

los., in !edel-al funding since FY despite the documented

shortage of traied tehabiliLatio:1 personnel.

Nehal,ilitation is a 1,,Ifilre program. Disabled Americans

who have been st,rved by this prorra:a have returned far more in

tax,i1,1e dM5 iii; Lie prouam cost.. 11 is poor

unhcalihy ht:maniiarian concern to reduce

ia level of funding tr kehabilitation Training, which is so

vital to the delivory o: quality services. NCRE is hopeful that

the Cu::tmitie will supp..rt our efforts to train rehabilitation

pe::scnnel to meet the needs lhc nniion's hand icapped.

241

Senator WEiciiEit. Thank you very much, Mr. Reagles.Gentlemen, thank you very much. We have a long witness list,

and I appreciate your testimony. It is well gives in response to thequestions.

Thank you.The -next two witnesses that we have, Harry Hall, the Washing-

ton representative of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society; andMartin Adler, executive director of the Helen Keller NationalCenter for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults.

Mr. Hall, It is a pleasure to have you here, and why do you notproceed with your testimony?

STATEMENTS OF HARRY T,. HALL, WASHINGTON REPRESENTA-TIVE, NATIONAL MULTt:'LE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY AND MARTINAI)LER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, HELEN KELLER NATIONALCENTER FOR DEAF-BLIND YOUTHS AND ADULTS, SANDS POINT,N.Y

Mr. HALL. I am honored to appear before the subcommittee todiscuss certain aspects of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amend-ed. My name is Harry L. Hall. For 6 years I have been serving asthe Washington representative of the National Multiple Sclerosis,:Society. Prior to that, I served as the assistant to the commissioner,the Rehabilitation Services Administration. Through the years Ihave had an opportunity to understand what is possible and reflecton the strategic ways to achieve it with respect to the vocationalrehabilitation of severely disabled persons.

I come before you this morning, as an individual, for the purposeof briefly commenting on sections 312 and 316, and then concen-trating on section 311 of the Rehabilitation Act.

Senator WEICKER. Before you start your testimony, I want topoint out that all the statements are being included in their entire-ty in the record, and I would hope that each of the witnesses wouldsummarize their statements.

Mr. HALL. Section 312, a program to provide rehabilitation serv-ices to migratory workers, expects to expend $750,000 in fiscal year1983. Details and achievements of this program are best describedin the 1981 report of the Sixth Annual National Conference of theVIt Project for Handicapped Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers.It is estimated that 342,000 migrant and seasonal farmworkers areeligible for VR services. This program attempts to complement thebasic State program which has great difficulty serving this verymobile and unique populatiOv.

Section 316 is a program to stimulate the development of specialrecreational services and was funded at the level of $1,884,000 infiscal year 1982. Last year there were 213 grant applications ofwhich 23 were awarded. Essentially, this program has the potentialof strategically integrating therapeutic recreation for disabled per-sons into broader recreation programs primarily supported by theprivate sector and local governments. Many of these severely dis-abled persons participated in recreation programs for the first timein years; the programs seem to be meeting health needs, socializa-tion needs and rehabilitation needs.

242

Now, want to review the purpose of section 311, the specialprojects-for the severely disabled, and comment on what part thisprogram should play in the overall vocational rehabilitation pro-gram. This section of the act was initially oriented toward specialprojects developed under a separate grant program focusing onolder blind, underachieving deaf, and spinal cord injured persons.Subsequently the legislation was expanded to provide a focus onother types of severely disabling conditions.

In my written testimony, I have attached a chart which gives thedetails of the program expenditures on an annual basis, and showsthe distribution of projects according to various disabling condi-tions. I should mention that the spinal cord injury projects havebeen managed by the Rehabilitation Services Administration total-ly separate from the other projects. It is anticipated that the pro-gram in fiscal year 1983 will spend $4,600,000 for the model spinalcord injury projects and $5,217,000 for the special projects for theseverely disabled.

For decades the vocational rehabilitation program administeredprimary through State vocational rehabilitation agencies has beena successful and cost-effective program. One does not have to viewthe program with disrespect to also add that the area which hasmost needed improvement is the area of knowing what to do andhaving personnel competent to do it with respect to severely dis-abling diseases and conditions. They have needed models and dem-onstrations and evaluation and in many cases additional insightinto the unique aspects of many of the severe disabilities. Limitedresources to meet the service demands have prevented Stateagency initiatives in this area. I believe a nationally coordinatedprogram is the most rational and efficient method of meeting thisneed.

Advocates for the consumers and service providers in the Stateagencies recognize this need. The fact that the Rehabilitation Serv-ices Administration has identified some of these conditions as un-derserved populations illustrates the broadly held view that this isa problem requiring special attention.

The Rehabilitation Services Administration, as authorized cur-rently by the Rehabilitation Act, has precious few tools to exercisestrong national leadership. This program is potentially one of itsbest tools. Some of the results of the special projects have been ofclear value and there is yet a ver:, substantial amount of systemsimprovements which could and should be made. I have the impres-sion that State agencies will accept and implement demonstratedimprovements.

There has been no detailed and objective evaluation of this pro-.gram by RSA. While I have very strong respect for the RSA staffmembers who manage this program on a day-to-day basis, I knowthat the resources available to monitor progress in the projects islimited. It is my understanding that serious consideration is beinggiven by RSA to an expanded staff monitoring role, and also to theawarding of a specific evaluation contract in the next year. The se-lection of priority areas is largely a function of RSA staff work re-sulting in a grant announcement published in the Federal Register.The selection of specific grantees is managed through a peer reviewprocess.

213

Beginning in 1974 the first of four demonstration projects con-centrating on multiple sclerosis was initiated. There is now a fifthproject in its first year which is focused jointly on cerebral palsyand multiple sclerosis. The first project at the Albert Einstein Col-lege of Medicine Multiple Sclerosis Clinic in the Bronx demonstrat-ed that a coordinated and comprehensive medical care and serviceprogram can produce individuals severely disabled with multiplesclerosis who are motivated and capable of job training, leading tothe return to employment.. Frankly, it did not demonstrate the ca-pability of the State VR agency to take people from that point andultimately obtain placement.

The second project at the multiple sclerosis clinic associated withthe University of Washington in Seattle undertook the task of de-veloping and testing a prognostic indicator for vocational rehabili-tation counselors, which was called vocational assessment in multi-ple sclerosis.

A third project conducted by the Minnesota North Star Chapterof the National Multiple Sclerosis Society in conjunction with theState rehabilitation agency further tested the prognostic indicatorsguide, demonstrated the effective use of MS support groups, andthrough its Outreach program clearly proved that there are manypersons with multiple sclerosis, especially in outlying and sparselypopulated areas, who are desirous of receiving services and return-ing to employment, but were initially unaware of the State VR pro-.gram.

A current project being conducted by the National Chapter ofthe National Multiple Sclerosis Societe, in conjunction with theState agencies in Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia,constitutes the most successful effort anywhere in the world in theplacement of persons with multiple sclerosis. This project has de-veloped its own job bank, its own transitional employment trainingprogram, and currently is providing a substantial amount of theservices they originally anticipated would be provided by the Stateagencies. Is has proven beyond question that many individuals se-verely disabled with multiple sclerosis can return to work. Follow-up to this project will necessarily involve the demonstration ofmore effective and efficient means to coordinate those aspectswhich State agencies can do with those aspects which are probablybest done by the private sector.

It is crucial, both for individuals and because of the Federalbudget implications, that demonstration projects pave the way forthe State agencies to build into their system more efficient and sue=cessful programs for serving severely disabled individuals from cur-rently underserved populations. In my view, section 311 should bereauthorized.

Thank you for inviting me to testify.[The prepared statement of Mr. Hall follows:]

244

.1 N. la IU.L1 IA.FUf)L III.

l'ANI)ft:411.N, EAB.Uk S H1M'N RLSOLELLS (.UTIITTEE

';11.Ir (..HAM'Ati ANT) NIIMBER !, GE TIE SUBCOMMITTEE

I /4! rueNED 10 APPLAR I1FfiE NHS !AlbOUTIIITEE TO DISCUSS CERTAIN ASPECTS OF

TAT IN) ACT OF I' V3 ntl MINDED, MY NAME IS HARRY L. HALL. FOR SIX

YEARS I VOLT NIT) SERVING L rimoti REPRESENTATIVE OF TIE NATIONAL MULTIPLE

SCLEROSIS ILTY, PRAM LM 10 TWO I SERVED AS ASSISTANT TO TIE C.0411 SS I ONERTEE

I,ErtNilLITATICN SERVICES ATI1INISIRATICAI, TIROUGH TEE YEARS I NAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY

10 It ILIAC TAIU) WHAT IS POS S I BLE Ng) REFLECT ON TIE STRATEGIC WAYS TO ACHIEVE IT WITH

1,V,PLCT TO T TE VOCA1 1 ORAL RE HAE I LI TAT ION OF SEVERELY DISABLED PERSONS.

I COI: BEFORE YOU 1)115 !URN ING, NJ INDIVIDUAL, FOR THE PURPOSE OF BRIEFLY

CLYIENT I TIG ON SECT I MS 312 NID 316 MD D EN CONCENTRATING ON SECT ION 311 OF TIE

RID a 1.1 TAT I CN ACT.

...;LC I Of I 312, A PRO N1 TO PROVIDE REHABILITATION SERVICES TO MIGRATORY WORKERS,

EXPECTS TO EXPEND $750A IN FY1935. DETAILS ME) ACHIEVEMENTS OF THIS PROGRAM ARE

BEST IESCR I NJ) IN TIE 1931 REPORT OF TEE SIXTH AINUAL NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF TEE VR

PROJECT FOR FIND I CAPPED MI GANTT AND SEASONAL FARIMCRKERS IT IS ESTIMATED TWIT

31-Q, 000 MI C32,NT MID SEASCNAL FARMWORYERS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR VR SERVICES. THIS PROGRAM

ATTEMPTS TO CCMPLEMENT TEE BAS IC STATE PROGRAM WHIG' HAS GREAT DIFFICULTY SERVING

THIS VERY NUBILE NiD UNIQUE POPULATICNJ.

SECTION 516. A PROCRA TO STIMULATE THE DEVELOPNENT OF SPECIAL RECREATIONAL

SERVICES WAS FUNDED AT TIE LEVEL OF $1,324,000 IN FY1982. TI-ROUGH REPROGRAMING

TIE AEMINISTRATION ECES NOT PLAN TO EXPEND ANY FUNDS IN FY1983. LAST YEAR

TERC WERE 213 CRAW APPLICATIONS OF WHICH 23 WERE AWARDED. ESSENTIALLY) THIS

PROC,R141 IAS TIE FOTENT IAL OF,- STRATEGICALLY INTEGRATING TIERAPEUTIC RECREATION FOR

DISABLED PER :ORS INTO BROADER RECREATION PROGRAMS PRIMARILY SUPPORTED BY TIE

PRIVATE SEC TOR NZ) LOCAL GOVERI VENTS WHILE TEE RECREATION MAY OFTEN HAVE THE

IMPACT OF INCREASING ONES PREPARATION FOR EMPLOYMENT, TIE PURPOSE IS BROADER AND

CON; I STNIT 'WITH TIE EXPANDED PURPOSE OF THE REHABILITATION ACT ENACTED IN 1978.

RECREATION PROJECTS TIMED WEER SECTION 311 AND 316 WITH FY1981 MONIES SERVED

ROX I MA 1.1 Y 4,100 PERS51iS. MANY OF THESE SEVERELY DISABLED PERSONS PARTICIPATED

I N AI CN PRO( RN'; FCk 11 .E FIRST TIDE III YEARS; TEE PROGRAMS SEEM TO BE MEETING

EAL H, I AL cri NiD RLiLEIILITATICNN NEEDS.

245

No!, 1 WANI 10 fit 711W 101 L ION 2;11, 1111 SPEC I AL PROJECT S FOR TIL

5EARLLY DISAIJLED, NM LUMEN I ON WI A PAN I III S PRIX RNA SMULD PLAY IN TI IF OVERALL

VOCAT ILYIAL REHABILITATION PRO N1. THIS SECTION OF TIE. ACT WAS INITIALLY CRILITILD

TOWN2D SPECIAL PROJECTS DEVELOPED UNDER A SEPARATE GRANT PROGRAM FOCUSING ON OLDER

BLIND, LINDER:111 ENING DEAF N1D SPINA_ CCRD I NJLCED PERSONS, SUB.SECUENTLY TIE

IT: GI SLAT I (II WAS EXPNIDED TO FIRE! DE A TOCIL ON OTTER TYPES OF SEVERELY DISABLING

COUR I IONS . IN MY MITTEN TESTIMONY, WHICH I REOLEST BE I TICLLICED IN DE RECORD,

I HAVE ATTACHED A CHART VoIll CH GIVES DE DETAILS TIE PROCRN1 EXPENDITURES ON AN

ANNUAL BASIS AND SUMS THE DI S1 R I BUT ION OF PROJECTS AOCCRDI NG TO VARIOUS SEVERELY

DISABLING CONDI T IONS . I SITJULD MENTION THAT TIE MODEL SPINAL CORD INJURY PROJECTS

HAVE BEEN MANAGED BY THE REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMIN I STRAT ION TOTALLY SEPARATE

FRC1 TIE OTHER PROJECTS, IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT DE PROGRAM IN FISCAL YEAR 1983

WILL SPEND t14.E.00.(T00 RR DE MODEL SPINAL CORD MARY PROJECTS NE) 55,217,480 FOR

TIE SPECIAL PROJECTS FOR DE. SEVERELY DISABLED.

FOR DECALESTIE VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM ADMINISTERED PRIMARILY THROUGH

.UATF VOCATRXIAL REHABILITATION AGENCIES HAS BEEN A SUCCESSFUL AND COST EFFECTIVE

PHOCUAM. ONE ICES NOT HAVE TO VIEW TIE PROGRAM WITH DISRESPECT TO ALSO ADD THAT THE

AREA WHICH HAS MDST NEEDED IMPROVEMENT IS THE AREA OF KNOWING WHAT TO DO AND HAVING

PERSOI11EL COMPETENT TO DO IT WITH RESPECT TO SEVERELY DISABLING DISEASES AND CONDITIONS,

THEY HAVE NEEDED MODELS AND DEMISTRATICNS AND EVALUATION AND IN MANY CASES ADDITIONAL

INSIGHT INTO THE UAIOLE ASPECTS OF MOST OF TIE SEVERE DISABILITIES. LIMITED RESOURCES

TO MEET SERVICE DEMANDS HAVE PREVENTED STATE AGENCY INITIATIVES IN THIS AREA, A

NATIONALLY COORDINATED PROGRAM IS TIC MOST RATIONAL AND EFFICIENT milim OF MEETING

THIS NEED.

ADVOCATES FOR TIE CONSUERS AND SERVICE PROVIDERS IN THE STATE AGENCIES RECOGNIZE

Tff NEED TO IMPROVE DE CAPABILITY OF DE STATE VR SYSTEMS WITH RESPECT TO SPECIFIC

SEVERELY DISABLING CONDITIONS, TIE FACT THAT DE REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRA

TION FAS IDENTIFIED SOME OF THESE CONDITIONS AS "LNDERSERVED POPULATIONS" ILLUSTRATES

NE BROADLY HELD VIEW THAT THIS IS A PROBLEM REQUIRING SPECIAL ATTENTION.

THE REHABILITATION SERVICES ACM IN IS-MAT ION, AS AUTHORIZED BY THE REHABILITATION

HAS PRECIOUS FEW TOOLS TO EXERCISE STRONG NATIONAL LEADERSHIP. THIS PROGRAM

IS POTENTIALLY ONE OF ITS BEST TOOLS. SOME OF DE RESULTS OF THE SPECIAL PROJECTS

I ;Ayr PEEN OF CLEAT? VALUE AND THERE IS YET A VERY SUBSTANTIAL MOUNT OF SYSTEMS

IYPROVEPEN I FNII I CH COULD AND SODULD BE MADE, I HAVE THE IMPRESSION TEAT STATE

ATAZ IES WILL ACCEPT AND IMPLEYENT DEMONSTRATED IPPROVEYENTS IN THEIR SERVICE PROGRAMS.

246

ItCRI NU II IAN L ANT' rjp.n. L l'4. IVAINAT ION. OF ITIFIL PROGRAM .hY

WHILE I HAVE VERY STRONG, RESPECT ION ILL fC A L., INT t PIPERS WHO IWIACIL THIS PROGRAM

ll A DA( TO DAY BASIS, I KNOW THAT THE RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO MOM TOR PROGRESS IN

TIC PROJECTS I S LIM I TED, IT IS MY LAIC.ERSTAZDING THAT SERIOUS CONSIDERATION IS BEING

GI VI N BY Ft`./1 TO NI L LNLDED STArT VON IRV INC ROLE, AND ALSO TO TIE AWARDING OF A

SPELL I E IE EL/AEU/11'10N CONTRACT III TIC NEXT YEAR, TIC SELECTION OF PR IOR I lY "AREAS

S LAItif.LY A PINOT ION OF RSA STAFF WORK REL,I 11.f I NG HI A Wag N410UNCEMENT PLEBEISIED

I I I TIC FEDERAL REGISTER. II SE I ICI ION OF SPECIFIC GRNITEES I S MANAGED THROUGH

PEER REVIEW PROCESS. ,)

ING IN 1978 TIE FIRST OF FOUL DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS CONCENTRATING ON

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS WAS INITIATED. TARE I S N(14 A FIFTH PROJECT IN ITS FIRST YEAR

WHICH IS FOCUSED JOINTLY ON CEREBRAL PALSY AND MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS. TIE FIRST

PROJECT AT TIE ALERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS CLINIC IN

TIE ERUIX DEMNSTRATED THAT A COORDINATED AND COMPREHENSIVE MEDICAL CARE AND SERVICE

PROMAM CAN PRODLEE INDIVIDUALS SEVERELY DISABLED WITH MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS WI-ID ARE

9111vA11:1) AID CAPABIE OF JOB TRAINING LEADING TO TIE RETURN TO EPPLOYNENT . FRANKLY,

I f DID NOT DEFIXISTRATE CAPABILITY OF TIE STATE VR AGENCY TO TAKE PEOPLE FROM

THAT POINT AND ULTIMATELY OBTAIN PLACEMENT.

TIE SECOND TVOJECT AT TIE FOLTIPLE SCLEROSIS CLINIC ASSOCIATED WITH THE UNIVERSITY

OF WASHINGTON III SEATTLE UNDERTOOK TIE TASK OF DEVELOPING AND TESTING A PROGNOSTIC

INDICATOR FOR VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION COUNSELORS, WHICH WAS CALLED "VOCATIONAL

ASSESSMENT IN MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS". A THIRD PROJECT CONCOCTED BY THE MINNESOTA

NORTH STAR. CHAPTER, OF THE NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY IN CONJUNCTION WITH

TIE STATE REHABILITATION AGENCY FURTHER TESTED TIE PROGNOSTIC INDICATORS GUIDE,

DEMONSTRATED TIE EFFECTIVE USE OF MS SUPPORT GROUPS, AND TIROUCH ITS OUTREACH

FROCRAM CLEARLY PROVED THAT THERE ARE MANY PERSONS WITH MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS,

ESPECIALLY IN OUTLYING AND SPARCELY POPULATED AREAS, WHO ARE DESIROUS OF RECEIVING

SERVICES AND RETUNING TO EMPLOYMENT BUT WERE INITIALLY UYAWARE OF TIE STATE VR

PROGRAL

A CLRRENT PROJECT BEING CONDUCTED BY THE NATIONAL CAPITAL CHAPTER OF TEE NATIONAL

MULT I PLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY, IN CONJUNCT ION WITH THE STATE ACENC IES IN MARYLAND,

VIRGINIA AND THE DISTRICT OF COLLCIB IA, CONSTITUTES TIE MOST SUCCESSFUL EFFORT ANY-

Wi IRE IN TIE WORLD IN THE PLACEMENT OF PERSONS WITH MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS. THIS

PROJECT HAS DEVELOPED ITS Chili JOB BANK, ITS Dull TRNIS I T ICILAL EMPLOYMENT TR/11'11N*

PRoGRAM, AND CURRENTLY I S PROVIDING A SUBSTANTIAL /MUT OF THE SERVICES THEY

I.A( lf,11Al I.Y /41T IC 'PAW) '0,111 D IL PItC,V11,1.1, BY DE STATE ACI:NCIES, IT HAS PROVEN

H.YoND ',./f../Y fl VTR! I Y DISABLED WITH MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS

ct,,li fo.11111 I() rrAtl., 10 nil'. PR(All..CT WII L NIC.ESSAR ILY ItNOLVE TIE DEMONSTRA-

I V.1 Ifil(11.1 Ne., [HI( II:11 cuOUDINATE TICK ASPECTS WHICH STATE

AH !KIT , Pf I eo I III r.i A ,r1 f ;Jill fi API PROPABLY BEST DONE BY T11:: PRIVATE SECTOR,

II Is cRix I AL, Eln f (IN AND l CNN l OF TIC FUNERAL BUDGET IMPLICATIONS,

Dor ItmoN'ARATIGN rro,,ar; F(Nt STATE AGENCIES TO BUII_D INTO TI-EIR

!ALP Tr R1 I1f IC11III ifnI) 'Aka PPOCRN.13 FoR SERVING SEVERELY DISABLED INDIVIDUALS

5)11(1 III y 1)014 pfsfe,i miff II B.;;; IN MY VIEW, SECTION 311 SHOULD DE RE-

Af/i ff,k

!HANK '«.») ((Al irril [Po, rl HY,

,111111! II U .

ilAPItY L. liAt_LUAr !MAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY1120 20TH STREET, N.W., SUITE 5520'rnv;i1IrJ(i10li, U,C, 20036

IIIIIVI HIP

249

Senator WEICKElt. TI111111( you very much, Mr. Hall.Mr. Adler?Mr. ADLER. Thank you very much for inviting me to testify in

relation to the deaf-blind, Mr. Chairman.The Helen Keller National Center, or the [HKNCJ, as we know

it, is recognized as a national resource in section 313 of the Reha-bilitation Act of D73 as amended, and provides intensive special-ized services that are unequaled in the Nation for persons with oneof the most severe of disabilitiesdeafblindness.

Following enabling amendments to the Vocational RehabilitationAct in 1967, the National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adultswas initiated in 1969 in cooperation with HEW, and The IndustrialI lome for the Blind. The center was constructed with Federal funds(approximately $7.5 million) and we currently receive $3.137 mil-lion, 87 percent of our income, directly from the Department ofEducation. Through our nine service regions geographically dis-persed throughout the country, we provide testing and rehabilita-tion of hundreds of deaf-blind young people and adults.

During the most recent 1 year period, 777 clients received serv-ices (140 were served by headquarters' staff, and 761 were servedby nine regional representatives, including 124 who were served byboth headquarters' personnel and regional representatives).

Eighty-three clients-38 women and 45 men from 27 Stateswere enrolled at the IIKNC headquarters for rehabilitation evalua-tion and/or training during this time period. Forty-eight leftduring this period, including two placed in competitive employ-ment; eight placed in sheltered workshops; one in a work activitycenter; eight at home, we are not quite sure what they will bedoing; three in training in other facilities; one as a homemaker;three students; 12 at home awaiting job placement, if we can findan area that will accept them for employment; three receiving on-the-job training; two placed in custodial institutions; one reclassi-fied as not deaf; one received a paid work internship at HKNCheadquarters as an instructor's aide.

Because of the profound severity of deaf-blindness, services mustbe concentrated and individually tailored in order to be effective.This complex service delivery system is effective at the center be-cause of its special construction features and excellent, well moti-vated staff. Without the unique and expert professional support atthe center, training and rehabilitation provided by the State facili-ties or other organizations would be slow and time consuming, aswell as more expensive.

To achieve our objectives, we have developed six separate ele-ments of service within HKNC.

Item 1. Rehabilitation Servicesall individuals accepted for eval-uation and rehabilitation at HKNC are deaf-blind and frequentlymulti-handicapped. The overall purpose is to provide those individ-uals who generally have been isolated and ignored for many yearswith training in communication, education, daily living skills, mo-bility, industrial arts, prevocational activities, home and personalmanagement, personal hygiene, speech therapy, audiological serv-ice nd complete counseling opportunities.

use our individuals are deaf-blind, without sight and sound,and` equently without speech, we have no other alternative but to

21 -971 0-83 ---- 17

250

provide services almost on 1 onetoone basis. The intensity of theintellectual and emotional effort required from staff to work withour deaf-blind trainees is demanding. Depending upon clients' abilities, our goals range from teaching deaf-blind individuals simplemethods of caring for themselves out of institutions, or returningto live with their families. Other trainees may become so skilledthat they may be able to be accepted into competitive employment.One of the 16 1989 outstanding handicapped Federal employeeswas an I IKNC graduate, and working as a laborer for the Depart-ment of the Navy in Philadelphia.

Item 2. Residence Servicesto provide the housing and othersupport services necessary for the deaf-blind trainees to reside atIIKNC while receiving rehabilitation programs. In addition, theresidence provides living quarters for workers who are receivingtraining in deaf-blind services, residence staff, and occasionally,parents of deaf-blind individuals who stay at the residence for aperiod of' two or three days, observing the rehabilitative process.

Item 2. Researchthe center is mandated to develop research intwo areas: (1) aids and devices for the deaf-blind; and (2) techniquesof rehabilitation for the deaf-blind. Most deaf-blind individualshave no way of communicating with others unless they are in phys-ical hand-to-hand contact. They cannot use the telephone or eventhe standard '17Y. They may not have any idea when someone isat their door, when a fire alarm goes off, their telephone is ringing,or someone is attempting to break into their living quarters.

We have developed and produced radio units called the TactileCommunicator, that provides radio signals for deaf-blind individ-uals within their homes. These signals are programmed for door-bells, fire alarms, telephones and other essential lifesaving services.Our Tactile Communicator was the first instrument approved bythe FCC under the newly established handicapped band.

Item 4. Community Educationthe basic focus of our Communi-ty Education Department is to publicize rehabilitation and employ-ment opportunities for deaf -blind individuals. This task is also ac-complished through our nine regional offices covering the UnitedStates. These nine regional representatives also provide direct serv-ices to deaf-blind youths and adults within their geographicalareas.

Item 5. National Training Teamthis team has been fully oper-ational for about a year to a year and a half, and is backlogged interms of dates that people are asking them for, to 1984. This teamgoes to various parts of the country, provide training opportunitiesto professionals to parents. They are in tremendous demand rightnow. It has also led to the establishment, for the first time, of themaster's degree in deaf-blindness, that is now cosponsored by West-ern Maryland College.

Item 6, Our Affiliated Network System consists of 22 agencieswithin 18 States that have received startup funding for up to 5year periods to initiate deaf-blind programs. They receive training,and other support systems, as well as being part of a coordinatednational delivery system for the deaf-blind.

We have presented the service delivery system developed for andwith the deaf-blind across the country, but who are the deaf-blind,what. have they accomplished within this service delivery system.

2lEvery 1;1. year old child knows of I lelen Keller and her accom-

plishents, you know that there are at least 111,11(10 to 50,000dearblind in our country, some tlw result of the rubella epidemicthat spread throughout Our country during 19113-11165? Of this ru-bella group some 11,000 deaf-blind youths are now reaching maturi-ty, and have a need for rehabilitation. We have helped numerousdeaf -blind rubella victims of (in older age to obtain employment,most in sheltered workshops, some in competitive employment.There is a large group ()I' congenital deaf people who, in their twen-ties, lost their sight. This is the Usher's Syndrome population ofthe retinitis pigmentosa group. These individuals generally receivetraining in schools ler the deal, and are frequently unprepared vo-cationally and emotionally when they lose their sight in theirtwenties.

Hundreds of others who have become deaf-blind because or dis-ease, genetic factors, and yes, even war veterans, whom we havehad our center, received comprehensive training in order to go onwith their lives. They come from every part of our country. Theycan and do become more productive members of our country.

Senator WEIcKE. Let me say that all statements will be includedin the record in their entirety.

Mr. ADLER. Thank you, sir.The prepared statements of Mr. Adler follows:1

252

STATEMENTTO

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES

UNITED STATES SENATE

RE

HELEN KELLER NATIONAL CENTER FOR DEAF-BLIND YOUTHS AND ADULTS

BY

MARTIN A. ADLER, MSW, ACSWDIRECTOR

HELEN KELLER NATIONAL CENTER FOR DEAF-BLIND YOUTHS AND ADULTS

111 MIDDLE NECK ROADSANDS POINT, NEW YORK 11050

OPERATED BYTHE INDUSTRIAL HOME FOR THE BLIND

MARCH 21, 1983

258

P'. (6n ill, 11 0(1 1,11 11 I ho uoill I I :

Ihan1 von Ie, invi Clog Inc to ti,) 1 y teller name IS

Marten A. Mint ow I .1, ihr III rig Ow of the Ilelen Keller National Center for Deaf..

1.1 A.Ig I ) Int a I nil on lung land In hew

1910. Is rre.elriind n', a national ti in %ection 313 of the Rehabilitation

t of 111/3 amended, and provide', intensive spin services that are tif"c9(1(11e(1 In the ',it Ion I or tirridiro. with Mit most severe of disabilities deaf -

;1

following clOiling allaguhment% to the Vocational Rehabilitation Act in 1967,

the N4t1Undi (enter Ito Dual Iilind Youths and Adults was Initiated In 196g In

(noperation with the Department of Health, Education and Welfare and The Industrial

Dow,. for the (+hr.!. lbe Center was constructed with federal funds (approximately

million) and is supported by federal funds (approximately 87t), Directly and

through its nine service regions geographically disbursed throughout the country,

the Center has provided testing and rehabilitation to hundreds of deaf-blind

"young people and adults. During the most recent one year period, 777 clients

received service,. (140 were served by headquarters' staff and 761 were served

htnIne_iniona) representatives, Including 124 clients who were served tly both

headquarters' personnel and rei.onal representatives.) 83 clients (38 women and

45 men from ?7 states) were enrolled at the HKNC headquarters for rehabilitation

evaluation and /or training during this_. time period. 48 left during this period,

inciudApg ?_placed in competitive employment; 8 placed in sheltered workshops;

1 in ...5i work activity center; fi at home; 3 in training in other facilities; _1 as

homemaker, 3 students; 1? at home awaiting job placement; 3 receivina on-the-

job training; 2 placed in custodial institutions; 1 reclassified as not deaf;

1 received a paid w,rk internship at HktiC headquarters as an instructor's aide.

A ot

254

it tr, fh, ',.o, da! blindess, servifes mist be

Lonsentrat a dl tailored in ordof to he tifecLive. Ibis complex

srflt. ,teltv,f( ',stem iseffective at the Lector because of its special COn-

., ,,cu,i end trained ,41thoot the unique and expert professional

support [n fencer, training and lehabilitatifaiprovided by the state facilities

or other ornanizations would he;low ond time-conuming as well as more expensive.

Su dLn10.1. our obae,,tIve, We have developed si, separate elements of service

whine HOiL,

IdAalfaN -- All individuals accepted for evaluation and rehabili-

tation at g0T. E11.1` deaf -blind and frequently omits-handicappeJ. The overall purpose

is to provide those individuals who generally have been isolated and ignored for

maw( years With training in coatnunication, education, daily living skills, mobilitY,

d,t %,activities, hose and personal management, personal

omihe, !,,Crap,, audiological services, and complete counseling opportunities

because our individual; are deaf-blind, without sight and sound and frequently with-

out speech, we nave fp, other alternative but to provide services almost on a one -

tie -one basis. ih intensity of the intellectual and emotional effort required

from ,taff to wwl, with our dent -hlind traineesni'. demanding: Depending upon clients'

abilities, our gaols ramie from teaching deaf-blind individuals simple methods of

caring for thesso 1 ves out of institutions, orreturning to live with their families.

Other t-ainees n,r, become sn skilled that they may be able to be accepted into

competitive ,q,01,,,Thent, hoe of the ton 1960 Outstanding handicapped Federal Employee

Mat dfl oiN( gra,ha,to.

11, p[siu[Nu _. To provide the hou;inJ and other support services

necessary for the deaf-blind trainees to reside at OV,gC while receiving the rehabil-

255

I in addition, It'' it..,pienci. provides living fled(' ters for

are r.Leiving training in de,lf-blind sorvicw., residence staff, and

far,1,!% of deaf-blind individuals who stay at the residence fur

rat there iih'.ery mg tie rehabilitative process,

!!. Ihe Lester is mandated to develop rPvarch in two areas:

aids and dovi,i-, for the deaf-blind; and (?) techniques of rehabilitation

!or the deaf-blind. Most deaf-blind indi.,duals have no way of communicating

with others unley-, they are in physical hand-to-hand contact. They cannot use

telephone of even the standard TFT. They may not have any idea when someone

I', at their door, when a fire alarm goes off, their telephone is ringing, or

someone is attempting to break into their living quarters. We have develcped

,aid product.d radio units called the Tactile Co ounicator that provides radio

lee ihdividuals within thee, homes. These signalsare programmed

'Of door-14.11s, fire alarms, telephonesand other essential lifesaving services.

i.eC Id( io!ninftator was the first instrument approved by the FCC under. the

rewl ',fled handicapped band.

(.0114 INKA11911 -- The basic focus of our ceouwnity Education Department

to pwilicize rehibilitation and employment opportunities for deaf-blind individual

'nis,tas; is also accomplished through our nine regional offices covering the United

:ate,. ;nese regional representatives also provide direct services to deaf-

' lind yPuth, and adults within their geographical areas.

-- This teal), has been fully operational, providing

-aininc to personnel in rivate mad state agencies, as well as to parents of

. .,outer and adul:,. The der,dod for its skills and presence in agencies

256

ti t tr,,t1h1 hour ovrn reoivrd requests from abroad

0, Our tva.' PreSerk v. tivrrrr Or theriationa1 Training Team (NTT)

1,. to th 0,tat,1 (to. fir'. !nu, of a master's degree program in

! ; ndne.. [n it h, ni.tern h.1.-tryldn,1 (allege and FIKNC.

A,fit I'iliu NI 1W6PK ihr cui.itts of .,t; affondes within 18 states

t reterved start-op londing for hp to year period' to irritate deaf -blind

The:.e,gene._res during the last ruirortim period worked with 613 deaf-

: I Ind rrsons. They received training and other support systems as well as being

,0 d toordlnated system that enables these agencies to share problems,

end This con«.pt, in adddtion to the NTT, the regional

representatives across the country, and rehabilitation training at headquarters,

national service delivery system for the deaf-blind.

We have presented the service delivery system developed for and with the

deaf -blind across the country, but who are the deaf-blind, what have they accomplishe

wk thin this service delivery system? Every 12 year old child knows of Helen Keller

ee! he, accompl thments. Do you know that there are at least 40,000 to 50,000

,!elf -blind in our country, some the result of the rubella epidemic that spread

tnrouqhout our country during 1953-1965? There are some 6,000 deaf-blind youths

.,ho ore now reaching maturity and have a need fur rehabilitation. We have helped

deaf-hl ind rubella victims of an 'older age to obtain employment, most in

,mitered workshops, some in competitive employment. There is a large group of

ohgenital deaf people who, in their twenties, lose their sight. This is the

Syndrome population of the retinitis pinmentosa group. These individuals

.-nrrally receive training in school'. for [fir deaf and arc frequently unprepared

a t ona 1 1 y and enrot i ono 1 ly when they lose their sight in their twenties. Hundreds

('0.; 0

257

ease, genetic lac tors, and

t ot .or Lester eceived comprehens Ive

they trine f rum every part of Our

t aim 1 los Who struggle with

la t . oa. I., have r mw from institutions

!.,!!. 0,, ,,! Vr d ! !!!!!r!nica!!! with thrm. What does the deaf -

lit e It., ,I I r, .ult of his dud sahl tv? What can the deaf-

!11,1 her ..nr 0.,_1,1/1,1.i I. It !.. how grea t the deaf -blind person's ability

1,11 V' 11 .t,Ie 10'1 , d well adjusted, highly skilled. well-motivated

; 141,, r,1,0 1v,.. f00 deaf -blind person will almost always

Iry :t he, Pe111.1otn,hiln, trust of ten he on a one-to-

P,Irt; JiArly In LorlsAni3Otion. They need the services of interpreter!"

ever, t nI r,t orofos'jondl of de,,f-blind individuals require

hen 1,Vr%nnn.21 1,11..1 r n tneir day-to-day work. Despite these dual handl-

'ips many of tho deal -Id 1,1 h014. and ut 11110 training with the highest degree of

jouitjoip ,ht., t;r ,t/h/a dqrft(,.. and Marry more are employed in

I t r, j wk..? r ,tt, h I qxhit v.,rf 1,1. to teachers arid directors of

hook and ; h toot year.., graduates of 11Y.NC obtained

tt r II; . .11,,sc. Inry are now taxpayers rather than

I,. mo,nt,or,, 01 Aire,' ican society, feeling less

411,11 thev will always feel degrees of

}01

h

i-"r",,S.-11.):k:.Ji LL.,

on I

Martin A. Adler

2 G

258

An1110HAL IMIMONY

FOR CONSIDERATION BY

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED

OF 111E

COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES

UNITED STATES SENATE

RE

HELEN KELLER NATIONAL CENTER.FOR DEAF-BLIND YOUTHS AND ADULTS

BY

MARTIN A. ADLER, MSW, ACSW

DIRECTOR

HELEN'T<ELLER NATIONAL CENTER FORDEAF-BLIND YOUTHS AND ADULTS

111 MIDDLE NECK ROADSANDS POINT, NEW YORK 11050

OPERATED BY

THE INDUSTRIAL HOME FOR THE BLIND

MARCH 28, 1983

26u FST r

!',1 t, I II

259

in 1 ,I,1 e 'o . of the t.t

is 'l u' in A. At 1.a. and I dm tin. hi, tur iii th, Hid tvi itt ler

III r,; .1, P lo Its. i (Ain,' add i ti °nal

t ,t Ito, to yttut ht.,trin,t , on t i,tri I PtAi,1101 I LION At t

, .1,, Oar ,11,1 i on, . deaf bl i and

ottt nod I,0,; dial 1,1 (,f th, drat-hi Old , hold

agency hod.1., national s1 vey, and roo,-,.endations trim our own ',Calf

i roil, the liflen Rel lin- ;lat. lona! (enter service del ivory ,..ys Liu. We are a 1-

Lich i opy of ill,. quest ionna ir t.r to Lhe above persons and

The stwr'at ion of the repl rect!ty,d f lovtr.,:

I . '41,0 you se,i xi, the primary and, need for deaf -blind personsit,' 1,1 Mott do you 'ail, thii pr into y nnrrl5 fur deaf rid persons

i win!' 1 ',WI,' What dpi you pr kimry nods for deaf -hl in 19110 through 1994?

Ito p,..it,id st tiirt int by hided i duo v., replying to this question

cent arourd the n.,. -,, of ',tato Twin rvents' defining in a clear manner

to pr,, ride total coordinated ',ervic,r, 00 a state level for the

deaf -hi Ind. This involve', the development of a written plan within each state

as to r,h.it ,f'li'nt; Hr. '6Hn t..1:.11(1 be design,otrxl as that system responsible

fur the develo.o,oent and provision of services for deaf-blind persons. Many

respondonts indicated Chit becaoso 'of the severity of deaf - blindness, because

of tho isulotion and corrunication problems, because of the need for special

housi wo and I rd TV,p(le tat acce,:uodations, and because of the special prob-

lems deaf -blind individuals encounter vii Chin the educational and rehabilitation -

al system, no one facility or run meet the need', of deaf -WI ind child-

ren, 'youths, odult,i, and senior citizens. It becomes necessary for a service

delivery system to utilize numerous resources within a particular state in

p.t-v-f ere'Dy f

r

I

260

Ili, dt he `,1,11. t th.Veo

(H .o stn I "t Ot 'tt Or.e/r" which

;,,, ,,f ',..c f r(4,1 early hi-

, I -.11Jkiin t 111',hk1 1/1

I n.

1 ,Ii ii riti I./ ,e,r r:q ,c rrdnrtimi in the nuw-

ur de.if ihd chi ldr..n,

irr !I I, c. (100 deo f 1;1 rut la chi hirer' as the resit]

He ; i,.1,-1 la . trimly id the a . as well as Other

hl I rd 'i :hi iond 1 opPre rohiLi es f unded and coordinated

d he ped a tncd. f,r 1]...00 -R1 lrcl Chi Wren. Prid:wident:, within the cdu

trlinri rhi iiiren is It if :01(44 NI be a continuouid,

the ,o.ifs hr-cdkc, Inc.f hulidays, vacations,

etc. In r) r, ,t pr(.1-.,-, of the educational program too long a break

pnnr

and If I '

ire'o,ii,r in le.o N 1111 , ciadimptihh of the dependency upon the family,

'e ut t,H f'l IR! tAil'Orl and child major orob-

within IS ed ;. Lionil system is the overall lack of trained teachers and

ether 1 wil, can copasuniha Le and effectively relate to a severely

handicat,ped child ,(r'; the parents. The physical facilities should be barrier

f dnd fu I ly ei;,;;;d'; tn s, ad the varied needs of these children. The edu-

,.;itiondi should be habil itative, rehabilitative and pre-

vocot ioea 1 . As n' :1 I, as puss it, 1 e , certainly when the child is 14 years of age,

state and federal rehabilitative agencies should be working side-by-side with

the educational systc, A Cl"' mdnager should he responsible to coordinate

and intor;a,it butte syt,tovs fur the benefit of the child. This could be accom-

plished by inter-3,:enry agrem4ents , clear and coordinated state plans which

it -1,111,1

261

1, 11 (1.11,,,' ,

, ,,,1, :II,: ILr

t fr,' 1 aIfter, I,yr flair !. 1 ire' i ',if i'lorly

.11 1.- I1 i 1, .r11, r 1

,f. oiff n I / fr."' uo fait I.Ilr,l If I Ifh ei; , o 1,1.ji,t

.11,1 I,

thy j r ( 11,.1,11 f.el I

o,r,!( r..ft !,tl ,a, Il tl dini r,,, and re') lid I i tffit. ien trfi iii rig r:nt, or',

%if', I for if, our r I. 1 ; d t',I .0,11,11 feltti f it ',tots hlull find prola ofd la; off I fait eh f,liould

Holnn holl,ef ffotIon 11 Lent, ery if ivory ',Y',fan a', part of Um

;of wail of

fro' in tf ( d ri, I rr Ind Iv Iotls compl i nod

th not ovoi I fit, le to a,: ind even

tha,:h t ce,roa hal unity 1,10 '11 heol t n t el; r',111,10tW., (h0%0 systems

to Hi tt,to. iond 1 ly )11 knot We feel tin nrohlem

(.,:r ter-, ar mind rho I,ri of rrr,,-:unil.at.i iIto mental health system; have in

with Cr, dt,0 Mini. 'hr' rehaLi 1 t Hien prom's; ( .mnot be successful

wh,n in,' iv 1,!u.:1 i s aahll and or,nt. and .orineff find ffomeone to communi-

aite problr, to. 'ft.: t ord nth,fr ;fob! c. 1:1t,r1(.,11 h centers should be

to dt,V01,4) a rail lan for filo troining of their staff to meet the

15 of the (fait inll.

Comnlijn i cat ion ;:orf to he the next cost important problem respondents

rrierrno to, tinny dolt -hi Ind i nil iv irlfla ', 11,1Ve 11,, verbal language skills and

r'Hury I l i ( r r r n r . forme ion I i flood Hie and [frier 7,pe11 i rig to ooffiffigni _

c.a te. 1-1",21 is a definite' 1.1C.: of reiffibi I i tation i';orkers and teachers wire

262

r tr, ,II I, lir is,Jr 1(1,t 1(111',,1 t

11 111111,1 Mo.. I l 1i11.'',V11! ill IS ii ,',1,1s11'. \di., MI I:1 11.( t.ivelY

0,1 I.- t.! 1, if l Is to the desf Since many

deal H isd yet (14.1'11111i1 11'1' 11' 1,', 1" 1111'1 I. few ips()11,

.,jho /11'4 to «WS ill111, I', the 11011 1,1111,1 1(11.1 i11 'OH id 1 , educol iona 1 I.Y

and vwasionally ond dependent. Imploycient opportunitiw. should he

forth,' developed vi expanded. This inclode', work at home, Work activity

centers, worHhop%, ,hill all'other lovek of competitive employment.

1 0,11 blind per, r, iaorking, i.e. from nearlY

to notional bidw,tric7, for the hlind workshops to employment in profession-

al opra (I

in olds to mointdin d .lob, th, dedf-blind person frequently

dccrammunlations. This can he accomplished through

existing awl the eApansion of legislation related to Independent

1 ivind Orators. Other firm. of housing acrrammsddtions are needed for the

deaf- blind, especially those who are oot employable in the competiLive market

Gr are now past the age of employment Many more senior citizens are experi-

encing of Loth vision and hearing. flow do they handle this dual dis-

ability, after havinu lived a life of sight and sound? Several respondents

hoped Men feller National Center would become responsible for developing d

cradle to grave national and state system for the deaf-blind.

2. What systems do you see necessary to develop and meet the above needsduring 1984, 1935 through 1939, and 1990 through 1994?

Finny re,pondent.-, who wrote of the more personal rieedc for the deaf-blind

the primary and inwiediate need, indicated in response to question 2, the

importance of developing state systems and plans for the coordinated and in-

263

H I ,,l I 4 1 i r i d h l , I i th, pi IN i. f

Iii. (an i ( i-: I , Moi hd 1 114 iiina 1 hinter tor

1 ho ha ( h I fa, h and 1 beI rii I ies ; Arkdie.ds

( t h ilat i (mai tam -

it I'll i t l l WT.', k i t HT,

t I t I , P i . 1 1 1 , 1 1 V I , 11,11 1.1., d', 1111,1 Llit. 111'1(41 i'.1.1 11.r

1 iii ii ).,,.1! -lit hid Youth'. Po int , N.Y. (hire

t l a n Hy, to I ly by the talltil of LI it would It' iviil,itiiet iihI tti foil t 11,111,11(

111. I for I Yltr, d liii iriiit tutu1 1111!lit 1010,1 In (b11.".1 liii t

h ti t toward the 111 ,111(1 irr. pnit 11111 it Willer 's Syridtilittiti.,

u, ii I t -Id kidney, was f reguent, 'y tttl 'il . The fol l ow-

I na I " tro drid clev,1 opulent ut cLmsmin i cation and 'nobility(Hy '1. PlIdt) I I! c1(,11-1)1 lit person'. to 1 1y(2 more independent -

:11 1-11 «rnoutor-, tici L would ittI ize (ii tiler ti 1 ai:ger CRT

1,1,1 print. output ; Lt 011k, Mitt fl(!er iny (ley icas that

incorpord ti-all - dnd art' within Lhp ec onomic means of deaf-bl ind persons;

dermgrdph i c re as to the s izti miii cempw, I t ion of dedf-bl I nd persons

curri culum sfhd to methods and ,,ystems Old t deaf -bl ind persons could

be L tmr ut i hip i n cduca tiog and rehab i 1 i ta t ion ; and the need for con ti nu ing

research in Vi visual and hoar ing assessment . Many ruispolldelit1, expressed the

need for d nat. inna I fl n i t i on on ilea f -bl indness.

Other areas within Question 2 referred to stable and increased funding

f or Helen Keller Nat loon 1 Center so that all facets of services for deaf -blind

p,g sons (JHill!] be "umbrel l a -ed" under this agency. A continued federal presence

in the educati on and rehabilitation f deaf -bl ind persons was repeatedly men-

264

r! IPpl I A I iv, 1,1 0,11,1,, tia'

r , 1 , 1 , t ' 1,1 ?,., ! 1,1 I I,/ l' ni o I 1()( I

,;1,1 1'1 111.11,1.! t!,.,It -1,1 ind to f'1.,11 )1 (111i till' !,1!1'

1..Wd.11,! by I.nr. Ilw 1..11 ind individual telt, d 7i :11111i i i. 11.11 SV111111 id I ly

uere, l pub I I, t,i Ih !weds and .11,i 1 id 1 h.. deal -IIi lad.

1,t, I 11 e, I Iv,. (1,4,;01 mro,ripFi(v flied 1(.,11

to 1,,ei l I) r,1,TF; Ire -blind i 0/1,1.

11,1 Inn f,fy ei,ary In di.vt,lop mill support thosi systems;dur t ee me per

fl, widnini(Hr, ill their ti';1)()11%., Co this (iliwit

r.w.f 111 ,1 fur thy nil inuat ion and expansion of feclitra I and slate nor

fr I I 1 if-,1; ,ippropt i It irnr,; r,lncif is definitions of

Inter,Illem.y agreements 'ait.1)in the ',Late system,, that would en-

, 0,1,-,01,, tit,. /I in II udi of expariile(' educational oppor -

hill I I deaf -blind learn ~lowly; and reti.Ihi1il,Itiun systems that

cover an e. t.uuled period of t and low rehdlii i tat ion counselors to have

th to wflnk with d,af-blind, Other system, housing, transportation,

rc,i, ley, en , re, rea t ion , econcot :upport , family counsel ing and assistance,

iheritd1 bed t h Ind ruir.;iril hunt, care have to be intent-a ted within a deaf

blind service delivery sys ter . liany felt Helen Keller National Center should

de d major ongani:alion in prnclotinq and developing these programs. Maintain-

ing the Reui',:nal renters for Oeof-Blind Children was frequently stated.

--------4-7--Tlf-lar,-e-stinne5t a ctixiitom of five other needs that deaf-hlind persons haveand should be itet during each of the time period:.

In r.ponse to this question, most. respondents began to repeat items

listed in f;iletioh: 1 and 2, Housing for the aged deaf-blind was listed several

265

I f op tr!,,,nt', er rr 1,11,01114111 0, 'Up Ynlr l ing dedl blIno

wo dnother tieyleid Pviewing the tesults rnnl ellectiveness

many hop,' hpuld v,t, d nation ' delivery system for Lhe

,I, it hl nd, toll. t hp lol 1 oa hd emphas Lied : Lunt hued job

dirt p ',new ; Iuilinln,l tnlullo,l trt pr cOnrd.int,

on theli dhility In dnd till' dedf- blind; respite

for the pdi..iit of the drill - blind; continued flexibility in eihication-

dl dnd iehdbilitation syst,ms; dnd further adaptation of the elec-

tionii and MIIIIMMOhq Of the art to runt the needs of the deaf-blind.

Whdt ariAs of resedrch do you feel would bp of primary hyorLduce todeaf -blind porsoir,?

16,pondeots felt the following research dreds were necessary:

1"r d''Iun.,rvltion td dnd hedrio9; inirl'dling the environmental

.ty id dedf-hlin persons; rirniminicdtion dnd information s'stenis adaptable

for ihp deli blind, dvolopownt of terredtionol and leisure Lime activities

litatde for the deaf-blind; unntk, medical and psycho-social research on

deat-blindoe%s: work tolerance and work achievement of deaf-blind persons;

te-,e of guide dog:, dnd device to did in the mobility of deaf-blind persons;

inhlv;ion in the 1990 census of demographic data related to the deaf-blind;

and thoi-oe te,,hoologicd1 aids and devices that would enable the deaf-blind to

',PV, hear, dnd cor.iminihate!"

We hope the dbove information will be helpful in your consideration of

the Vocational RehabilitdLion Act of 1973, as amended, as well as understand-

ing the Reeds and priorities of the deaf-blind. We' do not feel our attenpts

. to sonmdrite the many comments we received do justice to the feelings, hopes,

and weds of our deaf-blind Airpricans. Perhaps a visit to our faciility in

New York, meeting deaf-blind clients here, in other agencies, or inviting

dem -blind or,:antiation to meet wiUi your Corinittee or staff would

oiling in deterrAn no whdt the deal -blind heed to become more pro-

i,lwitivoly and socidlly involved.

21 ;$71 11 "It

Helen Keller1 I leaf

National Center.1101 Alltihs

1111.01 1, I iv(

ee. i es kegar irng he Pea

Martin 0. Ailei ,

sub, tee the liamlica.,iped

Jo' iris ./W!I b. Ws , ihairumrn it the 'iutpaannii OAP. ent-e dpppl dr the ',nate !ahoy. and Unman Ii Suui,.es Committee, to appear ()Morethit t tee on Kir,.11 also ie tiro./ ide the !iubcotuni ttee with written

any regarding the future plans of the ru,len ce I ler National Center, This hasiii fitted by Mari.h 11'., 19113. Our test ix...ny en March 21 .st, which will be limited

qiintit pro,,Ot t Orl will fours un the general need% of HOC. As you maytor So I kr, I, 01,1111 rIti to review the current Pehabi Ii tat ion Act,

'An to pr ,,;,,h, tiny ',1!,Ittt,t ttee by March 31st with a comprehensive pictured tie needs ii I nil ; orsons throughout the Urn ted States. We hope to develop

P,) in trine, of ere. /ear, iv, years, and ten years. We are requesting you to pleasepie a., with hriol we,wet., to the following!

I. What to you sec tfac primary and Immediate reed for ideal. -blind persons duringI 0;4 ! What do sin, see the priii,Ary needs for deaf -blind persons in 1965through 1910? What .1n you see as the primary needs for deaf -blind persons in1990 through I

ghat ,to you see iiecesse, y to develop and 'rest the above needs during1915 throu)h 1089, and 1'19,1 through 1304?

I, ',That legislation .say be neo.tory to develod and support those systems during'he ,Above three time periods?

suggest a .no.iimum of iv other needs that deaf-blind persons have andbe met during each tire time periods.

What areas of research do you feel would be of primary importance to deaf-blind..erions?

WP have tried to present general questions that relate to deaf -blind individuals of allages. I am hopeful that your responses will be brief and to the point so that your

wrehts could he utilized in testimony. Because we have .such very limited timewe are request ing that you expedite your response. lots memorandum is being

'writ to Beat -blind consumers, workers in the field of work for toe deaf, the blind,

and the deaf-blind, Parents, and agencies. Please feel free to ..hai e this requestxi th other individuals. We must have your response tayliarch 18th. If you have anyluestions, please feel free to CMrile.

The r might he questions which the committeemight wind tit caopoiiiiit hi ',Alit tor revinise to the record, and Ithank you hoth very much.

Now, the committee trill taken three minute break. I lipprecialeif the next panel, the part II of the Education of the HandicappedAct, Hie First panel will he (fay Bauer, Cieorge ('unit, and I)r. EdSotitia.,,, if they votild iihead and tidoe their places tit the witnesstable, we %vitt ahead and recess far minutes, in order to 1..jAethe translator here a little rest, and allow the committee staff toreadjust itself

IShort recess.1Senator Wt,:tkit. The committee will come to order.kVe now move to .t he committee will be in order.kVe now move to the Education of the 1 Iiindicapped Act, and Mr.Itatier, I suspect you will he presenting the testimony of the 1)e-

part merit in this :11'09f'ir'st, however, I would like to place into the record Ill(' S1;01'-

111011t of my e011t:ttill,10, 'motor Stafford, that will appear at theof the special (ducat ion portion of t best' hearings.

[The pripared statement of Senator Stidfocl follows:1PRFI'AR:11 SEATF:MENT ID, SENATOR STAFFORD

Sen:11(.1' SlAproRD The F:(111r.it ion for all I landicapped Children Act ()I'taken us .1 how \vav toward provnlntg foie. :Intl iippropriiite services to all handl-cop/end and (1 44, Mil le t )11 r task today is to review thin progress anil to set the4 .(rur,-, itrr the 111111,V. tel'iT !Mir 1111111(W .votingslers educa-tin savvne, m the school ynio., iln-iniiritins still exist. :in. eligiblechildren, particularly preschoolers and secondary students, who are still not receiv-ing the appropriate educational services they deserve.

The (IDClet 111qn":1111, serve a 11111(1Do purpose within the context of the 1.:(1u-,..iition of the Handicapped Act. l'he ;ire the vehicle through which educators areaide to research arias of particular concern: 1/isseminate information :Mout sucess-ful pr:ict ices and rim technologies. ;old receive the necessary training to provide thetuP, of services needed by Mtralicapped children and youth. These programs

Irl<01. that services provided to handicapped students nationwide are of thev.

Federal commitment to these discretionary programs has been substantial inn;ist, ticcatis of their documented succ'e'ss this commitment should continue.

rhele on. are:is which may require, ;in increased emphasis in order to insure that111n-:111:.!: handicapped children ;Ind youth are recognized and provided forthroo4h tins legislation

I look t,rward to hearing about the ;acomplishments we have made in improvingser wes 14 . handicapped children as %cell is vour suitgestions ;is to how these spry-1.. Ali he enhanced in the Iururc

Si 'llif Vol EICK ER. YOU may proceed, Mr. Bauer.

STATEMENT OF GARY M. RACER, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARYFOIL PLANNING, BUDGET1ND EVALCATION, DEPARTMENT OFEDUCATION. ACCONIPANI D BY GEORGE A. CONN, COMMIS-SIONER, REHABILITATIoN sEuvicEs AlmiNisTRATIoN, ANDAcTING AStik4TAN1' SECRETARY FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION ANDREHABILITATIVE SERVICES: AND DR. EDWARD SONTAG,ACTING DIRECTOR, SPECIAL EDUCATION PRO(;iLMr. BAUR. We will try to keep the statements very brief, Mr.

Chairman. I know that we are pressed for time.The administration is proposing a :i-year extension for all of the

authorizations under this act which are expiring at the end of-1

2GS

fiscal year 1!i8:: These initherizations cover eight discretionary pro-grams funded under ports (', of the act. Although IA(' arenot proposing any changes in the scope, or types of ictivities whichmay be conducted under these authorities, we do believe that , iceredirection of eur priorities for these programs is required.

We appreciate the opportunity to today review the progress thi..thas been made over the last 5 years in these programs, and to :ll.-scribe some trends in special education and in the needs of handi-capped children which require our careful attention. I,et me fir: -tdescribe the overall objectives of the programs and then rev,.,,.e. inmore detail the activities supported under parts C, D, and E.

With the enactment of Public Law 94-142 in 1975, Congi,,,i,tablished a national goal of equal educational opportunity !,ithandicapped children, and authorized Federal financial assistanceto help the States in meeting this goal. We strongly support Paisobjective and believe that monitoring and enforcement of theoral guarantees are among our most important responsibilities.

We also are committed to providing financial assistance to heStates to help them meet their responsibilities under the law toprovide a free appropriate public education to handicapped chil-dren. hi addition to these functions, we feel that the Federal Gov-ernment can enhance State and local efforts to improve the qualityof education for handicapped children by targeting sonic additionalFederal resources on activities that are not likcly to be undertHconby States and localities. These include activities in the areas of rsearch, dissemination of information; model development, teachertraining and technical assistance. These types of activities are currently authorized under parts C, D and E of the Education theHandicapped Act, and will be extenc:ed under the administrat.ou'6reauthorization bill, which be transmitted to the Congri:-.shortly.

We believe that support for these discretionary activities can b-both extremely supportive and comple:nentary to State and lot.;;provision of direct services to children. Although we are not proposing any modifications to the current authorities for these pro-grams, we are proposing to shift the focus of some of these act:71-,ties as States make greater progress in meeting their responsibilhies for the provision of direct services. I will now describe the ac-tivities supported under parts C, D and I in greater

I would ask Ed Snntag to comment on some of the programs ingreater detail, if I may.

Dr. SONTAG. Thank you.Senator, first I would like to talk about part C, Centers and Serv-

ices to Meet Special Needs or the Handicapped.Part C. Centers and Services to Meet Special Needs of the Handi-

capped, supports contract and grant programs !Limed at enhat,cingthe capacity of the service delivery systems in the States to servespecial populations including preschool children, adult and deaf-blind and other severely handicapped children.

Under section 1;21 we support regional resource centers (EEC's).This program originated in 1969 to assist States in implemeLtingevaluation and assessment practices in schools. In 19M, as a resultof monitoring visits to States and a number of evaluation studieswhich found a marked uneveness in the quality of educational

"69

s,rvices aerw.:., local d Slate education agencies. the RHC activi-t ies were aimed more toward technical assistance to State agencieswith the goal of removing the remaining harriers to quality specialeducation programs for handicapped children.

On March 22, 1977, the last time the Office of Special Educationeared }whirr this Subcommittee for the purpose of legislative

retithorization of this program, we stated that "." " our long-range plan is to terminate this program as the full implementationof Public Law 9.1- 1,12 heroines a reality."

Dr. SoNTAt;. The early childhood education program authorized11y section has, since 1110, funded projects which demonstrateard disseminate exemplary methods of educating handicapped chil-dren under age eight. Many of these projects are maintained byother funding sources after Federal grants end. This program,which also supports early childhood institutes, complements thepreschool incentive grants program funded under part 13 by devel-oping models of best practices for preschool programs.

Under section we have been able to .focuS on the uniqueneeds of severely handicapped children who often require extensivecoordinated services which are provided by a number of State andlocal agencies.

The fifth and last discretionary program under part C is the re-gional vas adult and postsecondary program, section 625.There is an increasing recognition of the need for programs to helpolder handicapped children in the transition from school to work.In the past, this program has been largely focused on vocationalschools for the deaf'. In setting future priorities, we intend to devotemore attention to other handicapping conditions. Our current andfuture activities w,11 maintain the goal of helping handicapped chil-dren to enter adulthood with confidenceknowing that they can bepersonally fulfilled while also contributing to society.

Two of our discretionary programs are authorized by part DSpecial Education Personnel Development, and Recruitment Infor-matiun. Our personnel development program has supported train-ing for thousands of special educators, regular classroom teachers,related service personnel, administrators and others through theyears.

There can be no question that an adequate number of trainedteachers is essential in providing quality education for handicappedchildren. Under existing legislation we can continue to address thisneed, largely by focusing on preservice training of new teachers.

During this past year, for instance, we rechanneled our resourcesOn . ;even priorities including special education teachers, relatedSt TV ices personnel and volunteers and parents. We intend to insurethat emerging needsespecially in the area of secondary and post-secondary programsare also addressed in the future.

Part of the act authorizes research and development activities,timed tit improving education opportunities for handicapped chil-dren. This past year, for instance, we init.;.ted research projects itthe area of secondary school proirams and intend to eventuallyexpand our de.nonstration activities \Alen additional informationbecomes available. Research also helps us to determine the natureand contend of personnel preparation programs and it assists us in

970

designing deininisirahlw prfigrains for .severely handicapped C1111-

(111..11 and yolith.Senator, we would be pleased 0) answer any coly.tions that you

have.Senator WEn.xmit. Thank you very much, Mr. Sontag.In stating its posit iou t he appropriate Federal role in education,

the administration often includes research as a priority. Yet }'urn'propost.: In reduce funding in speoial education research implies thatit IS not a priority. Yon point out here that net u;iiiy it is :t1'2 lllllhurlproposed in 19S.1_ _maybe you might want to Ilinitnent on why thisseemingly is not a priority.

1)r, SoNTAu. Senator?Senator WEiclitoi. Are We going to get the macro or the micro

answer?Dr. SoNTAn, The research program in spec :11 education programs

is an integral part of our entire effort. It pu sents us with an op-portunity to interface with Public Law 91-1.12, improve monitoring-,determine future directions in our demonstration programs and toprovide better information in our personnel preparation program.

We have a two-faceted program, largely field initiated, balancedFederal direction. We think that those two alternatives pro-

vide the field, with viable information's() that we can better edu-cate handicapped children.

It is a very important priority, Senator. The budget cut that wasproposed for 198,1 i a relatively modest one.

Senator Wt.:Incl.:lc. Oh. no. No, no, that does notI realize that51.2 million is not lot ef money by Washington, D.C. standards.But what is that percentage wise? it is roughly 10 percent.

1)r. ".:-..):\rrAc. Yes, sir.Senator WKICKI.:11. According to GAO, in the 1981 report, second-

ary and postsecondary age youth' are underserved by special educa-tion. Since only :ill States provide for an education for 18 to 21 yearolds, it is hardly surprising.

What leadership role do you recommenddo you assure thatFederal education is providing in this critical area of education foryoung c.(lults?

Dr. SoNTAG. Se. atm., we are very concerned with the work op-portunities available to the handicapped children as they leavepublic school environmeit. Not only that, we are concerned withthe large number of dropouts that we continue to have from ourspecial education programs. More than half of the enrollees, specialeducation programs, never graduate from high. school. The largemajority of handicapped individuals go into the work force, are un-employed. It is a major con,-ern.

We have looked at all our discretionary programs. r'i)1.cted at theestablishment of transition from school to work as a priority. Ourefforts to date include the development of a formal working rela-tionship with the Office of Vocational Education and 'the Rehabili-tation Services Administration to assure service coordination. Adirect. result of these efforts can be seen in the education data thatthe enrollment of handicapped students has more than doubledover the last years, and State and local `'ending has more thantripled.

Senator WEickFic. Do you want to pull that microphone up?

271

;-;11NI Al, I ',u11 e We have 11111(11'd research programswhich have demole,trated problems relating to the transition ofstudents Irvin school to work. Work at the University of Oregon,the University of Washington, and the University of Wisconsin, in-dicate that vocational education money spent on severely handi-capped children does make a difference.

We are finding that children %vim %vere previously institutional-ized, with modest support in the community of approximatelyiSI,01 Year at the University of Wisconsin, students can be main-tained in compet it ive employment.

Similar data from a very severely profound population at theUniversity of Oregon shows that students are now holding competi-tive employment, who in the past, without special instruction, wereplaced in institutions, ill: the very best in restrictive environments.These programs do Make it significant difference, and we will con-tinue to ;iddress our efforts on t hese children.

Work at the University of Illinois has influenced curriculumchanges at the secondary school level, by finding ways for schoolsto work with the leaders and business and industry to be sure thatemployers 'Heeds are being met in school programs.

We have been supportive of work in Virginia CommonwealthUniversa%. to develop innovative voc,itional training models forthe deaf. really severely handicapped youth in high technology.

We have prOvidid direct technical assistance to State educationneeds. We establi.-lied vocational education transitions from schoolsto work as a minor priority, and as I said earlier, it is reflected inall of the programs, with the exception of early childhood educa-tion, that we continue to address.

Senator WPackPat. The intent of the prescho(1 incentive grantprogram is to encourage States to implement preschool instruction,and to facilitate planning for to 5 Year old handicapped children.It is estimated that only one out of four of the preschool handi-capped population i5 receiving special education services nation-wide.

Again, what recommendations do you make t improve this program to reach more students'?

Dr. SoNTAu. Senator, at this time we are proposing no specificrecommendations for the preschool incenti e grant program. How-ever, we are requesting reauthorizatioi; for the handicapped chil-dren's early education program, which is under part C. We feelthat this is one of the most successful programs that has ever beenfunded by the Government.

Senator, I am sure you are aware mat the track record of seedmoney programs. demonstration programs, of course, the Govern-ment is not as great as it can be anO should be. Recent studies indi-cat!. that some 10 to 20 percent Federal demonstration projects arepicked up after Federal money goes away. Eighty percent of all ofthe projects ever funded in this program, since 1969, are still in ex-istence. Those programs demonstrate quite clearly that early child-hood education makes a difference in educating children. It savesmoney to society in the Ion;, run.

The children who enter these programs at early ages are lesshandicapped, avoid costly institutionnlization. It is a program thatvorks, and we are urging its continuation.

Se 1111101. Veh, brit we hilVe to do something, The fact is

that there obviously is a problem. I am more tharklad to sit (lowwith you and the Department, you. know, to try to see if' wework something out, because only one out four receiving spy-

ion s,rvic4.s is bad:I It 5(IN't The enrollment in the preschool incentive craft-Senator Vv ,.k.KER. As Yuri correctly point. out, if you can increase

the number of ,bildren receiving the services, it would save anenormous iiimmot of money. Only one out of four is receiving theseservices, so obymiisly we are missing the boat somewhere.

Dr. SONAG. There has not been an increase in the number ofchildren receiving services under this program since the enactmentof Public Law 9,1-112. There has been a leveling off.

Senator WKiekKit. Well, then clearly there are sortie changes inorder. Obviously something is not clicking.

Mr. BAUb.:H. Mr. Chairman-Senator' WEICKEK. Nina points out to me that the funding level

has been the same for what, 1 years-3 years, so that this is one ofthose instances when additional funding would help. But that is aproblem.

Anyway, I think it is a problem that you ought to take a carefullook at.

Mr. BAmt. Mr. Chairman, as you know, the'ehildren aged 3 to 5.also can he served under the basic State grant program, and we areincreasing that amount in our request, by $28 million.

Senator WEIckER. Well, let me tell you, having had personal ex-perience, that service can just vary so widely from State to State,and believe me, the States, if they want to, can find 1 million waysof running around the obligation. In any event, I think it is some-thing that we should take a look at.

I have further questions but I want to give time to the remainingwitnesses that we have. I will submit my questions to you for a re-sponse that will go into the record.

Thant a very much.[The wing espouses were subsequently received for the

record.

,C)

273

UNI I IA) SI A I 1.5 OEI'Alt !MEM DT EDUCA TION

\II .\kIH.\HIHIAIII I 10.'1, I

'

I I HI A III)N. /1.!,1-

.!

(.1r;C

27 5

ei

276

. I 1,.. P.P P}..'.1r 1111 1 hi', 11. 1,111.1, Pr

1.'Pt 1 r' ...11 '1, '1 111,1,1 r 11. ..1.1' .1 1,11....11.1 11..

pp , I: , .. 11. . I. '11.1f ''. 11"d '11.1 1

,,p I, P. pp, I,. pp p,. pp' rI If 1,114111 I 1

. ,p.. p,.,p pp....I. r 1.'1.11

.1. I, .11 ' '1111111

I ,1 11 t 1 14,1 1' f 111,1 1., .1 ,'11`' f 1..1 1 .7.

11,r. 1:f .. I ir, 1.,...IH' 1.1.1111.1..1 L I,

14, 41,P, 1'1 17.

I ' I i. .iP 1111.

i It ; 11.' PP '!.. 11,1 I. I 1111111..1; p.1'1/. .11. Pf f..11, 11,1 t f

I 11 1 .1.11.11 .I1 1 OH I` .'..fPPI1.11

LP

! I .1 I

. . 1 , 1 P I 1'11: I , Pf 1 ri r 1

I; PI, P ' ' I t II P PIP PIf 13...11.1, .1(1.1

' P I'' ; .1

1 t, ".11*. 1111,1 t 11.1.

277C1)

;.1, .1, 11.: 1 t' . :It 1 11 it 1: II:, 1 11 1

r1r t .1. .1. .11.11 It i!m :1 I 1

1

1 .t t t. II: II '1. 11. :11

I.I I t:

i't I

t 11 :r. 1 I I 1.: * .1 : .111. .1 :11 .1

.11:

' 1 t..1 Io 1..! .11 ::::y4.1111.1m,t .: .11r.I I * 1 . . 1 A ! I I I ' : . ` . . , ^ / 1111.1 i

1 t. I : l I. I: Mt V: . 111.711,, . :.t.' 1 ti

j 1 I l'. ; .

.

i 11.11 11 .

r ; 1: :1,11

;

, , II II. 1- Ih.

4,1

I

,

279

II I. i i, I ,

lit

!.I ;1,.? A

1, 11, 111

rot,

Ir11.

/1,1 111 1

280

1111 11,1, , I I I I, ill,11

1 , 1 1 1 '1 1 1 1 1 1 101 1 , 1 1 11.

,r, ,,.1 i irrII 11,1: IN I 1.1 1.11,1r,

11.1.11 111. t 11. .1 .11 t idly thr.

Ili,- I.. ..r1,.., 1.111,,1.11,1 .1 -I.- 11,1/. ,.1 ;1111 i11,1

'ir t,:.. i..l 1.1 11

1. I .11 1,, ,4111 11 1...111, 11.1111 .

yt,11.1 !II 1

1,,

111'11.

I 11 ',I1,11 111.1 -,1 1.1.1. t

1:... 1 .11 .r ill I I,

,111 .1 11 L.: :1:.

1,11111111 11,1 11.1f III I ,r 1,1 r

r II 1 , rt r: . , 1'ir I' ..1 ::11::.,:r.t 1 :II, .irof

tr. : ; 11:11.,:t1

1 t

',.'t r IT: ,11 I

;,r ,1,.1:1 .1.11 t 1,11, 1, 1

in,111 1,1 rlo. '411,1r_ 11,I.111,1,1 " P11

.,t ,;{/nr 1-; 111b1 1,./11,1,1t1.11 t y 11.1r ,11!11 t.y

1

1( I )111 liet willie!s 1), Alan I lolnwister, dean,tit

Nly good friend, the chairman of the rununittee, SO11101/1' I1111(11,\k Ile l 111(011 has ell((11(RIS 11t /P ((I IltiS 4HIlit(11. in HIV011 11()1.1/11); 1111(1 i)1(1111/1.1i1(11)115 Sense, is Milli truly dedicated,

dedicated to he needs of the handicapped, diSalded, rot anled,.ind I might 1(1(1, to the 'Joint where he gots, in ll)is i11111051

11111( II 1 r()111)le wit11 IIle :1(11111111S1 11111011 1e-i I de.I want to pow, out Senator C(Ontnit Went and that ho

wanted to he hero, Or 1 ad twaster, to int rodlIce Y011. I It' is tied 1111in ;mother heorin,, and I will introduce his introduction of youInto the record at this point. In III(' Meant 1111e, let the Wele()1110 you1101(rri. the ;-,(111e0111111i1I00, 1111(1 Say Whitt a privilege it is to 1141V yl(11here, ;111(I I 1.1olik lOrward to your testimony.

'The folioving was received for the record:l

IYII0WI ("Feta S I A I TN1F:N-1 up SE:NM Hi( IA 1111

;on ht. ;4 II Intrmillre Mir 111'0 461 11(..,, I11, Alan NI,I 1144,,,h, ,\ 01,,41 ,41 11,114 state, I)r I lulnu'isler 1)1,1111 of

1714 ..,10..11 ;1.,1111.11 4111111, .0111 1.1.1',1411.11, (0. IZI.M.ardi al I '1

111 11,1I1,..;-.11' I , 1111:111111,1 nn I lit. ',Tic ul evaluat ionReaut /nag/anon otthe lAlication of the Ilandcapped Act. 'or siiv

r.il Ole lilpartnient Head of Iiihication at 1 ItaiiI de elop,Ia model re-eare 1 progralli roe ,shoot &strict,

hit. progrion for -.1 ;it department,: «r edueal Ian and Inar II t. ,1t111 ,C11.11In In ,'111.1.111t C1111111.114, he ,11V11,111011 ;11111 11111111.1111.110.11 a university evaluation

provyan, r,. 044 departments at l'41' ci`giry seven years. Ile lias also en-pr,,lt-arii ;iluati"ri acrlvrtles at Vanderbilt 1:111'ersIty or Minnesota and

111 ely.11 :-;tat litt111Icr id' !hi. pri,liliaa, ('iataill,,,a(ai on Education.In Addition, he h.1, been responsible for training Nil) level students and tins pub-

hi, work in wally journals and periodicals.Al till, tune I :on .ry grateful that 1). Ilof tneister took the tone and effort to

IA. test Pilorii the siihronunittee today. I am delighted to have the oppugn-. \ to poisent to von, 1)r :\11111 NI. Ilotnleiiter.

STATNIENT (IF DR, AI,AN Jl. 110FMEI4TER. DEAN. SCH001, OFGRADIATE STEDIES, ASSOCIATE N'ICE PRESIDENT FOR RE-SEARCH, UTAH STATE ENIVERSITYDr. 1 !OF:MEISTER. Thank you, Senator.Before the evaluation and research sections can be commented

OIL I1 (10e51 II/11 hats 1(1 he posed. Is a change needed in the law'? Theanswer to this question determines the focus of the comments.

".ly answer is "no." I see nothing in the findings from the recenthearings held around the country or in the findings from previousevaluation studies that would suggest there is a need for substan-tial changes in the law.

I would counsel Congress not to change the law unless there aremajor problems. Public Law 91-1.12 is not just another piece of leg-ishition. It :s a symbol of the achievement of citizenship by a sig-nificant portion of the population. As a symbol it should not besubject to the constant threat of minor changes regardless of thesincerity of the intent. Recommendations for minor changes areoften seen as an attack on a symbol, and communication is lost, Wecannot afford such a loss of' communication.

15110 this, not because I am tired of' the debate, but because I be-lieve there are no major vveaknesses in the law and minor prob.

282

lems should be taken care of at the program level. For this reason,the following comments are concerned with program directions.

I would like to pose the following frame of reference for the con-.duct of evaluation efforts.

One, the problem selection process should be clarified. Thefourth annual report to Congress on the Implementation of PublicLaw 94-142 notes that specific evaluation studies activities were"to provide information requested by Congress." I had difficulty de-termining how Congress formulated these questions. There needsto be an overt process by which evaluation questions are identifiedand prioritized. If the question development process is poorly de-fined, how can information have value? Information is useless if itdoes not relate to questions of concern.

Two, the evaluation process should not neglect the difficult ques-tions. There is a focus on variables such as the number of pupilsidentified, number of pupils served, amount of expenditures,number of personnel by disability category, et cetera. In general,the emphasis is on how many were served, not on how well theywere served. I think it is now time to deal with the complex butbasic issue of how well are our handicapped children being served?

There is considerable debate concerning the 84-percent increasein the number of learning disabled pupils during the past fewyears.

Three, there should be a programmatic approach to the evalua-tion process. Evaluation is a rational progressive problem solvingprocess that is rarely achieved in one study. Some efforts shouldhelp identify specific issues, and some efforts should then followupon the specific issues. Some studies will lead logically to other stud-ies. This requires longitudinal planning and the coordination of in-formation that can only be met by a critical mass of effort at theFederal level. I feel that the evaluation resources at the Federallevel have slipped below this critical mass effort. They certainly donot meet commonly accepted Federal requirements that at least 5percent of the resources be expended on evaluation efforts.

Four, evaluation efforts should be change-oriented. The idealevaluation model is a three-phase process: (a) Evaluation informa-tion is collected and problems are identified; (b) Intervention is con-ducted; (c) A reevaluation is conducted to assess the effectiveness ofthe intervention.

Five, evaluation efforts should include the potential decision-makers. If evaluation efforts are to have credibility, then the poten-tial users of the information should be involved in the formuiationof these studies. While the involvement of Department of Educa-tion personnel is guaranteed, I had difficulty determining how Con-gress on one side, and groups on the other side, such as the Nation-al Association of State Special Educational Directors or representa-tives of advocacy groups on the other side, were involved.

My recommendations for evaluation activities that would be con-sistent with the spirit of section 618 are as follows.

There should be two major divisions to the evaluation activity.One division should be a continuation of the monitoring programthat provides the quantitative data on numbers and types of pupilsserved. To this data should be added information on the quality aswell as the quantity of services. This monitoring program also

28

283

needs to be strengthened by a longitudinal data source that focusesnot at the agency end, but at the consumer end. A substantialamount of quality information can be collected on consumer reac-tions at a modest cost if we adopt modern polling techniques andfocus on the parents of handicapped students.

The second division of evaluation activities should flow logicallyfrom the first division. The second division will focus on specificproblems where explanations are needed as to why things are hap-pening.

I would like to comment briefly on the research section. Mymajor concern With present research activities is the fragmentationof efforts. A major reason for this fragmentation is the lack of re-sources. When resources are reduced, we allocate resources insmaller units and the resulting fragmentation means that centersof excellence for long-term in-depth efforts disappear. In my ownfield, the disappearance of these centers of excellence has been dra-matic. Because of our emphasis on the application of technology tothe needs of the handicapped, our technical skills have been attrac-tive to private industry, the military, and the health sciences.These fields understand both the nature of the investment and thepotential return of the investment.

There are ways to minimize fragmentation, even with limited re-sources. One way is to focus on the development of complete pro-grams that make a major difference.

I am surprised how few people really understand the type ofchanges that are necessary to successfully treat. even the mildlyhandicapped children.

It is clear, then, that we cannot be satisfied with model programsthat just make a noticeable difference We have to develop modelprograms that make a major difference. The normal definitions ofsignificant achievement gains have little relevance.

The product of a research effort in model programs has to be (1)programs that are complete and generalizable across a variety ofeducational environments; and (2) programs that make a major dif-fer ence.

Once we identify a few programs that make a major difference,we need a plan to capitalize on these demonstrations. This meansthat our research effortQ have to be tied closely to other trainingefforts. Associated with every model that makes a major differenceshould be a technical resource program that (1) Will support thereplication of the model in other sites; and (2) that will train lead-ership personnel in school districts and universities in the imple-mentation of the model.

We must always keep in mind that the majority of special educa-tion pupils are mildly handicapped, and the majority of thesewould not be in special education if they had been appropriatelyserved in the regular classroom. Research efforts should focus onprocedures and models that prevent entry into special education.

In conclusion, I would like to close with a reference to a researchproject I conducted three years before Public Law 94-142 mandatedservices to all handicapped children. I received a. research grant toapply telecommunications to the needs of the severely handi-capped. I selected some 200 handicapped children who were not re-ceiving services in the rural areas of Utah. Through--the use of the

284

telephone and highly structured training materials, we developedthe parents as teachers.

We were successful in a .variety of ways. The pupils improved asa result of the training. The parents developed skills that werehelpful in other settings as well, and the materials were distributednationally and are now available in five languages. Not only 'did weshow that we could make significant improvements in the qualityof life for some 200 families that had not been served, but eventoday, there are thousands of teachers: and parents in the UnitedStates, Australia, Manila, Singapore, and even teachers in China,using the materials. I came out of this experience convinced of thevalue of research and of the importance of 94-142.

I think it is important to note that the legislature in Utah pickedup this idea as a line budget-item, at the conclusion of the study.

My story is not an isolated eveq. Other special education re-searchers have done much more. The programs you have fundedhave made a difference, and I know of riiother way such activitieswill continue to occur if the Federal effort is diminished. The lead-ership for such research of this kind 1,as not and cannot occur atthe State level.

Thank you, sir.Senator WEICKER. Thank you very much, Dean Hofmeister.I gather then that, specifically, the matter that I referred to ear-

lier with Dr. Sontag, of a reduction of $1.2 million in the researchbudget is a cut that you do not feel should take place?

Dr. HOFMEISTER. I feel very concerned about it for two reasons.No. 1, I have a great deal of confidence in the program supervi-

sory personnel in the Office of Special Education. They know howto deliver on the dollar.

No. 2, I know what a million point four is, as far as the quality oflife of individual families and citizens in the country. I think it is avery significant cut.

Senator WEICKER. Thank you very, very much for your/testimo-ny.

If there are questions for the panel, we will submit7them to youfor response in the record. I think it is a very forceful statement,and one that will have great impact on the Committee. I appreciateit.

[The prepared statement of Dr. Hofmeister and responses to ques-tions follow:I

285

COMMENTS ON PART B, SECTION 618: EVALUATION

AND

PART E, RESEARCH AND EDUCATION OF THE HANDICAPPED

PUBLIC LAW 94-142

by

Alan M. HofmeisterDean, School of Graduate Studies

Associate Vice President for ResearchUtah State University

Testimony before the Senate Committee on Labor and HumanResources, Subcommittee, on the Handicapped, March 21, 1983

286

COMMENTS ON PART 8, SECTION 618: EVALUATION

PUBLIC LAW 94-142

Introduction

Before the Evaluation and Research sections can he commented

on, a question has to be posed. Is a change needed in .the law?

The answer to this question determines the focus of the comments.

My answer is "no." I see nothing in the findings from the

recent hearings held around the country or in the findings from

previous evaluation studies that ,iould suggest there is a need

for substantial changes in the law.

I would counsel Congress not to change the law unless there

are major pr,Jblems. P.L. 94-142 is not just another piece of

legislation. It is a symbol of the achievement of citizenship icy

a significant portion of the population. As a symbol it should

not be subject to the constant threat of minor changes regardless

of the sincerity of the intent. Recommendations for minor

changes are often seen as an attack on a symbol, and

communication is lost. We cannot afford such a loss of

communication.

I say this, not because I'm tired of the debate, but because

I believe there are no major weaknesses in the law and minor

problsms should be taken care of at the program level. For this

reason, the following comments are concerned with program

directions.

Part 8, Section 618: Evaluation

i would like to pose the following frame of re:erence for

287

the conduct of evaluation efforts.

;. The problem selecticn process should be clarified. The

Fourth Annual Report to Cc-jress on the Implementation of 94-142

notes chat specific evaluation studifs activities were "to

provide information requested by Congress. I had difficulty

determining how Congress formulated these questions. 'There needs

to be an overt process by which evaluation questions are

identified and prioritized. If the question development process

is poorly defined, how can information have value? Information

is useless if it doesn't relate to questions of concern.

2. The evaluation process should not neglect the difficult

questions? There is a focus on variables such as the number of

pupils identified, number of pupils served, amount of

expenditures, number of personnel by disability category, etc.

In general, the emphasis is on "how many were served," not on

"how well they were served." I think it is now time to deal with

the complex but basic issue of "how well are our handicapped

children being served?"

There is considerable debate concerning the 84 percent

increase in the number of learning disabled pupils during the

past few years. A major reason for this increase is not just

related to the aCmission process, but to the exit process.

Exiting a program is an issue many would rather not discuss

because it requires us to deal with the issue of "how well are

pupils being served?"

3. There should be a programmatic approach to the evaluation

process. EvaluatLion is a ratio.ial progressive problem solving

process that is rarely achieved in one study. Some efforts

288

s.lould help identify specific issues, and some efforts should

then follow-up on the specific issues. Some studies will lead

logically to other studies. This requires longitudinal planning

the coordination of information that can only be met by a

critical mass of effort at the federal level. 1 feel that the

evaluation resources at the federal level have slipped below this

"critical mass" effort. They certainly don't meet commonly

accepted federal requirements that at leat. 5 percent of the

resources be expended on evaluation efforts.

4. Evaluation efforts should be change-orient,d, The ideal

evaluation model is a three-phase process:

a. Evaluation information is collected and problems are

identified:

b. Intervention is conducted;

c. A re-evaluation is conducted to assess the

effectiveness of the intervention.

I found very little evidence that this three-phase model was

in use. Even though many of the evaluation efforts last for

three years, they terminate at phase one--the collection of

evaluation data. Often, considerable time is lost in such

activities as waiting for forms clearance.

5. Evaluation efforts should include the potential ilecisicn

makers. If evalution efforts are to have credibility, then the

potential users of the information should be involved in the

formulation of these studies. While the involvement of

Department of Education personnel is guaranteed, I had difficulty

determining how Congress on one side, and the National

2.9,,

289

Association of State Special Educational Directors or

representatives of advocacy group. on the other side, were

involved.

Recommendations for Specific Evaluation Activities

My recommendations for evaluation activities that would be

consistent with the spirit of Section 618 are as follows.

There should be two major divisions to the evaluation

activity. One division should be a continuation of the moni-

toring program that provides the quantitative data on numbers and

types of pupils served. To this data should be added information

on the quality as well as the quantity of services. This

monitoring program also needs to be strengthened by a longitu-

dinal data source that focuses not at tl,e agency end, but at the

consumer end. A substantial amount of quality information can be

collected on consumer reactions at a modest cost if we adopt

modern polling techniques and focus on the parents of handicapped

students.

The second division of evaluation activities should flow

logically from the first division. The second division will

focus on specific problems where explanations are needed as to

why things are happening. For example, the first division

studies may tell us that very few mildly handicapped pupils ever

exit a special education program before they leave school.

Division two should tell us why this might be so. These studies

should be designed to facilitate follow-up evaluations after

changes have been implemented.

290

PART E, RESEARCH AND EDUCATION OF THE HANDICAPPED

Fragmentation of Efforts

My major concern with present research activities is the

fragmentation of efforts. A major reason for this fragmentation

is the lack of resources. When resources are reduced, we

allocate resources in smaller units and the resulting

fragmentation means that centers of excellence for long-term in-

depth efforts disappear. In myown field, the disappearance of

these centers of excellence has been dramatic. Because of our

emphasis on the application of technology to the needs of the

handicapped, our technical skills have been attractive to private

industry, the military, and the health sciences. These fields

understand both the nature of the investment and the potential

return of the investment.

Model Programs and Research :enters

There are ways to minimize fragmentation, even with limited

resources. One way is to focus on the development of complete

programs that make a major difference.

I am surprised how few people really understand the type of

changes that are necessary to successfully treat even the mildly

handicapped. The average learning disabled child becomes highly

visible in the third grade. By the time these children enter

fourth grade, they usually have been placed in special education

and a program initiated. When we start serious intervention in

the middle of the elementary school, the child is usually two to

three grade levels behind, and for the elementary school staff,

that leaves approximately two years for remediation. During

291

those two years we are asking the special educator to take pupils

that other people have failed with and bring them up

approximately four grade levels in two years.

It is clear, then, that we cannot be satisfied with model

programs that just make a noticeable difference. We have to

develop model programs that make a major difference. The normal

definitions of significant achievement gains have little

relevance.

The product of a research effort in model programs has to be

(1) programs that are complete and generalizable across a variety

of educational environments; and (2) programs that make a major

difference.

I think the long-term resources that are pumped into the

research centers can develop such models. In some cases,

effective models have evolved; in others, the efforts have not

yielded a total functioning model. We seem tc have reversed the

process. We study components in isolation and make projections

about their value. If we have a total program that works, then

we know there is value in studying the components.

Research Links to Personnel Preparation

Once we identify a few programs that make a major

difference, we need a plan to capitalize on these demonstrations.

This means that our research effforts have to be tied closely to

other training efforts. Associated with every model that makes a

major difference should be a technical resource program that (1)

will support the replication of the model in other sites, and (2)

that will train leadership personnel in school districts and

2 9 J

292

universities in the implementation of the model.

Research Links to Regular Education

We must always keep in mind that the majority of special

education pupils are mildly handicapped, and the majority of

these would not be in special education if they had been

appropriately-served in the regular classroom. Research efforts

should focus on procedures and models that prevent entry into

special education.

Durrell, as he retired from service after directing

treatment programs for learning disabled pupils for thirty yea=s,

observed:

The problems of beginning reading instruction have been

greatly overdramatized. There are many communities in all

parts of the country in which reading failure is seldom

encountered in the first grade. All that we need is

efficient instruction which is adjusted to individual

subskill needs and which conforms to the nature of the

learning task. The nonreader is a child who has been

inadequately served in the classroom.

Of the hundreds of nonreaders coming to our clinic

during the past 30 years, most could have avoided reading

difficulty. In every case there were obvious weaknesses in

the subskills of reading sufficiently serious to account for

the difficulty. Nearly all responded to effective skills

instruction closely adjusted to their learning needs. The

only exceptions were children with uncorrected sensory or

physical handicaps, and these were very rare.

293

Psychological, psychiatric, neurological, and sociological

explanations of reading failure appear to be unimportant and

misleading. (p. 71)

It is clear to me that many of our problems can be solved- -

that the'answer lies in the quality of the treatment programs we

develop.

Conclusion

I would like to close with a reference to a research project

I conducted three years before 94-142 mandated services to all

handicapped children. I received a research grant to apply

telecommunications to the needs of the severely handicapped. I

selected some two hundred handicapped children who were not

receiving services in the rural areas of Utah. Through the use

of the telephone and highly structured training materials, we

developed the parents as teachers.

We were successful in a variety of ways. The pupils

improved as a result of the training. The parents developed

skills that were helpful in other settings as well, and the

materials were distributed nationally and are now available in

five languages. Not only did we show that we could make

significant improvements in the quality of life for some 200

families that had not been served, but even today, there are

thousand's of teachers and parents in the United States,

Australia, Manila, Singapore, and even teachers in China, using

the materials. I came out of this experience convinced of the

value of research and of the importance of 94-142.

My story is not an isolated event. Other special education

reseachers have done much more. The programs you have founded

have made a difference, and I know of no other way such

activities will continue to occur if the federal effort is

diminished. The leadership for research of this kind has not and

cannot occur at the state level.

294

UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY LOGAN, UTAH 84322

OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENTFOR RESEARCHTetepPonetti011 750-I 180

April II, 1983

Honorable Lowell Weicker, Jr.Chairman, Subcommittee on theHandicapped

Committee on Labor and Human ResourcesUnited States SenateWashington, D. C. 20510

Dear Senator Weicker:

The following enclosure was prepared in response to yourletter of April 4, requesting such information.

It was my pleasure to present before the recent hearings. I

would like to take this opportunity to commend you in the contri-

bution you are making to large numbers of individuals who do not

have the ability to help themselves. I would also like to com-

mend you for the professionalism and dedication of your staff.Handicapped and the field of special education are indeed fortu-

nate to have the leadership and professionalism that resides in

your office in these difficult times.

Sincerely,

Alan M. Hofmei terAssociate Vice Presidentfor Research

jbs

Enclosure

295

Recent reports tell us that the goal of providing a free

appropriate education to all handicapped children and youth has

not yet been met. (SRI, CA0).

Question 1: Could you tel me what contribution research and

evaluation might make towards reaching that goal:

Response; The implementation of 94-142 is reaching it turning

point. Most of the administrative practices necessary to support

a free, appropriate education to all handicapped students and

youth are in place. We now face the demanding challenge of

providing quality programs within this administrative structure.

The concept of appropriate education clearly has a qualitative

dimension to it. The development and validation of replicable,

high quality interventions is, of course, a major goal of

research and evaluation in education. Without such research and

evaluation, we will never achieve appropriate education.

Question 2: What is the, federal role in facilitating those

contributions?

Response: The less,.;s from history are clear. Individual states

have not and cannot mount and coordinate the types of research

and evaluation efforts necessary to develop highly effective,

valid, and replicable intervention programs. This is clearly a

federal role. If it is not a federal role, it will not be done,

and a significant portion of the population will lose the

citizenship through denial of an appropriate education.

As you know, there are currently no new special studies

being funded out of Special education programs.

Question 3: What will the impact he?

o

296

Response: our concern at this pint is not how many ind i v idua 1 s

are being served so much as how well are they being served? This

is a coml ex and critical evalunt.ion question. Without high

quality, well coordinated evaluation studies, 94-142 could result

in a sh a 1 I ow administrative facade behind which the quality of

I ife of the handicapped remainsthe same nr onn10 even become

diminished.

Question 4: What effect do you feel the Administration's

proposed reduct inn of 11.2. mill ion for FY 'P4 in research funding

would have, if approved by Congress?

Response: SEP has an excellent record for he inn able to mount

R&D programs that result in itsignificant improvement in the

qua I t y of life for Larne numbers of hand icapped individuals.

For this reason, we can anticipate, since this is a significant

reduction in, funds, a s ign f icaht reduction in the quality of

life of la rge numbers of handicapped individuals. It is

unfortunate that rent a l lfederal programs can show such a strong

positive correlation between dollars spent and improvement in the

quality of programs. For this reason, it would ho most

unfortunate to restrict the effectiveness of a federal agency

which has extensive unmet needs to address and which can del iver

if given the resources.

Al an M. Hofmci st or

0 .

297

Senator WEicic Ea. We next have Mr. Winfield Mc Chord, the ex-ecutive director of the American School for the Deaf, West Hart-ford, Connecticut. Mr. Mc Chord, nice to have you here. Go rightahead.

STATEMENT OF WINFIELD MeCHORD, HEADMASTER, AMERICANSCI1001, FOR THE DEAF, WEST HARTFORD, CONN., ON BEHALFOF THE CONFERENCE OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATORSSERVING 'I'llE DEAF', AND THE CONVENTION OF AMP:RICAN IN-STRUCTORS OF TILE DEAF

Mr. Mc. Ctioa.n. Thank you.Senator Weicker, I am speaking for the Conference of Education-

al Administrators serving the Deaf, and the Convention of Ameri-can Instructors of the Deaf, two of the three leading professionalorganizations, teachers of the deaf, and those who serve the deaf inan educational program.

Ironically, I have been asked to speak to part F, captioned films,which was born at the American School for the Deaf, as a result ofa small grant from the Junior League of Hartford.

The major concern of our two organizations is the connotation ofthe term discretionary, which we feel conflicts with the perceptionof the field of deafness, that these programs have been considered.

Captioned films for the deaf originally was intended to serve deafadults through the distribution of theater films, and served prettymuch in the same capacity as talking books for the blind, adminis-tered by the Library of Congress. But as time passed, captionedfilms moved into education, began to capture educational films. Wenow have 1,400 educational captioned films, 100,000 films areloaned each year, 1.9 million films are used, and there are 3,500user accounts throughout the United States. There are more than7,000 groups of deaf adults who watch only the feature lengthfilms.

In addition, captioned films began to serve schools for the deaf,by offering projection equipment into the classrooms, and in myopinion, impacted more on the professions of deaf education thanany other legislative instrument, since the early 1900's.

Captioned films has moved into broadcast technology, it hasspawned the captioned films decoder and closed captioned pro-grams. We also, through captioned films, receive training of teach-ers of the deaf, showing them how to use the new technologiesavailable to them, as well as the new programs provided by cap-tioned films.

Captioned films has also been experimenting in telecommunica-tions. They are working now on computer supported message sys-tems, and other approaches that make use of the telephone as aninstrument of access, rather than a barrier to the deaf population.

Our organizations feel in order to preserve the integrity of thecaptioned films, there should be an amendment. The captionedfilms program is intended for deaf children and deaf adults, as op-posed to just deaf children, as would normally be assumed by thetitle, Education for the Handicapped.

In the last few years the administration has been promoting theconcept of internal block grants which could be reallocated at the

2i 971 ()---s:S----

298

discretion of the Secretary. We feel a separate legislative authoritywould help protect the continuation and growth of the captionedfilms program.

Captioned films is also viewed by deaf persons as a service pro-gram, rather than a research and demonstration program, or anyother type of program which might be appropriately deemed as dis-cretionary.

Therefore, a separate authorization would clarify that matter.During the past 4 years the total program funding for part F has

been reduced from $19 million to $11.5 million. A separate authori-zation and appropriation might provide better visibility for the cap-tioned films program in the authorization and appropriation proc-ess.

The captioned films program is the only program funded whichprovides direct services to a broad range of deaf persons, from childto adult. Most other programs are serving a narrower band of deafconsumer needs.

We feel, therefore, that a separate authorization could protectthe integrity of that program. Without captioned films for the deafthere would be no educational films for hearing impaired children,there would be no captioned general interest films, and therewould be no captioned television.

The possibility of expanding these into electronic media certainlymakes a visually oriented population of hearing impaired childrenand adults able to find access to the benefits of society, that wouldhave been precluded otherwise.

I have attached, therefore, to this statement a proposed amend-ment to EHA, to establish separate authority for captioned films,in order to reduce the discretionary aspect.

Senator WEICKER. Well, let me say one thing to you. I am 100percent with you on the captioned films. I think you people havedone a great job with the schools. How can I put this to you in lay-man's language?

Well, a lot of times you will see my colleagues attach amend-ments to the bill on the floor, which they consider to be veto-proof.I am not so sure that I want to take captioning out, because itstrengthens our hand in the overall. It does obviously have enor-mous impact on a great number of people. It might be tempting, ifyou will, to go ahead and fund captioning separate from the others.

I am all for what you are trying to do. I am just trying to saythat this is an area of -service which is becoming more and morepopular with the American people, being more and more utilizedby more and more Americans, and it is something that Americanswho are not handicapped, are all for. So you are developing a con-stituency there, and I think I will let you have that constituency,not just on captions, but on other items. That is the point that I amtrying to make.

I am sorry , go ahead.Mr. MCCHORD. That is the conclusion of my statement.[The prepared statement of Mr. McChord follows:]

3 0

299

TESTIMONY BEFORE THE SENACE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPEDREGARDING REAUTHORIZATION OF THE EDUCATION FOR THE HANDICAPPED ACT

Mr, Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Winfield McChord,

Jr., Headmaster of the American School for the Deaf located in West

Hartford, Connecticut. I am presenting testimony related to Part F,

Instructional Media for the Handicapped, on behalf of the Conference of

Educational Administrators Serving the Deaf (CEASD) and the Convention of

American Instructors of the Deaf (CAID).

It is my pleasure to address this topic since, as you may be aware, the

Captioned Films Program, which is funded through Part F of the Education of

the Handicapped Act, was begun at the American School for the Deaf with the

help of a grant from the Junior League of Hartford. That this hearing on

discretionary programs under the EHA includes the Captioned Films Program

is itself a source of concern to many in our field. The very connotation

of the term "discretionary" is in conflict with the perception in the field

of deafness that these programs have been, are, and should be service

programs of a nondiscretionary nature.

The Captioned Films Program was originally intended to serve the adult

deaf population through provision of subtitled (captioned) films of a

general interest nature (including cultural and entertainment films).

Subsequently, the authority was expanded to provide educational captioned

films to the deaf student population, and extended the services so that

other forms of media were covered. In concept, it is not dissimilar to the

much larger Talking Books for the Blind Program administered by the Library

of Congress.

As a result of the support for the Captioned Media Program by Congress,

a collection of muce than 1,400 educational captioned films haS hnen estab-

lished and is circulated on a free loan basis to educational programs which

serve deaf students. More than 100,000 film loans are made each year

providing for more than 1.9 million film viewings. The distrihution of

tnesn films is supported by both federal dollars and through in-kind

subsidies by 58, ,schools or agencies thoughout the United Strates that house

and circulate the materials. Approximately 3,500 user accounts (other

schools and programs) borrow the films and share in the cost of postage.

As a result of this program, more than 7,000 groups of deaf adults have

been established for the purpose of borrowing and viewing general interest

captioned films. These groups have formed to purchase projection equipment

from their own funds and to cover the costs of return postage for films

borrowed. More than d million viewings of tnese general interest films

occur each year.

In recent years, as a result of this program, closed caption television

has become a reality, expanding the world as viewed through television to

the leaf population. More than 70,000 closed-caption decoders have been

sold to deaf persons. It is estimated that more than 250,000 deaf persons

are regular viewers of closed-caption television.

As a result of this program, substantial support has been provided to

the educational process for deaf students. Teachers have been trained in

the utilization and develpment of media in the educational process for deaf

students. Materials in a variety of media types were made available

301

through the program. Overhead projectors were Acquired and distributed to

classrooms for deaf students along with other materials in an effort to

substantially impact on the richness of the instructional environment.

These latter types of services have long been discontinued as a result of

the discretionary nature of the program, yet there is rapid turnover in the

teacher force, Ind the need for training ant exposure to effective

audiovispal instructional techniques.

As a result of this program, a variety of telecommunications

capabilities have been under development which will make the society more

accessible to deaf persons. These include computer supported message

systems and other approaches to making the telephone an instrument of

Acc,..ss rather than a barrier to societal participation by deaf persons.

Mr. Chairman, our organization is interested in obtaining your support,

and that of your colleagues, fc. establishing a separate legislative

authority or the Captioned Films Program. May we share these reasons:

1) The Captioned Film Program is intended for both children and

adults. The Education for the Handicapped Act has a primary focus

on discretionary services to handicapped students. A separate

authority would, in our opinion, better emphasize and protect the

interests of deaf adults.

2) There have been various proposals in the last years, submitted by

the administration, calling for the establishment of internal block

302

grants which could be reallocated It the discretion of the secre-

tary. Establishing a separate legislative authority would help

protect the continuation and growth of the Captioned films Program.

3) The Captioned Films Program has always been viewed by deaf persons

and educators of the deaf as a service program, not a research and

demonstration program or other type of program which might appro-

priately be viewed as discretionary. A separate authorization

would clarify this matter.

4) During the past four years the total program funding for Part F has

been reduced from S19 million to 511.5 million. There is indeed

concern that services might he significantly reduced at a time when

great strides could be made to promote the accessibility of tele-

vision and the adaptation of new technologies to meet the needs of

the deaf. A separate authorization and appropriation might provide

better visibility for the Captioned Films Program in the authori-

zation and appropriation process.

5) The Captioned Films Program is the only program funded which pro-

vides direct services to the broad range of deaf persons, from

child to adult. Other of the important programs for the deaf

funded thorugh the Congress address the needs.of some narrower band

of deaf consumer needs. We believe that a.separate authorization

could protect the integrity of this program.

303

6) It is generally believed in the field of deafness that the Part F

programs have been divided for administrative purposes between two

divisions within the Special Education Programs and there is con-

cern that this will lead to destabilization in the conduct of the

program.

Mr. Chairman, without the rlotioned Films Program there would he no

educational films for deaf student;, there would he no captioned general

interest film's, there would be no captioned television.I MI sure, Mr.

Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, that the extent of our own

dependence on the electronic media is clear to you.

Without this program the deaf individual would be substantially

isolated from the broader society and its values. The access that we have

been able to provide through this program is still far short of what is

available to the general public.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I am reminded that the deaf community has

long been considered a "silent" minority with an "invisible" disability.

Deafness is indeed one of the most difficult disabilities with which to

cope, and with which to attain success in today's world.

I have attached to this statement a proposed amendment to the EHA, and

further explanation, which we believe would help to achieve and preserve

the values which I have tried to discuss with the Subcommittee today. Deaf

people do not look upon the Captioned Films Program as "discretionary" in

any sense. We ask the Subcommittee to reassure the deaf community, and

reaffirm that these programs will not only continue, but will not be

diminished.

Thank you for your attention and concern.

0j.

30,1

Attachment to toctlmony of the Conference of Educational Administrators

Serving the Deaf before the Senate Subcommittee on the Handicapped regard-ing Reauthoritation of the Education of the Handicapped Act, March 21,10113, presented by Winfield McChord, Jr., Headmaster, American School forthe Deaf, Woct Hartford, Connecticut.

Proposed Amendment

CAPTIONED FILMS AND RELATED SERVICES FOR THE DEAF-0AY-OTHCP HANOICAPPLYTOIVIWALS

STATEMENT OF FINDINGS

The Congress hereby finds that--

Ill the Federal Government has a responsibility to promote the general

welfare of leaf and other handicapped individuals by adapting, producing,

and distributing existing media and materials in a way which assures

broader accessibility for such individuals;

(2) the adaptation and distribution of media for handicapped indi-

viduals will provide enriching educational and cultural experiences for

such individuals, and should contribute to their understanding of and

participation in their environment; and

(3) in order to promote accessibility to adapted media and materials

for educational purposes, distribution of such new technologies should not

be limited to handicapped individivals but should be extended to teachers,

parents, employers, and other persons directly involved in the advancement

of, handicapped individuals.

305

I YAIii of

!;PC. (4) Tne Secretary shall establish a free loan service of

C,Iptioned films and educational media for the deaf, for the purpose of

making such materials available in the United States for nonprofit purposes

to handicapped individuals, parents of handicapped individuals, and other

persons directly involved in activities for the advancement of the handi-

capped, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary.

(h) The Secretary is authorized to

rn acquire films (or rights thereto) and other educational

media by purchase, lease, or gift;

(2) acquire by lease or purchase equipment necessary to the

administration of this title;

(3) provide, by grant or contract, for the captioning of

films for the deaf;

(4) provide, by grant or contract, for the distribution of

captioned films and other media for the deaf and other edu

cational media and equipment through State schools for the

handicapped and such other agencies as the secretary may deem

appropriate to serve as local or regional centers for such

distribution;

(6) provide by grant or contract, for the conduct of

activities related to the use of educational and training

films and other educational media for the handicapped;

(6) utilize facilities and services of other governmental

agencies; and

Sec.

:106

i/l .Lcopt gifts, contributions, and voluntary and uncom

pensated services of individuals and organi:ations.

AOMINP.TRATION (11- TI TLI

The provisions of this title shall be administered by the ;ecru.

tary, acting through the Assistant secretary for Special Cducation and

Rehabilitation Services.

SeC. there are authorized to he appropriated 511,500,000 for fiscal

year 1984, and such sums as may he necessary for each succeeding fiscal

year, for the provision of services under this title. Such sums shall be

available without fiscal year limitation.

EXPLANATION

This amendment would remove section 652 from the Education of the Handi-capped act, and establish it as indefinite, independent authorizationadministered by the Secretary of Education through the Assistant Secretaryfor Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. The rationale andpurpose is to recognize the importance of the distribution of captionedmedia and other adapted materials for the deaf and other handicappedindividuals for educational and cultural purposes, by specifying that itcontinue indefinitely as a federal responsibility. This responsibility wasoriginally recognized in 1958 when Congress established the Captioned Filmsfor the Deaf Program in Public Law 85-905. This amendment establishes thedistribution of captioned media and other adapted materials, as somethingdiffprpnt from the traditional discretionary programs. The removal ofsection 652 from EHA is intended also to emphasize the availability ofthese distribution services to all ages of handicapped persons, not just toschool aged handicapped children, and to affirm that these distributionservices also be accessible to those who are involved with handicappedindividuals.

This amendment does not affect the research, developmenmt, and evaluationof captioned media and other adapted materials authorized under section 653

307

of tett, er the 1011ml:4,100 of appropriations for itch activities.

The amendment, although limited to the distribution of .:aptioned mod14 andother adapted modia, define: distribution broadly to give the =crotarymaximum flexibiliti. For example, the oendment establishes a "oan serviceof captioned films and educational media for the purpose of making Suchmaterials available In the United States for nonprofit purposes to handl-CaPPed individuals, parents of the handicapped individuals, 4nd otherpersons directly involved in activities for the Advancement of the handi-capped, in accordance with engnIftion: prescribed by the Secretary, Theamendment lists the processes by 411101 the %ecretary is authorized to

acquire films 404 other educational media; provide training related to theuse of educational media for the handicapped; utilize the facilities andservices of other government agencies; and accept gifts, contributions, andvoluntary and unconpensated sovice ot individuals and organizations,

vURTI1ER OBSERVATIONS

Captioned Films has been a service designed to meet 4 specific comuinica-tion deficit of the hearing impaired, The basis on which the rights todistribute films i- negotiated includes the premise that teal -iewers,borrowing films of no charge, will not reduce the audience 'of films incommerciil theaters, This amendment would remove any ques' in that cap-tioned films should be loaned to other audiences.

It would remove a means of assisting deaf persons in the )f new tech-nology if the language of the amendment Was interpreted )wly as to

exclude the exploration of new technology in making educi, andcultural information accessible to deaf persons. SUCH EX! qA IS

specifically included by this amendment.

Since deaf persons make a substantial investment in the technology for

viewing captioned films or television, any establishment of rental or usage.fees for the viewing of films/video materials would be unjust, Deaf per-sons must currently organize to purchase viewing equipment and must payreturn postage for borrowed films, Charges for rental and usage fees arenot authorized by this amendment.

In order to promote the effective utilization of captioned materials, itmay be appropriate from time to time to develop original materials. If thelanguage of the Amendment were interpreted narrowly, the development ofneeded materials might he precluded, Such development is specificallypermitted.

It is important that teachers, parents, and others concerned with advancingthe interests of the handicapped have access to the educational materialsand media available through this program. However, this amendment does not

308

Senator WEIMER. Well, I thank you very, very much for yourstatement, and also for the expert services that are being providedat the American School for the Deaf.

That will conclude this set of hearings, and the committee willstand in recess.

Thank you very much(Whereupon, at 11:38 a.m., the subcommittee adjourned, subject

to the call of the Chair.]

OVERSIGHT OF THE VOCATIONAL REHABILITA-TION ACT AND THE EDUCATION OF THEHANDICAPPED ACT, 1983

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 23, 1983

U.S. SENATE,SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED,

COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES,Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m., in roomSD-430, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator Lowell Weicker,Jr. (chairman of the subcommittee), presiding.

Present: Senators Weicker and Thurmond.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR WEICKER

Senator WEICKER. The subcommittee will come to order.Today, we continue our review of the discretionary programs

under the Education for the Handicapped Act. These discretionaryprograms were designed to complement the body of the law by tar-geting areas that deserve special consideration. From research toearly childhood development, to personnel preparation, these pro-grams have offered a support and demonstration system to insurethat a comprehensive range of services is available for all handi-capped children.

The Federal commitment to these discretionary programs en-ables successful implementation of the act. I look forward today toreviewing the accomplishments of these programs and consideringchanges so that we can be even more effective in meeting the edu-cational needs of the handicapped.

Now, I would ask at the outset that all witnesses please restricttheir oral testimony to 5 minutes or less; all statements will be in-cluded in their entirety in the record. The reason for the request isnot lack of interest on the part of the chairman or the staff or themembers of this subcommittee, but rather to accommodate all inthe sense of their being heard, and in the sense of also leaving op-portunity for questions to be asked. And if one person steps veryfar over the line, it does a disservice to all the other witnesses whoare scheduled to appear before the committee. Believe me, the diffi-cult spot that it puts the chairman in is that the cause which all ofyou articulate is one that deserves to be heard for hours on end byall the people in this country, and it puts me in the awkward posi-tion of having to cut witnesses off, and I do not want to be put inthat position. It is just a matter of courtesy to your fellow workers

(309)

3

310

in the field to have the oppoi'lunity to articulate the hopes and theaspirations of the various constituencies that they represent.

So I really would appreciate it if you could stick to the time limi-tations.

I understand, incidentally that we are all set with the interpret-er, and that is good.

I have the honor, incidentally, before we start, of introducingsome young people who, as I understand it, are here as the resultof the work of the Close-Up Foundation, which brings 15,000 highschool students per year to the District of Columbia, to the Capitol,for 1 week of seminars on government. ThiS week, we have about70 students from Penn State, and I wonder if those students whoare here with Close-Up might stand up so that we might recognizethem. [Applause.]

It is a great pleasure to have you here.We will begin with our first panelMr. Robert R. Lauritsen, the

division manager of the St. Paul Technical Vocational Institute,and Dr. Thomas Bellamy, director of, the specialized training pro-gram for the University of Oregon who will speak to us about sec-ondary and post-secondary education programs.

It is a pleasure to have you here, and I see we have a third gen-tleman with us, and I wonder if that third individual might alsointroduce himself. 1 know Dr. Bellamy, and I see Dr. Lauritsen.Who is the other gentleman we have here with us?

Mr. LAURITSEN. The gentleman with me is Mr. Eric Blumenfeldfrom Westport, Conn. He is a student at St. Paul Technical Voca-tional Institute.

Senator WEICKER. Good. He is very welcome, indeed, and it isnice to have him join us.

Dr. Bellamy, of course; I had the opportunity of hearing you tes-tify in Hartford 2 years ago, very eloquent testimony, I might add,while I was just at the outset of being educated in this whole area,and you clearly contributed greatly to that education. It is nice tohave you here today.

Dr. BELLAMY. Thank you, Senator.Senator WEICKER. Now, I do not know how you gentlemen care

to proceed, but you handle it in any way you deem fit.

STATEMENT OF DR. ROBERT R. LAURITSEN, DIVISION MANAGER,ST. PAUL TECHNICAL VOCATIONAL INSTITUTE, ST. PAUL,MINN., AND DIRECTOR, REGIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAM FORDEAF STUDENTS; AND DR. THOMAS G. BELLAMY, DIRECTOR,SPECIALIZED TRAINING PROGRAM, UNIVERSITY OF OREGON,AND ASSISTANT PROFESSOR. OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND RE-HABILITATION.Mr. LAURITSEN. I'would be happy to start, Mr. Chairman.My name is Bob Lauritsen, director of the regional program for

deaf students at St. Paul TVI. I am also the hearing son of deafparents. I am pleaseu to speak on behalf of regional education pro-grams.

I am very delighted that this subcommittee has arranged for theinterpreter, Bob Chandler, and I am also pleased to report to you

311

that Bob Chandler was an intern at St. Paul TVI while a graduatestudent at Gallaudet College.

Regional education programs for deaf and other handicappedpersons grew out of initiatives of the Bureau of Education for theHandicapped and the Rehabilitation Services Administration.These two agencies responded to many priorities of the mid-sixtiesthat emphasized the need for one National Technical Institute forthe Deaf and regional post-secondary schools for the deaf in inte-grated settings.

Regional education programs became a reality through researchand demonstration grants in 1968 and 1969. For 5 years, we devel-oped fully integrated, mainstreamed programs in institutions thathistorically served hearing students only. We established supportservice systems. We were breaking down discrimination barrierstoward handicapped persons. We found that large numbers of deafpersons were getting success in environments that historically hadserved only hearing persons.

We needed to continue our programs in 1974, so we undertook avery exhaustive search for funding. We looked for about 2 or 3years, and the only way we found to continue our program wasthrough Federal legislation. We were very pleased that Congress-man Al Quie of Minnesota took the lead and became a majorauthor of the legislation that we are addressing today.

The initial intent of the legislation was for deaf students. Sincethat time, the program has expanded to include other disabilitygroups. Twenty-nine additional grants have been awarded. Of these29, 7 have been in the field of deafness and 22 for other popula-tions.

We feel that this comittee should take great pride in the resultsof regional education programs. Deaf persons and other handi-capped populations have really penetrated postsecondary educationbarriers. But we feel there are three realities that must be faced.First, program accessibility for handicapped persons has increasedmuch more than funding accessibility. Second, deafness and someother handicapping conditions are low-incidence handicaps andshould be dealt with as national priorities. The regional approachprovides a critical mass of students, a consortium of specializedprograms, and permits concentration of resources. A third reality,one that we faced in 1974, is that the majority of States cannotmaintain specialized programs over time and cannot pick up thecosts of specialized programs after Federal funding is exhausted.

Our programsthe ones in the field of deafnessprovide train-ing in one technical vocational institute, two community colleges,and a university. Each program maintains a minimum supportservice system that includes a preparatory or orientation program,counseling, interpreting, note-taking, tutoring, auditory training,and other related services. Our training offers peer group supportand offers training that leads to jobs.

Regional education programs have broken the stereotype thatdeaf persons faced in jobs from 1817 to the late 1960's. We havetrained over 3,500 deaf persons in more than 200 career areas.

We feel that we are cost-effective programs; with the minimumFederal investment of dollars, we buy full access into host institu-tions that currently have about $835 million in costs and annual

J _L

312

operating budgets. We also are able to maintain state-of-the-arttraining for technology. Over the years, we have done a number ofcost-effectiveness studies, and we find that on average, our gradu-ates will repay the excess cost for training through Federal taxespaid in 2 years.

Members of this committee are very well-informed about the ru-bella bubble. We have conducted our own study, and our findingsare very similar to what you have. We know that the rubellabubble is real. We feel that 86 percent of high school graduatesover the next few years will be seeking postsecondary training;that 63 percent will seek 2-year postsecondary training, and that aminimum of 75 percent of all students will need some kind of spe-cialized support system that the regional education programs offer.

Mr. Chairman, there are thousands of young deaf persons likeEric Blumenfeld here. Eric is a product of a mainstream programin Connecticut. Upon graduation from high school, Eric attendedNorthwestern Community College in Winstead, Conn. 'He withdrewafter one semester. For 2 years, Eric went from job to job, seekingjob satisfaction and a career. He found neither. Gallaudet _Collegeand NTID were not viable alternatives for Eric. After an extensivesearch, Eric selected St. Paul TVI. He began his studies in 1981.The course offerings and the friendships he has developed and thesupport services have provided Eric the chance to enjoy success.

Eric has with him some of the things he has made at TVI. Theseare things that are going to be used in our technological society.These are things that form the basis for Eric to go on, earn hisliving, be it Connecticut, be it some other place. He will find suc-cess in life because of the training he has received, and it is theseregional education programs that have made that possible.

Senator WEICKER. Thank you very much.[The prepared statement and additional material of Mr. Laurit-

sen follow:)

813

Tentim.ny

In !luppnr' of

Education for the Handicapped Actwith emphasis on

'regional Vocational, Adult and Pont-Secondary program,

Before theUnited Staten Senate

Subcommittee on the And capped

The Honorable Lowell Welcher Jr., ChairmanMarch 23, 1983

by

hobert R. Lauritsen, St. Paul Technical Vocational Institute

J

21-974 0-83--21

314

Mr. Ohaitman. My name i% Il ly bauti,Nen, I am Oitoc(ot ot tla . le,

E lucat ion Program for hear Students at it P,ntl Techn ica I VW at tonal licit tut,

(St. Paul TV!). I am also the hearing son of deaf patent.. I am pleatied to speak

en 1,,natt ..1 Pnnitdina.

PM: INTENT oF .d.,'EloN 625

Regional Education Programs for dent persons and other handicapped petsons

grew out of initiatives of the LIWOAU of Education for the Handicapped and the

Rehabilitation services Administration. These two agencies responded to national

prloritles of the mid-IgbO's that emphasized the need for one National Technical

Institute for the Deaf, and regional post-secondary schools for the deaf in

integrated settings. (The Natlunal Technical Institute for the Deaf became a reality

in June 1965) Regional Education Programs became a reality In 19611 -69 through

two year Pesearch and Demonstration grant awards. Regional Education Programs

pioneered in fully integrated/mainstreamed post-secondary education settings. Support

service systems were established. Discrimination barriers towards handicapped

persons were broken down. Large numbers of deaf students found success in pre-

dominantly hearing environments. An exhaustive funding search was undertaken to

maintain these programs at the expiration of grant.monies. The only solution

was federal legislation. Congressman Al Quie was the major author of the legislation.

The original intent of this legislation was to provide regional programs for deaf

students. The Program has since expanded to include other disability groups.

Four Regional Sducation Programs for Deaf Students have been maintained since 1975.

Twenty-nine additional grants have been awarded. Of these 29 awards, 7 have been

made for deafness, and 22 awards for other handicapped populations.

'The Babbidge Report, National Workshop on Improved Opportunities for the Deaf,The Alexander Graham Bell Association, The Conference of Executives of AmericanSchools for the Deaf, the Council for Exceptional Children, the U.S. SenateCommittee on Labor and Public Welfare plus numerous government officials expressedthe same need.

321LEST COPY !If) r:

315

:1111 1101:!

rt.1 ;1... ,1 .11 Ion Plo./Ii1111,1.

(I;;;O! I I'd'' -0;,..eel,,

I O , n . 1 . . 1 . 1 1 l . ) 1 ) . 1 , 1 1 1 / ) , . 1 1 1 . ) 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 l ' ) 1 ) 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 1,1 faced, Pirst , ptogram

.1) I'. 1 ha, 1n 11.10,1 111,11 1 11.1.117 111.111 ). 1111,1111,1 fnr

ft m1 1 1., .11 111, y . .10 .11.1, 1,1111., I %WI 1111,1 )1,111,11,11.111W; ),111,1111,11111)

tia . a 1l,I .S 7111,11 1f .11i I 1;1.111 ) .11'.11 with )).1) 1,a).11 priori? 10s,

t,05 lu m.:; u. itudents, provides e natinal

.1-ligm If ,_1.1:1 rograrn,, and permits coacentrat 1011 Of resources, A

tr./ I )1,11. )_)11 mtp.rity ..f states cannot maintain specialized programs

1111 k ul the of prOrlf all, atter federal grant

its

A f!RIEF REDITNAI. EDUCATION PROGRAMS

PeP/Loll-ll I:Au...Ilion Program:, for Deaf Students provide training in one technical

vocational institute; two overrun ity colleges and a university. Each program maintains

a minimum ., -pp it .service system that includes a preparatory or orientation program,

1, tutnrinj, auditory training, and other related

rvi.1, a. l-S,lional Education Programs offer strong peer groups and training that

lead: t :ghs. :-.Pponal Education Program, have broken the stereotyped jobs

tnat face! -leaf people from 17T0 to the late 1060's. Over 3500 deaf persons have

been trained in more than 20. .rart2fIr areas.

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF REG/ClIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS

Regional Edu:at ion Programs are cost - effective. First, the Federal investment

of :2,267,-5,30 in in four programs brought full access into host institutions

that have physical plant costs and annual operating budgets of $835,000,000. In

our technological society schools such as St. Paul ?VI provide state of the art

training for rurrent and emerging technologies. A second area of cost-effectiveness

'AAA A

+10...A.

316

if ,1111 1.'1, 21 In II 11 2 ttt a I. [VI it 1 lat.,

tttI 41 II,. 11 21111111 1 hum It' lot II 1 I+e', l'" In 'W" 'l 1, ii.

211-1

Ilona . 1 1 I 11.0 I t ill I this yu-. 0401 tlt. I it.f mill1 altt,tit he ',loll,,t 1 nil IVI t1,1 1111', t 1,1 .. 111 I.it y 100.1

1 hlt,. 1111., 1111 0,y , f iv', 11,17 with .14111, ,t l'h

it Loi , ; tho 1.11,1,10 t:t It 11 I hi ih II 1,1 ;at 0 t

t.t iIth wig; that t. I p.r will yt 11 .t I:1,111y

11,11,11, and that a minimum ..1 teal stIplenr, t ainitt 1 welwill 1

f t * 1 4 1 1 14 * ,elated tl+i 11.1 a l Ind ".1 support. ,etvl

1151, 1 , , 1 1 / 1 1 ' ' - . 3 1 111.11111:II

There az th,..1,Iti h, of yr.oin ',eat Soot like Fri.: ,

Erl, in a prodLiCt of a trailltrearred pre-School-12 program. pon

gl aolttat ,r1 It on high s, Into!. Eric at terole.1 NotthweIttern Community College, Ielinsteal,

r'mnu.a1 wit, 'ale voluntarily Witharew after one semester. For two year: Eric:

went fain I .1. to 11111 SU0k1111 1oh nati,fatAtor .3,1 a career, Ile fount neither,

;2 1 1.11 it .14. I :11 11 wort, not viable alt,rn It- ice. St, P2.11 TVI pt.t., 10 1

the Lest_ r,s3ible z logart his studies at St. 1..2.11. TVI in C. -. 11,41, rho

,florin I "1,1ettr group support arol support servi,:es for ,loaf it '7 tont,

have proVI led Sri, the c.put,r.t.uitty enjoy success. The skills Eric 1., a...Tiiring

1 1 prr.are, a and hi... ...011 place in Ot!. 5.,11.0ty. Fuji 0.11

FlAtacati,1 PrDqrams have ma,le this po,,It.1.11.

317

APPENDId:

1. Support Service Model

2. Profit Statement

3. Loss Statement

4. Major Areas of Study

5. St. Paul TVI Rubella Survey

6. Brief Summary of Post Secondary Programs forthe Deaf

7. Critical Mass - A Definition

II

I

3 19

'.1 I.III IV 1

I I I .1A 11111111

....'1.4.1 14

11)4 I I. .. ...1

1,1i 4

1 is :111.1'

. 1 1 IA114,1 .1.1/II

, II 1, . 41, 111 , 4

141, I

I , ' 11..

.1 I I 44".. 00 4.1.) 0,140,1i)

t1111

1111, I 1 . .; Ira. 1,, 1,1 F. .1, .1/.tr.., '1/01'1 ',1 II

A:. l'/-1.11.11. /.1:; /0,1 ;.:

t ; . 1 9 7 9 . ! 1 . P o c ! I t a.: 0,7.311410.11 130 4.

.1 t St. rI TVI t 44.1 t tIc

9,10 I Pre (j 5i. e/1' :te thele 1*.e 130 4J,jll'IjlI,it 1)4

tl !VI 61.1( tceducatto.: 0'; fet,S.

32 r7,17 rr.41.dadr,

'1'1411 Ai 'll.

Poi, I

:121

MA Jos AREAS Or bilna

A-c TechAccoueling

Accounting/hookkeopIngAdministration and NupervtaionAirCratt Mint / TechAnthropologyNiteroi ArtsArchitectural Engineer MillArtArt GeneralArt HistoryArt lit DimensionalArt 11 DimensionalAuto bodyAuto MechanicsA-V HopairBakingBanking FinanceBiologyBookkeoping/CloricalBricklayingBuilding MaintenanceDUSindliti

Business AdministrationBusiness EducationBusiness Training CertificateCabinet MakingCafeteria Service WorkCarpentryCentral ServiceChemical Lab 1Te^hnologythemicel TechChemistryChild Care DevelopmentCivil Eng. TechCommercial ArtCommunicative DisordersComputer ScienceConstruction DraftingCook/ChefCooperative Mid-ManagementCosmetologyCounselingCustom ApparelData EntryData OperationsData ProcessingData Processing/Computer OperationsDeaf EdDental AssistingDental Lab TechDesign TechDev. Studies

Diesel MechanicsDraftingDramaDry Cleaning

Early (I41tiles)d pd.Eath ScienceEconomicsEducation AdministrationEducation PsychologyElectricityElectro Mechanical TechnologyElectro Eng, TechElectronicsElementary Ed.

EngineeringEngineering GraphicsEnglishEnglish as a Nitcond LanguageEnvironmental TechExceptinnel fillldFarm ManagementFinanceFine ArtsFloristryFood Service AidFood ServicesFood TechForestryForest HarvestingGeneral ArtsGeneral BusinessGeneral Clerical StudiosGeneral Math and TechnologyGeneral Office Practice

Clerk TypistFigure ClerkFile ClerkGeneral Clerk

GEDGeologyGraphicsGraphic ArtsHealth EdHealth ScienceHighway TechnologyHistoryHome EconomicsHorologyHorticultureHotel and nestairant CookingHumanitiesIndustrial ArtsIndustrial HydraulicsInhalation TherapyInterior DesignJournalismKey PunchKitchen Helping ProgramLandscape TechLiberal StudiesLibrary Tech

32L

322

Licensed Practical NurseLinguisticsMachine ShopMachine TechMachine Tool ProcessesMTP PrecisionMachinists TechManagementMarine CarpentryMarine TechnologyMarketingMass CommunicationMathMechanical DraftingMedical Lab AssistantMobile Home RepairModern WoodMotor Vechile TechMusicNurse AidNursingOffice AdministrationOffice Clerical.Office OccupationsOphithalmic DispensingOptical TechPainting and DecorationPan African Studiespetroleum Engineering TechPhilosophyPhysical EducationPhysical SciencePhysical TherapyPhysicsPhotographyPhoto TechPhoto TypesettingPlastics TechPlumbingPolitical SciencePoodle GroomerPower SewingPrinting Tech/GAProduction ArtProduction MachineProduction Sheet MetalPsychologyPublic AdministrationRadio TV BroadcastingRadio TV FilmReading and MathRecreationRecreation Tech.Religious ScienceRespiratory Care TechScienceSec. Ed

32,3

Sec. StudienSERVESheet MetalSmall Engine RepairSocial Human ServicesSociologySolar EnergySpecial EducationSpeech CommunicationSteam EngineTailoringTheaterTool and DieTraffic ExplorationTrailer/Camper RebuildTruck DrivingTruck MechanicsUpholosteryWatchmaking

Water And Waste Tech.WeldingDevelopmental Majors:

Dev. BasicDev. BusinessDev. CabinetmakingDev. Chemical TechDev. ElectricityDev. ElectronicsDev. GOPDev. KeypunchDec. Machine ShopDev. MTPDev. MedicalDev. Welding

323

PAULIVIIWALLA.2FIVEY.

1182

rf_anh;!ard(7,f H.arin,

19611.306

7:::'ected 39 E68 6721 5675 3952 26,975

of r:rad,a:::7.:co. a:

1..04 Of: 186

1: 42..54 5001 3419 1837 ;-.147

Est:7.3%-adpf Gradates that

w111Pc.:-5,condary Education

a: the Fa...:51i..rcatetool

1742 1A5 1.109;2F 7,393

C,fthrll WIll

i.d:,cat :on at both

tha:. noate Love: a.7z1

:t Ion at.rt.atb

1923 151 19E5 1966

6rac:ed 7,121 5993 635.7 4405 3120 23,140

all gra'seeking Post-Secondary

Eduzati,:r ti.at

w111 re.3.ulreeither the E6,:ational Model of Ga1laudet

College or NT1L

or one or moreSupportive Services

of the St. Paul 1W1 r.odelin order

to nava a .accessfulPost-Sezondary Edncat

lot Exitariencc.

Sect-ices include,(1- Preparatory

Pr :at or F.:,ec:al

Orientation (2)Couhseliny 13)

:nterpreting - oral or raosl 4,

(5) TotorIng (6)Auditory Training

(7) Speciallred);edia (8) Sociali-

zation/RecreationPro-4rams.

1982 1983 1984 1965 1956 72AL

2457 4745 4E28 3516 1963 17,5%72

frnT r(t-TY

324

EIVE_SUMARY STAIEMEMTS ON TVI'SRUBELLA SURVEY

THE RUBELLA BUBBLE IS DRAMATIC FOR 1983, 1984, AND 1985.

63% OF DEAF AND HARD OF HEARINGGRADUATES WILL SEEK POST-

SECONDARY EDUCATION IN TWO YEAR PROGRAMS.

22% OF DEAF AND HARD OF HEARINGGRADUATES WILL SEEK POST-

SECONDARY EDUCATION AT THEBACCALAUREATE LEVEL.

86% OF DEAF AND HARD OF HEARING GRADUATESWILL SEEK POST-

SECONDARY EDUCATION AT EITHER THE TWO-YEAR OR FOUR-YEARLEVEL.

75% OF ALL DEAF AND HARD OF HEARINGGRADUATES GOING ONTO

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION WILLREQUIRE SPECIALIZED EDUCATIONAND/OR SUPPORT SERIVCES,

325

PuSi SECONDARY PROGRAMS FQ.11 THE DEAF

1982-83 ACADEMIC YEAR

Data obtained from the

1983 Guide to College/Career Programs for Deaf Students

Publishing date

SrUDENT

.---POPULATION

- Late Spring 1983

NUMBER OF

PROGRAMS

1 - 10 30

11 - 20 32

21 30 19

31 7

31 -130 6

101 -200 6 (California State University

at Northridge; LaPuente

Valley Vocational School;

Los Angeles Trade-Tech

College; Ohlone College;

Southwest Collegiate Institute

for the Deaf; St. Paul TVI)

201 -900 0

Over 500 2 (Gallaudet, N.T.I.D.)

Information obtained from the Center for Assessment and Demographic

Studies, Gallaudet College.

'.1) '4

,) t, .

326

CRITICAL MASS

...A MINIMUM NUMBER OF STUDENTS TO FORM A COHESIVE

PEER GROUP THAT PERMITS INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES TO

PREVAIL IN DEVELOPING ADEQUATE INTERPERSONAL

RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN THE PEER GROUP; THE DEVELOPMENT

AND CONFIDENCE OF SELF IN THE PEER GROUP TO COMPETE

ADEQUATELY IN THE LARGER ACADEMIC AND SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT,

THE HEARING ENVIRONMENT, THE PRECISE MINIMUM NUMBER

OF LIKE STUDENTS TO FORM A CRITICAL MASS WILL VARY

FROM PROGRAM TO PROGRAM AND WILL BE DIRECTLY

DEPENDENT UPON THE SIZE OF THE HOST INSTITUTION.

327

I ,. Htpt it

.hillItIt,fl r'

ti t. 11 ft

(,1121 457-4140

Division Manager, Special Ural/vimSt. Paul Thchnical lbcational Tnstitute(St. Paul WI)

.f"Director of St. Paul WI's several Prrxiraro for DeafStudent:3, hllitiorally mai ;es programa for allbandicapied, ihsa.lvantaied and special r.opulation,i4;orisible for all administrative duties includinglocal, state and federal reports; budgets; personnel;l'ogrun mIll.-11,r,nt and clew!! opre ri t .

i! r.v Division Manager, Sf>ocial tbeds, St. Paul WI, 19G9to present,

State of Minnesota, Division of Vocational Fehabilitation,Consultant-Deaf and (lard -of- Charing 1962-1969.

Dayton's St. Paul, Petail ltirchandising 1959-1962.

State of Minnesota, Departrent of Public Welfare,Services for the Deaf, Counselor, 1957-1959,

I IPti!xTh 'Ilrinp Corps, Ibli.ot.1): pilot, PAri< of Captain,

Ditt, Duty, 1154-1963,

St. Olaf College 1950-1952.

University of Minnesota,B.A. Major Econcetics 1954

University of MinnesotaSi,:tech Sciences, Patholoqy and iudiolo-r 1969

In excess of 36 graduate credits teyond

Innusota AsSOciation for Loaf

irerican Deafness and Pehabilitation Association(Past President, P.R,W.A.D.)

Fegistery of Interpreters of the Deaf;:itional and Minnesota Chanter

:12mher, Minnesota Council on the Ilan .icaopedGovernor A.ppointee

:b.mber, Thsk Force for the HearingMinnesota Division of VOcational Fehabilitation

s2rtorna Club, International

Clnt",trence of Cducational .*.?Plinistx,itorsthe Leaf; Chairman, CAro2r Frisca ton Cai:i tree

Convention of irerican Instructors of the [leaf

Council of Directors

PAI

328

I. .111 V PI %it 11111111 /VPI.-Milit.i011

nnenota 'cat I onal Assur:i alien

Mituesota Foundation for .tter Ilearinq and ITeech,President

Dust organizational activities include active participationin the Professional Rehabilitation tiorkers with the Multre af, Co:mei 1 of Organizations serving the Deaf,minnesota E'Liter Veal rode y, ftd ha tha Missions ofthe Amvrican letheran Church, original advisory Wardof the ,Critumnication :kills Program of the NitionalN;:;o,:i.it.lon of the Graf, hlvisory armittee for tIeihivei city of Illinois RSA Project on interpreting anda variety of other local, state and national organizations.

rd2ceived the NRCA Elkins Counselor of the Year /ward 1965;Min of the Year hoard, Special Services Peoognition,University of Wisconsin-Stout, 1971; Minnesota Jr.National Association of the Ceaf, , 1972: Special Leadership,ward, St. Paul 'IVI, 1979.

Sign language instructor at numerous locations inMinnesota and Viistern Wisconsin; active participant intelevision serics for deaf persons, "ILIA, See This",WICA,Minneapolis; served on advisory ccemitteeo for studiesfor several Governors of Minnesota. Served as '117:clinicalAssistance consultant to several states regarding deliveryof rehabilitation services'and vocational education fordeaf individuals.

Approximately twenty-five prepared pacers have beenpublished in several professional journals and proceedingsof state and national workshops. graduation addre,have been presented in Minnesota, North Dakota and:`1..A4 York. Tbstirnony on legislation has been presentedbefore both legislative Houses in Minnesota and beforeboth the United States Senate and the United States!Muse of Wpresentatives. Special projects initiatedinclude: interim Study Projects for College Students, aspecial project for multi handicapped deaf adults,summer jobs for hearing imDaired youth, initiation ofCounselor Aides for the Deaf, Career Assessment programsfor deaf youth,projects for deaf-blind cersons in post-secondary education, Interpreter training, trilingualprairmrs for deaf persons from foreign countries,. andspecial media projects for deaf persons.

Hearing son of deaf parents. Fluent in all communicationsystems used by deaf people. Committed to equality ofall people, with emphasis on equality for deaf people andall other special populations.

329

:;pp .n .!,t.

In Euppott ofEducation tot the Handicupped Act

with embhaula; 1-1Reqlonal, V"cational, Adult arid punt-Secondry Preqramu

rur tftNI 1,1 .1h!!; !;1.11.110

.:111,,,MMithq, on the Handicdpped

Thu ILmotahle Lowell Weicker Jr., Ch.limin

April 14, 1U133

by

Robert R. Lauritt:en, St. Paul biehnical Voc4tional Ireititnte

84sr21-1174 0 S3 ---22 4

tnunst.lue N1;

11(1W would you compare the tango Of !;,.rvicen provided !,,y the federally

funded nort-se:ridary Lruititut ions with 1)1e 75 or :lore institutions

(19Ii1 I', COI t."1/'..111,,tt* Prouinunn for leaf Students) which also

provide p ,a. orelar y programs for deal sto4nt se

Hespunser

The 19111 Guide t.0 college/Career Programs for leaf students which

is scheduled for publication lots Spring will show 102 post-secondary

programs for deaf students. Eighty-eight of these i,rograms serve 113s5 than

fifty students. Of the non-federal ly funded programs only three California

programs serve more than 100 students. Gallaudet Col loge . the NTH.),

tali fornia ;;rat. university at Northridge, Seattle community College and

St. Paul TV1 all serve more than one hundred students.

A Cr it ica I mass or deaf students is essential to create a learning

environment for deaf students. In integrated educational environments

one hundred students most often form a minimum critical mass of students.

Deaf students are isolated from mainstream education because of communication

barriers. A crit ical mass of students forms a support group for students

which permits individuals to develop positive self-image which in turn

enhances education. Positive self -imago promotes integration of deaf

students with hearing students.

Critical mass provides for cost-effecti,e .7n) -imunt support services

for deaf. students. One interpreter, notetaker, or tutor, can provide services

for multiple numbers of students in a career major. Programs that do not

have a critical mass of students must provide the same kinds of support

services to smaller numbers of students thus driving costs up.

331

III ILO.. I It II I I. ;', I .11111 1.10/11 I111

ried and I led .0 di it jos,

I It , ht. I, ,, .1 1,1 IL 11,11

I m.II 1`1,11 V.1 I ILI I'Lli 111, .1V ,I'L IIIL JLIIL IIIr

10,1 IL L LI ILIL I 11,111. AI LILLLLI I LLILLI I Lit I I./.,11,1iLl I II/II

IL L /LIM I ,I, II, 11;11.1,d o i de antic of s Isom lowezei high a. 1, ItI0t, n:, Thu t Poqii,11,11.

I, /HI )1 t 1,5111 t i! In udent lu buildI!11 ,,,,,,,,, I I 1,1101,11 I Lig, 1,11 11111,W: I Vu 111,

Lir L1,1,1,11 by pI,V /din') hr.,' f4" pt.cial learners,imvi nu I r,iini roi tutc,rigq, pi onee ill in 1.;;;1,,

h . ,1111,0. WI t.hin f I ,f ifinl St Paul

14.put .1t. i on for nerving bile difficult to ILIVI'Ve.

OW, 'L II L.! inn procedure ror pri,grams for deaf ntu;binis.I11, le rally tun II: I l I0I r.un:: I III to the ;02rut illy of t he Office ofSp.,i 1 rducat ion and ,ire re Ill red to mIinl ain .;lari;101..lii of excellence.

.1r1,1 1,, I fundi t he tIn i red states is at a critical level.

These funding eri ;.; ; may well ;it fect. non- fo;lerally funded programs. Historical lyin, non- tedcrol funded prorraim; exist on tenuous and f rairi le funding.

St. Paul TVI ha risistently Iiiilir.ed federal funding to secure

add i 0 iona 1 funding. In 1082 St. Paul vi expended $620,000 federal funds

.,nil Was able to Secure an additional $430,000.. The aggregate funding in

excess of $1,000,000 coupled with enormous amounts of like and kind contri-but ion ..T2 required to maintain minimum support services for deaf students.

S

114161,.1 4'11'1'11 131`..11'11 t1131.N I13.)

1:313111,11133.) pur `,3111,1113,11 1101 "11,.."71,pa (..33(1 11001 1.10.4 pout (11: 0311' o0o..3331 PIT

Tutu t3.3_;(11 pull 12,111(14 (.114(.4 put. 111,01 Ic3D 1o(rti,111.3) o:( ot.11131i.10411! 1313 (1.10)40

W1'31130131 t(! 1,,131.3.2 IPti"If33,1 11131(311.1 63111 :II 111m a 1,1N put' (1..,113(;) 1;11.11I.111.1)

J b 11 11111 /1...-3131..S1 031' 11'114 OA

jl Ii i3l-1( 113131 (1111 J0 6103114, sn.-3.1r3,3:.(31 113111130.1 133113 11,3(31 uodti 61311.11 1' Pull

.WI :, Dql Jaulol :pop ;It() 40 (313,-.0( ottl uo s,.-11anj 41144 Jivl4 3

S:101131,01, 01 11'3 01.0, 431 13111.1111:1,1101,

03(4. 'AllUmuulon 1v.n,1 041 puP 1313!iw-11113,21 7cntl 011 .40 ill, , 11,111

111.1[1 01 01,1I p1P ,;1111.1 .11103 :Ili], Al 11111101110:, 11131(1 Ill -,1,,Illt11,01I 011'

!Mt' It 111,<11I /111,1 i l',.1:11`LII 'p.4111,.1.1111 13)3-3) .1113,

'A 113:1.,/(113111 30(1'61 I' IMP 113:. 111,11:161.0 061 ' 011)31 1.W-I 11'11. T 11.0111(,,1

,c/ ,11- !AIWA, IA 11,1

.1 11.0U1.1 1',1111! t3(t1.r(1.3(( 1.....(i/,43 /Hit 111 11 3341334

A 11 r!,0,, ,t, ,111,14.3111 in ':,.1t'., 11111 11 ill:q1114!; 41

!;11,, 111111 ,1,1,1111.1 Al I 1110., Iv 111.1 0..1 11111

FA 13(141:an6

111,1 (:11

31111 ,11,1111, I

1130 Jon(, AIM) 11111 61,1 ii.:)11110 11:11111 11.11 (.3 131

11011, /111'1,ln., .1 1141(1 r.1111'11. ,1,1 1110 1141441 11131311.; tri

../11 11',!.11,/, '1.113 "11.11313) V.01,11,110111, 3,l A 1,1'111 1,111,111111

11.,1,1.11- .3( I' 1 I I' In !'II 1..1k) 1,.1.1 -11'. !Willi 1331 1111'1 11,1

l0 11111114U, 11.11.,I13) 161 1,1.1.111 ' t 11.4m lit)! 1l

It, wt. it 1,111111': I' pill' 1,,11 1,1,111,11 .141 10 1111VA

1l . " " ti "111 in'I'"f I 4'1 :.I ;1'31 (10111111 6116E

7.1:1;

333

Ini,,lvr 411 1 11 1 111 1111 I 1 h. hn.1i, of 1 11'1, 1 11 1 1 Y lorded

inititutagn. Intounal liaison is mains . tined l.y a varirt, ut !I f

It. I .o 4r. w th tit innt.ltntionn. Nutahln nru the relationship',

1 4 , , h. II, I IMO I it rout itul ion:: al l ur shots are

d c , 1 4 , t t e d I i viding the 1:d :,ervice to dual ::tudent

rdue 1.14.1rl, Istint ail, cl:r a: re 1 at b with ::144ci a 1

1. I 101i ./11.11. P,'1'...,,n1"1.. The majority or y

.p .0111,0-o; rr :artio.1 leavers are nut eligible for Gallaudet College or

STln. within IL it 4, I I.,. 11, are `arge numbers of deaf

persons who have :multiple handicaps. Regional Education Programs ot In

wide tango of training objectives that are suited for low to high achievers.

sire accept ed without regard t.o ad di t iona 1 handicaps if it

can h4.! 1..1t.C:d that an individual student can profit finis eitherre.jular 1,7.4 tat or modified course offerings. Deaf persons with

addit tonal handicaps of blindness, physical handicap, learning disorders,

4:erebral palsy, ePilepsy, behavior problems and others are among the

populations rout inely served. Deafnnss often occurs as a result of a

medical _:ynr,me. less discrete secondary handicaps can be identifiC!I among

the pcpulation!: served. Regional Education Programs serve high risk Ludents.

St. Paul VI did serve one student who had normal hearing but whose vr\cal

chords had been totally destoyed by consumption of lye. The student communicated

expresively by sign language. Viet Sam veterans are served.' There are

an increasing number of deaf persons who are locating in the United States

from foreign countries who are seeking post-secondary education. ror these

students the_ teaching of ESL is critical. A dramatic increase in the numbers

of deaf students with multiple handicaps are seeking enrollment for the 19133-84

academic year. The leading edgb of the rubella bubble will be seeking post-

secothiry education, and as the St. Paul TVI Rubella Survey, and other

el .7

ti 'I _I

334

"m =p i,it tt I ht. It I t ttl ji,,i 1,41

ht. '°'p`^ . :It . TVI mil 1 t t

!iv I hr.,. t 104.0 ,it ii-wili. .t 11,1V1! 1401411 110141 4111 1110 H404111141

1,141,411.11 14 III ,114,1 ,4, 4111'114 1,14441111i ,it 1441144 ,110 1 11 141,14, ,1111 1,141y 14, '4401V0 !,111410tit !,

.11 11011r lovit I .t1 lily, 1,10..trii-. with

i,it 64'1,11 1411,ilii I i I .11 6.111,1,11ot I itTi ,i11,1 1 I h1tit

P P11%11111111 y ti IA, Wit h t 01:t. I Vtt tt1P1 1 !,111.14,11,, .411(1

t 414,11 ,11141 'Alf) 41 &Hit i.,41,111

.',t . vii.; !.t.kiILht who h.o.t ho.o which 14,41

1110 4,14! 411t t 111111. 14,1' 1 11 t 4'4,1111i4:,11 V441',1t i111,11 4441,14:At A

of I It, ut,tt.tr lity ,ritttria

W1114 A44411,,I, it 41,1 Pt ,tt ct,ntm-

tut tt tt .111 y Ttnttt The tmi tAtrvict: itht.b?

it! 1110 I 0,11 4, 11 41, At 14411 14,1141:Tr, 14144V1.4104,

111411 41 414144111 111,1/ ,..114 444 11 4111 t '4 II,401 1114'11

11,11011041 `/t "I 4, 4. 444 44 /../,w

rcin.lt: rt/ iee:;

t11 I v notA15, A Viet !Lim

[1,t tt Aitl(j. Ti pri.-Iiriqual Ly

,144,11 014,441 :44,44,4 41 A. III, 4,4111 .114 is, if Vi 4,444. ra.11414,11t..,,4 whiqc of the ,ttpport

`or vic ../1 I L t 1.111,, ltt ririllat ion. 'Nu, ova Lit y.

it' .1 t 1 ,xil,1 zo : permi.t, lolotits

,/` /. ,tny ttf itit 1 In 1>ti ved ,tiopropi ititely. An import ,tht.

c1V11,1t it t it th, t. Pi 1 r.itir t1f !IC, I V iC,14; f fere,1 the nt,t. it lit ion

1 0,1., iLL u.lottt, with heal itttl

335

t,!ut!it hot

Should the itnlurally funded cleat itelhoiva, lunge ion be maint nine.% (ol

Pin 1',.1.11 11~10 11,1' 111,1111 .111.'11 I fJp111,11.io t hoi fur

ilafitlic,qvui tom,' 1,,tivi 1917. 'flit

111101111,7 'i,111t:1 Cur IlEAVII/t'lor.er Look IsPiourco Cent er, 111.)1',1111 1)1 1111)

AIWA!' i !.111 0,11W:1.1 cm 1:111iCAt hill 11,1'1 1:11110.11 ion P r,Iti I dins It trice

tictohel 19111) MEATH: 111,11119 hIt tt.iou .1101 I II.: 11,110li T1Wt 11 in a

clear national nerd for HENN!, Funding for 111:ATII it appropriate under

14:gional Ed,' It ion PI ogt ats.t . Aff il I at ion with the American Council

ou 6,1.at ton 1 ..pplopriate, Thn et iginal intent of Regional Educal ion

Program,. was to pI ovOle funding for ltgi,nal Education Programs for Dear

Student s I. a ,...mnt t tt iginal intent of the law should he eontinuod

at a level appropriate to the need of ,2:.2nt.i.al :>ervices for Deaf Students.

The administ rat ion has funded other efforts Lo facilitate Handicapped Americans

in post-SUCOndary 01111G,Ilion, Rigorous peer review culminated in nrATit being

funded. 111:ATH has made a beginning at serving as a national clearinghouse.

Much remains to be done. Demographic data on exiting students, and projected

numbers of Handicapped Americans is inadequate; direct technical assistance

to post-secondary institutions needs to he expanded; college/career guides

and related documents such as those in Deafnes'; need to be made available

for Handicapped Americans; transitional prearams for Handicapped Americans

h-olving ,econdary programs and attempthot to enter t -,econdary programs

need to ho implemented; resource dw:urnents for post-secondary institution

staff need to bo developed. HEATH officials surely can expand this list.

Feaional Education Program legislation was created to meet needs of Deaf Students.

336

The need is great for the coming years for deaf students in post-secondary

education. :leclion 504, Wgional Education Program legislation and other

factory have :rented a situation in America where Handicapped Americans are

beginning to find their place in post-secondary education. HEATH as a

national clearinghouse perfotms a valuable service. More needs to be

done fur adult itandicapped Americans. Special Education (P.h. 04-142)

meets needs of K-12 students. Vocational Rehabilitation meets needs

of jobs for Handicapped Americans. Pa.lional Education Program legislation

is a vehicle lo, meeting the post.-secondaty education needs of HarnlIcapped

Americans. Expanded authority and funding for Regional Education Programs

u I, , lilt ,a,i, towards creating eoualitv for all Handicapped Americans.

337

Senator WEicimit. Why doesn't Eric describe very briefly what itis that he has brought with him.Mr. BLUMENFELD [through interpreter]. We made these, to earnmore money and get better jobs.Mr. LAURITSEN. What is this? It is pretty heavy.Mr. BLUMENFELD [through interpreter]. This is a jaw vice.Senator WELCHER. What about that? That looks to me like some-thing that if your staff screws up, you caniput their thumbs in itand then sort of come down, very slowly. [Laughter.]Mr. BLUMENFELD [through interpreter]. This is an indicator. Thisis for exact measurements, tc make sure the surface is smooth. Itmeasures exactly.This is a plumb bob.Senator WEICKER. Now, is Eric still at the school?Mr. BLUMENFELD [through interpreter]. Yes.Senator WEICKER. When does he graduate?Mr. BLUMENFELD [through interpreter]. December.Senator WEICKER. At that time, where would you expect to lookfor a jobwhat kind of industry?Mr. BLUMENFELD [through interpreter]. In my home, Connecticut.Mr. LAURITSEN. What is the name of the company you are goingto look into?Mr. BLUMENFELD [through interpreter]. Bridgeport, a big millingcompany.Mr. LAURITSEN. Bridgeport Machine.[The prepared statement of Mr. Blumenfeld follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ERIC S. BLUMENFELD

My name is Eric S. Blumenfeld. I am hearing-impaired and I attend the St. PaulTechnical Vocational Institute in St. Paul, Minnesota. I am here today to talk abouthow T.V.I. has helped me. My goal is to learn useful job skills for the future. Jobskills are important because I want to know how I can earn money with my hands.I want to plan for the future and increase my earning capacity.I have lived in Westport, Connecticut all my life. I attended public schools fromkindergarten through high school. I graduated from Staples High School in 1978. Iwas the only hearing impaired person in these hearing schools. I never attendedschools, for the deaf because I believed that they were too strict and did not provideenough education or enough skills for coping with the hearing world.In the summer of 1978, I enrolled at Northwestern Connecticut Community Col-lege in Winstead, Connecticut. After one semester, I withdrew because Northwest-ern did not seem to meet my needs for the future. So I spent two years going fromjob to job. After two years, I began to think about going back to college again be-cause I needed to be able to earn more money to support myself and potentially afamily in the future.I chose T.V.I. because it has one of the best vocational training programs availa-

ble for deaf persons. Because T.V.I. mixes hearing-impaired students with hearingstudents, it offers training in life skills in addition to technical vocational training.I am grateful to have the opportunity to attend T.V.I. I hope other young adultswill have the same opportunity in the future.

Senator WEICKER. Certainly, I can tell all those who are attend-ing the hearing that in a State like Connecticut, where we have alarge machine tool industry, and a large defense industry, peoplelike Eric are in enormous demand. I might add that if he does aswell as his handiwork here attests, it should not be very longbefore Eric will be earning more money than a United States Sena-tor. [Laughter.]

3 4

338

Senator WEICKKIL Thank you very much, Mr. Lauritsen. I have aquestion, but I am going to hear from Dr. Bellamy first.

Dr. Bellamy.Dr. BELLAMY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.My name is Thomas Bellamy. I am an associate professor of spe-

cial education and rehabilitation at the University of Oregon. I doappreciate the opportunity to be here again.

I am here to advocate the development of a new secondary dis-

cretionary program in special education, a program that would em-phasize secondary programs and the transition from school to adultlife and to adult working situations. My written testimony lists sev-eral reasons that Federal leadership is needed now in this area. I

will not try to go through all of those, but I would like to highlighta couple of them.

The first one, and I think the most important, is that the chitdren who entered school after the passage of Public Law 94-142are, in fact, growing up. In the early seventies, fully 75 percent ofall of the special education services were delivered at the elemen-tary level. That has changed dramatically because of the leader-ship that the Congress provided.

As an example, in Oregon 5 years ago, our State's program for

moderately and severely impaired students graduated 15 people;this year, we expect 109 to reach graduation age.

The focus on secondary programs at this point is simply the logi-

cal and the desired outgrowth of the earlier investments that wehave made in public education for people with disabilities. Theproblem is not just one of numbers, though. I think there is anissue of quality as well. The simple success of the early childhoodprograms, the elementary programs, the programs in the area of

severe handicaps, and other discretionary programs have led par-ents, teachers, and a lot of other people to believe that it is morethan possible, it is an expectation, that all people who are in spe-cial education today will grow up to participate in the living andworking life of the community.

Unfortunately, that will only happen if we balance the invest-ment that we have made in early childhood with an investment insecondary programs. Perhaps the best way to underscore the needis to look at some of the followup studies that have been done re-cently of graduates of special education. People who have left spe-cial education over the last 10 years have, I believe, an unaccept-ably high rate of unemployment. Many people are leaving schoolprograms and going into exactly the same adult services that theywould have gone into had no school been provided. I believe we canreverse that trend. We can reverse it by intelligent development ofprograms at the secondary. and transition levels.

There are some things that we can only do in secondary pro-grams: vocational preparation, assistance to parents in transitionfrom school to work, development of some of the personal andsocial skills that can, only occur after adolescence.

I also think that investment today would be timely. I am con-vinced that a solid foundation is now available in research and indemonstration that would point the way toward a major nationaleffort in secondary and transition services. I believe that both fromthe Federal level, from SEP, and from several local initiatives, we

have good (lino ion in model programs, in vocational preparationefforts, in strategies for actually placing high school special ed pro-grams in situations that maximize integration with nonhandi-capped children, in building curricula in schools that actually doprepare for adult living.

11 we are going to capitalize on those isolated but excellent dem-onstrations, we do need some Federal leadership right now that as-sists in getting those kinds of programs in place throughout thecountry.

I emphasize in the written testimony several possible directionsthat a program like this might take. I would like just to point outone of those, because I think it is critical. Simply investing in sec;ondary schools will not be enough unless we combine that withcareful attention to the transition process itself and the develop-ment of postsecondary options for all students with disabilities. Itis quite clear that the investment that has been made so far in stu-dents who have hearing impairments has paid off tremendously. Ibelieve that a similar investment is needed for other disabilitygroups. Similarly, I think that joint projects between special educa-tion and the adult services that might be responsible for people atage 21 might help us transfer some of the technology that has de-veloped in the schools over the last few years to the adult servicenetwork as well.

To summarize, I think that Federal leadership is both neededand timely in the area of secondary services and transition to adultlife. We have a longstanding commitment in this country to thesocial and economic destinies of children who are disabled. I thinkthat it would be a travesty if we left the job of special educationonly partly done.

Thank you.The prepared statement of Mr. Bellamy follows:]

TKNTINIONY iii U. I'm I)., UNIVKINITY OF OREOON

. Cr, alr man , my name is G. I horna 5 Be 11 vv. 1 air Associate Professor

of Spec ia1 Education and Rehabilitation at the University of Oregon, where

1 direct a research group concerned with ado lesc ents and adults with severe

disabilities.

I we lcome the occasion to present my views on the need for a secondary

emphasis in the discretionary programs in Special Education. Thank you for

the opportunity to testify.

I an) here addressing secondary programs precisely because of the

success of federal investments in early chi ldhood and elementary programs

in Special Education. The dramatic progress made in these programs dur ing

the a st f yf arc will have a lasting benefit f or children with handicaps

only when it is balanced with equal attention to the special problems of

except iona I youth. Therefore, I advocate the creation of a new program on

secondary and transition services within the Centers and Services Part of

the Education of the Handicapped Act.

As the ongoing national debate attests, high school presents difficult

problems f or all students. For those youth with disabilities, the design

of educational services is even more complex. Programs must adjust to

individual learning dif fiulties and to normal changes of adolescence.

They must keep pace with a changing job market and with shifting social

expectations and opportunities for people with disabilities. The need for

secondary-level special education can be met neither by extending success-

ful ul elementary programs to the high schools nol,,by diluting the typical

secondary curriculum that so often simply prepares students for still more

schooling.

The task of designing and delivering appropriate secondary programs

has taken nn new significance with a change in the age distribution of

341

students. ur the dY,ay, ni P.1 94-14?, fully 751 of special educa-i

ti on services were delivered at t he elementary level. Today, drasticinc reases in secondary prograMs are evident as children who entered school

after federal and state educational guarantees get older. Five years ago,

fewer than 15 individuals left Oregon's school programs for moderately and

severely handicapped students; this year 109 are expected to complete

secondary school. We are now seeing the first full generation of studentswho have grown up in the public schools. Of course, this expansion is the

logical and desired product of earlier public investment in special educa-tion. Ending earlier patterns of institutionalization, children withhandicaps are staying in their hones, attending local public schools, andmastering important basic skills.

The challenge of special education at the secondary level is not justone of numbers. Student progress provides a foundation for higher parentand teacher expectations. Today, there is every reason to believe that

even the most severely handicapped student will grow up able to participate

and contribute in the mainstream of a community's economic and socialacti vity.

However, individuals with handicaps can be expected to enjoy such

participation only if education in secondary programs matches the quality

and effectiveness of early childhood and elementary services. There ismuch that can be done only at the secondary level. It is here, under the

pressure of imminent adult responsibilities, that basic skills learnedearlier must be integrated to support independent living, productivity, andpersonal fulfillment. Secondary education must also structure the transi-

tion from school to work and adult life.

342

the need for irk estnent 71, !,v, 7r!,11. y and transition serviceS IS all

no apparent in follow-up studies of special education graduates. Studies

in Oregon, Vermont, and California all show alarming levels of unemployment

of recent graduates. In Oregon, about seventy-five percent of those com-

plet ing school programs for moderately and severely handicapped students

are now in adult activity programs -- exactly the same program that would

he available at the same public cost, had no special education been pro-

vided. Even those graduates who do enter vocationally-oriented adult

services must on the average, look forward to trivial wages and to

tortoise-like progress toward full employment. In fact the handicapped

tons user who enters day activity programs after completing school and who

progresses to higher level programs at the national average rates will be

78 year s old -- past retirement age before receiving his or her first

competit i ye job,

Averages always hide excellent programs. There are model secondary

programs today that both point the way for future development and make a

convincing case that public investment in secondary programs can now make a

difference. For example, severely handicapped students in Charlottesville,

Virginia; Madison, Wisconsin; and DeKalb, Illinois, typically leave high

school with several years work experience in community job sites. These

demonstrations make it quite clear that dramatic achievements are possible

in secondary special education. Adoption of such models elsewhere will not

be automatic; nonetheless it clearly is time to make the promise of these

programs a reality for handicapped adolescents throughout the United

States.

I recommend a broadly-based discretionary program of research, demon-

stration, and systematic model replication that addresses the education

343

I' ('Cll of dl 1 spec ral lane at rear. ye ut h, regardless of dt9r or k Ind ofdi sabi 1 ity. Several Oecif it areas of focus -would be important in such apr 09r dm:

Improved intervention procedures. The more protected and special

t he secondary school, the wider the gulf that handicapped young adults must

cross between the end of schooling and the onset of work and adult life.Procedures, materials, curriculum approaches, arid measures are needed that

'reduce this gulf while maintaining instructional effectiveness. If thereal point of secondary schooling is success beyond the school, tradi-

tional instructional met hods will of necessity require adjustment. A

technology 1 s needed for training outside the classroom and monitoring

student pert or manc e on the job, in the home, and throughout the community.

Models for secondary service delivery. A publication of theNational Governors' Association recently lamented that while the vocational

preparation needed by any given handicapped individual probably exists some-where in the nation, it is unlikely that the program will be availablewhere or when it is needed. Delivery of quality secondary education may

we ll require significant changes not only in instructional procedures butal so in organization and structure. Investing in the development, testing,

and systematic replication of successful service deliveries models couldreduce costly reinvention, providing a more economical and more efficient

way of improving opportunities for the nation's high school specialeducation students.

Outcome research. To ensure that the public investment in special

education achieves maximum benefits for handicapped consumers, evaluation

efforts must move beyond measures of amount and level of services.

344

key e arc h could ch, nn,,ii to an; bur admini st rati yl de( oils in what happens

to handicapped chi ldren arid adults, f or example, regular reporting of

demographics ire special education could assist in planning for transition

and adult services. Systematic follow-up studies of graduates could pro-

vide a basis for both adjust ing educational procedures and evaluating adult

services. Ongoing studies of how special education students are served in

voc at iona 1 education, vocat ional rehabilitation, and other human services

cou 1 d provide i nforniat ion needed to adjust these programs. Mc asures that

ass ess quality of life of high school students and program graduates are

needed to supplement common indicators of progress in school.

li t '.fC Of' ['dry de Vf.lopnent and collaboration. The work opportu-

nit it's and quality of I if e of disabled school leavers depend as much on

adult servic e,,'and opportunities as on school preparation, Today, there is

great local and state variat ion in post-secondary options. Graduates with

similar skills may be offered such widely varied services as day act i v-

ies, sheltered work, or competitive employment preparation. Like their

counterparts in secondary schools a few years ago, many adult service

programs and post -secondary schools have little experience serving indi-

viduals with h more severe disabilities. It is ironic that many of today's

graduates have more severe disabilities, but also more functional skills,

than t heir predecessors only a few years ago. Significant adjustments

appear needed in adult services, and education can help in several ways.

For example, collaborative pr ojects between school districts and adult

services could provide a forum for increased interaction between school and

community services with an appropriate focus on individual children.

Invest ment in post -secondary education is also needed to support

transit ion from school to work. The Regional Education Program currently

345

hruiit'es this t ref ei %tar,.i 10, 111(11 V I (Ei t. deaf, le this

grout has clearly bteefitI cl, t here is a critical need to broader. the

prugran to other she( 161 edirc at ion students as well. Several isolated

models ex i st for serving handicapped individuals in community colleges and

voc at 1 one 1 sc hooll. A broadened Regional Education Program could provide

the roundel. ion for expanded use of these models.

I et me summarize, Federal investment now in secondary special educa-

tion is t he 1 og r al result of longstanding Concern for the economic and

social destinies of children with handicaps. The success of early chi ld-

hood and elementary efforts offers significant promise to citizens with

di 4, rail 1 it 1 es and to their families. Let us not leave the job of spec ial

du t at i on Lint i h toned. Investment in younger chi ldren has been smart, but

it will pay lasting vidends for handicapped individuals only when it is

bd 1 ant ed with equal attention to t he problems of exceptional youth in

sec ondary schools and in the transit ion from school to adult life.

'Consequent ly, I recommend t hat a Secondary and Transition Program be

est ab 1 i shed as a new Special Education discretionary program, providing the

federal le ader s hi p needed to offer appropriate education throughout the

school years.

21-971 ry

346

I Memory

Atter 'mak, dkLuy.ion with folk., at Paul H. Brookes, I have learned that

tho Oityntion to cinlimit three percent of the total .royalties to each

contributed chapter in the book, Design of High School Programs for

Severely Handicapped Student,,,, never became part of the formal publishing

contract. I assume that we failed to comnunicato this adequately.

Barbara and I regret the difficulty and do intend to honor the understanding

we had 3., you were preparing the chapter, Our plan is this: We will

ask that the publisher complete formal contracts and that royalty payments

fur all sales to date be paid in April, 1984, on the normal payment schedule.

Please it our know if you have suggestions for other ways to handle the

issue. I expect you will soon be asked to sign d contract with the

publisher.

Sincerely,

G. Thomas Bellamy, Ph.D.

Director

GTB:mz

3.17

ti, tr;rt U W . I I hun k you both, and I Will address the samequestion to both of you, because we have it continually raisedbefore this subcommittee by various representatives of the adminis-tration, both as to the law, and then, in the other committee Onwhich I serve, Appropriations, as to funding. It is said that in manyof these areasmany of these areasthe example has been set totlie point where a Federal role is no longer necessary, and indeed,the matter can be taken over as a matter both of law ond of fund-ing by the States and local government. I would like to have each()I' you comment on that position, and I think I have correctly para-phrased it.

Mr. LAURITSEN. We hear that question quite often, also, Mr.Chairman. My response to that would be what happened to us in197.1, hack in St. Paul, as with all the regional programs. We werefaced with that problem then, as we are faced with the problemnow. II' the Federal dollars expire, what will happen is that we willbecome a single State program. We will no longer serve Eric andpeople from Connecticut and other places. The cost of the programthat we have is a little bit more expensive, but it is very cost-effec-tive if' we pool our resources, and the best way to pool those re-sources is through the Federal input.

I would not advocate for' a program in every State, but I wouldcertainly advocate for select, regionalized programs that offer qual-ity, minimum support service systems.

I would like to make one other point. This committee and others,and the country, put, great numbers of dollar's into Public Law 94-1.12 and the vocational rehabilitation program, I would like to sug-gest that we begin to look at regional education programs as athird part of that link. We are the ones who provide the training."-'1 postsecondary education. The secondary folks get people ready

lostsecondary education; the rehabilitation people purvey serv-In order' for them to purvey services, they purchase services

rr n schools like ours. We are a critical link. All postsecondaryeducation for handicapped people forms a critical link in the spe-cial education and the rehabilitation network.

I would like to propose a continuing Federal investment forhandicapped persons in a triad formatspecial education, rehabili-tation, and postsecondary education.

Senator WEICKER. Thank you.Dr. Bellamy?Dr. BELLAmy. I think that in the area of secondary programs and

transition to work, Federal leadership is needed right now, morebecause we have a common problem that cuts across States that wecan solve more efficiently and more reliably if we do it from thestandpoint of Federal investment. I do not think we want simply toextend the promise of special education to people in a few Stateswhere model projects may have developed. In saying that, I do notmean at all to question the ability of people in State and localschool districts, but simply to say that we can solve the problemmore efficiently and more directly with Federal leadership nowthat we could otherwise.

Senator WEICKER. Thank you very much. I thank all three ofyou, Eric, Dr. Bellamy, and Mr. Lauritsen, for taking time out ofyour very busy schedules to be with us here this morning.

(.3

3.18

The next panel consists of Frederick Weintraub, the assistant ex-ecutive director of the Council for Exceptional Children of Reston,Va., and Dr. James Gallagher, airectur ()I' the Frank PorterGraham ('hill Development Institute, University of North Carolinaat Chapel Hill.

Dr. Gallagher and Mr. Weintraub, it is nice to have you with usthis morning. Why don't you go ahead and proceed in any way thatyou deem lit.

STATEMENT OF DR, JAMES J. GALLAGHER, DIRECTOR. FRANKpoRTER ciculAm CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER, UNIVERSITYOF NORTH CAROLINA, CHAPEL HILL AND FREDERICK .1. WEINTRAUB. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OFGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONALcIIILDREN, IIES'l'ON, VA.Dr. GALLAGIIER. 'Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a special pleas-

ure to have the opportunity to testify before this subcommittee be-cause its leadership in this area is well known and appreciated.

My name is Jim Gallagher, and I am director of the FrankPorter Graham Child Development Center and the Kenan profes-sor of education at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

During the years 1967 to 1970, I served in the U.S. Office of Edu-cation, and for 2 of those years, I was the director of the Bureau ofEducation for the !handicapped. In 1968 when I held that position,we were delighted when the Congress passed Public Law 90-538,the Handicapped Children's Early Education Assistance Act, be-cause it provided us with a vehicle by which we could stimulateprograms to provide support and assistance at the earliest time inthe handicapped child's life.

You were just hearing about secondary programs, which are ex-tremely important. We are going to talk about early education,which is also extremely important.

As is well known professionally, the earlier you start in thehandicapped child's life with services, the fewer the problems thatmust be overcome later.

In 1968, I think the Congress was wise not to embark on a majorextension of programs in preschool handicapped. We needed knowl-edge from research; we needed trained personnel, we needed dem-onstrations of good practice. But through the 15 years that thisprogram has been in existence, we now have a solid professionalbase to move forward from.

One of the fundamental purposes in the Bureau of the Handi-capped in implementing that original law was to encourage replica-tion of the demonstrations that were set up around the country.We understand from the Littlejohn report, which is a third partyevaluation, ust completed that analyzed the impact of this pro-gram, that for every dollar spent on handicapped children's demon-stration programs, over $18 has been generated for programing forchildren and their families by local and State resources; also, that55 percent of the children in these programs enter public schools inthe regular education program, integrated with normal childrenagreat saving in money and a more healthy social and educationalsituation for the children. The investment in outreach and techni-

cal assistance I, one III tlo. major innovations Of this program be-cause it allows (IS to instit utionalize good practice and to move itfrom one ',lace to another in the country,

We were fortunate some years ago to receive one of the competi-tive grants to set up an early childhood institute which becotnespart of t his total program. 1111(1(.r that. opportunity we were able,for example, to provide a curriculum for severely handicapped 0 to2 years of age, a handbook kir parents to help adaptation of handi-capped children and mainstreaming situations, a new way of as-sessing t he learning capabilities of young handicapped children anda variety of research programs providing new insights into thestresses experienced by families of handicapped children, particu-laly the fathers of handicapped children.

Yet it is not enough to be self-congratulatory about this success-ful program. because there is one objective we have not met, andthat objective that we had in 1968 was to provide full services forpreschool handicapped children around the country and, I mightsay, for preschool handicapped children from 0 to 5, not from 3 to

We still understand from that Littlejohn report that three out ofevery four handicapped children in the preschool age range arestill not receiving services. So what I would suggest, Mr. Chairman,would be first of all a reauthorization of these important elements,the demonstration and the outreach, with particular emphasis onthe outreach. We now know a great deal about what to do in thisarea. What we really need is to move those ideas and those prac-tices from one place to another. So I wouL place special emphasison the outreach aspect.

The great variation between States and their use of the preschoolincentive grants suggests that there needs to be some rethinkingon what is an incentive and what is not for a State. State imple-mentation grants, called SIG's, which provide technical assistanceto the State department of education, have had mixed success, andwe think a more assertive and supportive role by the Federal Gov-ernment could pay major dividends, Some States have progressedfar enough so they already have a comprehensive plan for pre-school handicapped endorsed by their State board of education.These States would be interested in extending their efforts in earlychildhood if they could be assured that the Federal GoVernmentcould provide them with some initial support. This would meansupport for the initial cost of implementing a system of service de-livery at the preschool age. During that time, for example, theycould be allowed a 10-percent set-aside or addition to their (Pub. L.91-142) allotment if they met certain criteria for movement in thispreschool area, such as the hiring of a State coordinator for pre-school programs, a comprehensive program plan for the establish-ment of training centers in early childhood, and a demonstratedyearly increment in local programing funding. Other States thathave not reached that stage where such funds could be well usedcould continue with planning funds, but they would be encouragedto move, knowing that further Federal help could be available, toimplement a full plan for preschool handicapped children.

We want these programs, like Public Law 94-142, extended to in-clude children from birth to age :3. It is difficult, Mr. Chairman, to

r3 )

understand that the handicapped child often gets caught in a juris-dictional dispute at the State level between the Department ofIiunaan Resources and the Department of Education. Both of themhave some contribution to make to this program, but the fact thatno one has specific responsibility means no one does long-rangeplanning. no one does allocation of the resources that are necessaryto carry out the program. So I would recommend that that respon-sibility he given to the State Department of Public Instruction orEducation. that would then contract or make cooperative arrange-ments with necessary human resources programs in order thatsomeone has the specific responsibility at the State level to plan forprograms for preschool handicapped children over a long period oftime.

Now, I must make one more comment. I must say that I was as-tonished to see the administration's request for a major cut in thisearly childhood program in fiscal 198,1. I can only assume it is someunthinking attempt to reach some bottoin line figure. Cutting suc-cessful programs is an odd way to reward competence and initia-tive.

'thank you.ITile prepared statement of Dr. Gallagher follows:]

351

TESTIMONY ON EARLY'CHILDHOOD

for the

REAUTHORIZATION OF THE DISCRETIONARY PROGRAMS'OF THE EDUCATION FOR THE HANDICAPPED ACT

U.S. SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED

James J. Gallagher

Kenan Professor of Education

and

Director, Frank Porter Graham Child Development CenterUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

March 23, 1983

1-0 j.)

352

My name I., Jame% iollaqbec and 1 am currently the Director of the

Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center and a Kenan Professor of

Education at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. During

the years 1961 -1910 I served in the U.S. Office of Education as the

Director of the Bureau of Education fur the Handicapped and later, as a

Deputy Assistant Secretary. It is my pleasure to discuss what I think

has been one of the genuine successes in government programming, the

Handicapped Children's Early Education Program.

In 19613 when I was Chief of the Bureau of Education for the Handi-

capped, we were delighted when the Congress passed Public Law 90-538,

the Handicapped Children's Early Education Assistance Act. Although

that program started at a very modest level, it provided us with a

vehicle by which we could stimulate programs that would provide support

and assistance at the earliest possible time in thu handicapped child's

4ife, not only for the but for the rest of the family as well.

It is well known that the earlier in the child's life that services are

provided, the fewer problems that must be overcome later.

In 1968 the Congress was wise not to embark on a major program

expansion in the preschool area because there were so many unmet needs.

We needed additional knowledge from research that would help shape

special education programs for preschool handicapped children; we

needed trained personnel who could operate such programs; and we lacked

practical models that would demonstrate how to provide efficiently such

services. In the past fifteen years, because of the judicious use of

research, training, and demonstration funds in Special Education Pro-

grams, we now have a solid professional platform from which to move.

3 5

353

II is the combination of elements in this prngram that has made It a

success: demonstration to provide models to emulate, early childhood

institutes to provide new ideas, outreach to speed new ideas Into

practice, technical assistance to aid new programs to get underway, and

state implementation grants to encourage states to move forward.

One of our fundamental purposes In the Bureau of Education for the

Handicapped in implementing the original law was to encourage replica-

tion of the demonstration models. This replication has been one of the

outstanding successes of the program. We understand from the Littlejohn

report which analyzed the impact of the HCEEP program, that for every

dollar :spent on the handicapped children's demonstration program, over

$18.00 has been generated for programming for children and their

families by local and state resources. Also, it reported that 55 per-

cent of the children who leave these demonstration projects are placed

in educationally integrated settings with nonhandicapped children, thus

creating both a lesser cost and a more healthy social and education

situation for the handicapped children. This program has committed it-

self to outreach, which means to spread the skills and knowledge to

practitioners at the local level. The investment in outreach and tech-

nical assistance is another of the forward thinking moves, because it

institutionalized the goal of transmitting good practice from one part

of the country to another and also brought good practitioners together

with researchers and special educators to create a productive communi-

cation network.

Special Education Programs established four Early Childhood

Institutes in 1977 which provided the opportunity to address important

354

and complicated issues In early childhood. We at the Frank Porter Graham

Center dC the University of North Carolina at Chapel Mill were fortunate

in competing for one of those early childhood institutes. Out of that

opportunity we were able to provide a curriculum fur severely handicapped

children ages 0 to 2; a handbook for parents to help them in the adapts

Lion of handicapped children in mainstreaming situations; a new way of

assessing the learning capabilities of handicapped children;. and a

variety of research that provided new insights into the special stress

that is experienced by families of handicapped children. All of these

products have been widely disseminated, in part, because or aggressive

support of outreach and technical assistance that has been provided by

the 'ipecial Education Programs agency.

Yet it is not enough to be self-congratulatory about the good re-

Sults of these last fifteen years. There is nne other objective that we

had 4C 0 long-range goal, and that objective has not heen attained. That

is, we had hoped that services should be available to all handicapped

children at whatever age, but particularly in those early years where

treatment can mean so much to the children and to the family. From the

Same Littlejohn report, it is clear that three out of every four handi-

capped children in the preschool age range are still not receiving ser-

vices. So, despite the effective nature of the demonstration, outreach,

and technical assistance efforts, it is now clear that we still need

additiogal strdtegies to reach our larger objective of full service for

all handicapped children.

To achieve that, I believe there should be a certain reallocation of

resources in this program. I would recommend a lesser emphasis on new

demonstration programs, with these new projects focusing almost entirely

355

upon prwilom 0101% 1110 wwild mdinr OdW. io otir,fing demonstra-

tions. I would instead place increased rmiplidt.i; on nut A1, eJr ;ervices

which, together with the technical assistance services, provide an impor-

tdnt spread of knowledge. Demonstration projects are currently spending

/I percent of the funds while °l percent of the funds are spent on out-

reach. Those proportion; should probably he reversed with 70 percent

going to outreach. The Early Childhood Institutes need to continue in

order to generate research and products that can add to the quality of

the services to he delivered and provide credibility to the extension of

services.

The gredt variation between states in their use of the preschool

incentive grdnts suggests that there needs to be some rethinking on what

is an incentive and what isn't for a state. State implementation grants

(SIGS) provided to t:rte departments of education, have had mixed suc-

cess, and a more assertive and supportive role by the federal government

could, I think, pay dividends. Some states have progressed far enough so

that they already have a comprehensive plan for preschool han.icapped

endorsed by their State Board of Education or similar body. These states

would he interested in extending efforts in early childhood if they could

be assured that the federal government was going to provide them with a

significant level of initial support to help the program get underway.

This would mean support for the initial costs of implementing a system of

service delivery at the preschool age during a five-year period.

During that time, they could, for example, he allowed a 10 percent

addition to their P.L. 94-142 allotment, if they met certain criteria for

movement in this preschool area. The hiring of a state coordinator, a

356

comprelnive program plan tun wddhll,diment of training centers, and d

yearly increment in local programming, could be among such criteria.

Other states that have not reached the stage where such funds would he

well used could continue with planning funds, but would he encouraged to

see that further federal help would be available to implement a full plan

when they reached that level.

I would also like to see these programs extended to include children

from birth rather than from age 3. A handicapped child is often caught

in a jurisdictional dispute in the 'Adtei ac to who should serve them,

particularly in the 0-3 age range. Should it he the Department of Human

Resources, or the Department of Education? That dispute has caused many

states to appear hesitant and nonresponsive to the needs of these chil-

dren and their families. I would strongly recommend that the basic

responsibility for providing such programming would be in the State

Depd'tment of Education, although we could expect than to broker or con-

tract out many of these services to human services and health programs.

The essential goal should be to bypass administrative barriers that pre-

vent the maximum development of these youngsters during the preschool age

so they can fit into and profit from special education programs at a

later time.

I must admit, in closing, that I was astonished to see the

administration's request for a major cut in this early childhood program

in FY'84. I can only assume it is some unthinking attempt to reach some

bottom line figure. Cutting se-,:essful programs is an odd way to reward

competence and initiative.

1

i

Senator Wralhrii Thank you, Dr. Gallagher. I ciaihl not agreewith you more, ;old I rah :1-01111'0 you t hilt , both III I he authorizingsense and in the appropriations sense, that that cut is going to herestored. I have already talked to the chairman of t his 1:0111111it tee,and he is in complete agreement, and I can assure you that I

expect the same kind of support in the Appropriations Committee.I think the reason is very simple. You alluded to it; over the past 2years, many 01 these ('tits have heel' made, not at the advice ofthose that are proficient in the field, but rather, by bottom line fig-ures dictated by OMB. That is a heck of a way to run a business, acollege, or a government. What is good and what works should befunded, and what does not should not he funded.Nobody is object-ing, in other words, to a paring of' budgets, but it ought to be donewith a certain degree of knowledge, and I think that has been to-tally lacking when it comes to the entire area of handicapped, dis-abled, retarded, et cetera.

Mr. Weintraub?Mr. WEINTRAtni. Thank you, Senator.I am Fred Weintraub, assistant executive director for govern-

mental relations with the Council for Exceptional Children.It is a pleasure to have an opportunity to appear before this sub-

committee today, and I would also thank the chairman for the op-portunity to once again sit at the table with Dr. Gallagher. We satat this table years ago, when this act was brought before thiscommittee, and it is a deja vu to sit here once again, and I appreci-ate that.

In our testimony, we review the highlights of' the research thathas gone on over the last 15 years, in trying to really see whetherservices for handicapped children make a difference. It has alwaysbeen postulated that if' we serve these children at their youngestyears, that in fact we would lessen the effects of' the handicapped. Iwill not repeat what is in the testimony, but it is clear, as Dr. Gal-lagher has indicated, from the research that preschool services forhandicapped children are essential for the children, they are essen-tial 'Or the children's families, they are essential for' our schools,and they are essential for our society as a whole.

The major question, I think, before this subcommittee is:Arepreschool handicapped children in need presently being served? Letme review a little data with the committee.

State education agencies reported that in 1982, 227,001) 3- to 5-year -old preschool handicapped children received special educationservices. The National Center for Educational Statistics estimatesthat. in 192, there were approximately 10 million children ages 3to 5. Thus, only 2.2 percent of' the 3- to 5-year-old population re-ceived special educational services. If we were to use highlyconservative estimates of the percentage of' the preschool popula-tion requiring special education services, we would .se 5 percent.Thus, we are serving, by a liberal estimate, only 50 percent of thehandicapped children ages 3 to 5 in serious need of special educa-tion services.

The National Foundation and the March of' Dimes reported thata quarter of' a million infants are born each year with birth defectsthat may lead to handicapping conditions. Another 50,000 infantsare born premature, and thus with substantial odds of' becoming

handicapped While progress is being made in serving thebirth to:1 handicapped population estimated conservatively to heover ;"100000 children no data (.5 itilti 011 how many are beingserved. Sample studies simply suggest that the number is minimal,

The next question is: Is the Federal effort effective'? and hereagain, I will not go into a great deal on what is in the testimony.But as Dr. (fallaglie indicated, the Littlejohn study and otherstudies have clearly indicated that the Federal program, the Feder-al effort, the model program, has increased services, has demon-strated effectiveness, and has provided continuity of impact. Infilet, the report concludes that the accomplishments of the IICEEPprojects as shown by the survey results are greater and morevaried than for ;my other documented education program we havebeen able to identify, and that is quoted directly from the Little-john st tidy.

The second component in dealing with preschool is the preschoolincentive, section 1;19. Because of the funding level of that incen-tive, which called for an additional $300 per child, but is presentlyapproximately $110 per child, there is serious question as to whatdegree it is in fact really an incentive, It is a help, and clearly, theadditional money is helping. It leaves us, though, with a few obser-vations, and I think these are very serious conclusions.

First, since 19s0, there has been actually a 2-percent decline inthe number of 3- to 3-yea r-old handicapped children being served.

Second, fewer States mandate preschool services today than atthe time of passage of Public Law 94-142.

Third, reductions in funding for health and social service pro-grams are also impairing preschool services, particularly for thebirth-to-3 population.

We would like to recommend to the committee that the Congressfully Rind the preschool incentive, that States be permitted tocount for reimbursement handicapped children from birth, andthird, that Public Law 9-142 mandates be extended to handi-capped children from birth on a phased-in basis. However, wewould he the first to recognize that our recommendations are possi-bly not. politically or economically viable at this time.

Senator WEICKER. Excuse me, if' I could stop you there. You saythat Public Law 94-142 should take effect at birth. Doesn't it now?

Mr. WEINTRAUB. NC), Senator. It mandates children from 5,and then, for children 3 to 5, it. mandates it only if the State man-dates it. So if the State does not mandate it, then Public Law 94-142 would apply. It does not even mention children from zero to 3.

Senator WEICKER. Don't you think thatand that is why wehave hearing* to educate Senatorsdon't you think, in light of thenew body of ademic knowledge as to what this early interventioncan do, that the law should be brought back to zero? My own childis starting to receive schooling at 3 months.

Mr. WEINTRAull. Yes; that is right, and what we find is a tremen-dous variation. For example. in the State of Virginia, if you are ablind child, you are served almost from the day you leave the hos-pital, but if you happen to be a retarded child, you have to waituntil the age of 2.

We clearly, in fact, had argued. even at the time that Public Law94-142 was being designed. and in fact, the early versions of the

('0()

31l0

bill were down to birth, Daring the construct of the bill, it was felt.that that was going too far, and the final versions of the bill wereat age 5, with a pseudomandnte down to 3.

We would certainly endorse that. We are also, perhaps as a moremodest approach, suggesting that. we clearly make it possible forthe preschool incentive money to be used for birth to 3 if' States sowish. Right now, under the incentive, a State that wants to usethat money it is getting to serve children, let, us say, who are 2years old or 1 year old, may not, and we would like to simply openthat up.

Senator WEICKER. May not, by virtue of law, orMr. WEINTRAUB. By law. It is limited to only going to children 3

to 5 even if the State would like to use it for below that.Second, what we are suggesting is that there befollowing up on

Dr. Gallagher's point about the State implementation grant pro-gram under the IICEEP programthat we expand that, toughen it,that we provide a base of some grants to States who want to reallyplan and get serious on preschool to facilitate that planning andimplementation.

I think I will stop at that point, Senator, and I would be glad toentertain any questions.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Weintraub follows:]

361

STATEMENT OF

THE COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CI ILDRIN

to

THE NURCORMIITEE ON NE HANDICAPPED

of

THE U.S. SENATE LABOR AND HINAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE

with respect to

REAUTHORIZATION OF TILE EDUCATION OF TILE HANDICAPPED ACT

March 23, 1983

Submitted Sy.:Frederick J. WeintraubAjsistant Executive DirectorDepartment of Governmental RelationsThe Council for Exceptional Children1920 Association DriveReston, Virginia 22091

For further background contact:Joseph BallardCEC HeadquartersTelephone: (703) 620-3660

3 G

21-974 24

Mr. (11.011,11M 111111 1111110. I .1 11111

C)11141 f or Exevpt tonal Ch1,141r4m (CC) 11 plear,ed In 11,1/e t h hi 111,1.0111101

e ftv rmmentn nn important 1 Haut. concern! op, hor I r,41.1.,41 oi I lu.

gaucat fon of t11. 114 lea1,11ea Art The CuuurIl for Except Iona I rh 1,1re ti

i II natlnnnl 14,100 int Ion of 't0,0110 nperlal yduratlun prof it And nthern

concerned with the ethwal Ion of hand (rapped and gifted and talented rh1111ren

and youth.

Mr. Chairman, while P.1.. 94-142 is Part 11 of EliA, It la our un,ht,;1,111111113,,

that a I t i r e I 1 Alit hot 1 ta t duo a not ex', I re, 11 1,1 not mlct' con,.1,1,r,111,,,,

by the auherannil t toe dart tut thin MIA ream hors zat I on proves eounnenl 1

will therefore be limited to the remaining portions of the ERA.

Since the Congream created the hilA in 1966, the Act has been the

foundation of the federal rule in special education, providing the fmpetus for

all manner of research, demonstration and personnel support. The Act

originally provided for grants to states (later to become P.L. 94-142),

research and personnel preparation, and also mandated the establishment of the

Bureau of Education for the Handicapped (BER) in the U.S. Office of Education

(USOE). During the remainder of the 1960's the Congress continued to expand

the federal role in special education by amending EHA and adding programs such

as regional resource centers, centers for deaf-blind children, instructional

media, teacher recruitment, early childhood models, and programs for children

with specific learning disabilities.

ERA will, of course, always have an important role In supporting the

mission of P.L. 94-142, but, aside from P.L. 94-142 we believe that the ERA

his an ongoing mission to continue to improve over time, quality of

instruction for exceptional children. That vital mission existed before the

enactment of P.L. 94-142, and that mission re melins Just as vital today.

The FHA ham played N significant tole oval the past two decades le

expanding and improving special educational del vices tis handicapped .hildten.

In (Act, an we teview the existing anthorities, we are impressed with the

continued usefulness and timelinese of most oi the provisions of the EllA. We

do, however. believe that it is necessary to examine drean of need in the

field of apecial education and to strengthen the hilts based upon list

Assessment. The recommendations which we make in this statement are based

upon that selective search for areas where the statutes should he

strengthened. The tact that we do not discuss certain programs or aspects of

the statutes does not Indicate a lack of concern or support for than.

Further, the order of our presentation of issues follows the order In

(testa appear in the existing EHA designation.

Definition of Handicapped Children

The Council for Exceptional Children feels that the term "behaviorally

disordered" is the most appropriate designation for children who are

handicapped by virture of their behavior. The current definition of

'handicapped children" uses the terminology "seriously emotionally disturbed"

which relies heavily on inferences about internal emotional phenomena. This

reflects a conceptualization of mental illness that is at least 20 years old.

More current diagnostic classifications stress the description of problem

behavior rather than the immediate interpretation of observed behavior as

indicative of inner pathology. A new definition that would focus efforts on

the description of problem behaviors as they relate to the tasks encountered

by students in educational situations would be helpful to the professionals

ing children and developing special educational programs and the

364

children and their tamillen. We therefore recommend that section 6,01) of

Part A be amended by striking the term "seriously emotionally dlutur,7:1" and

repl Ing It with !_he term "behaviorally disordered."

Definition ot_tipecial Education

Section b02(16) of Part A defines special education as it applies to all

programs supported by or operated under ElIA. The term 'spec ill . r. Ion'

menus specifically designed instruction, at no cost to parents or ..ad

to meet the unique needs of a handicapped child, including classroom

%Instruction, instruction in physical education, home Instruction, and

luntroction in hospitals and institutions."

We believe that the Lem "unique needs" has bee' too broadly int, :,rete0

to apply to child needs far beyond those of an educational nature. We feel

Hutt the 1, no-ss could provide a small but important thrust toward claret

thini,ing on this 1nne by the sample insertion of the word "educatic-,1"

between "unique" and "needs" In the definition, thus more clearly settini

forth that the purpose of special education is to meet the educational ne 4

of handicapped children. In Cat vein, we would also refer you to Cie Re : art

from the Commission on the Finat,-:ing of a Ftee and Appropriate Educatic !

Special Children (Mauch, 1S83), which contains useful discusalon on .t:e

issue of clarifying that which is and is ..ot

educational.

Special Education Programs (SEP) Structure

The Congress has long maintained a deep concern that the agency

administering special education programs:

1. Have sufficient administrative at'thotity and v;31biUty.

365

lit. he ptl I/11 10,1111 to speak mit fund I 1 y .11 aced; (,1

exceptional children and youth.

3. Have sufficient staff to carry out :Ls responsibilities.

In P.L. 91-:30, enacted on April 13, 1970, and P.L. 93-380, enacted nn

August 21. 1974, the Congress very 1 irecise1y required that the then Bureau of

Education for the Handicapped (BEH) he headed by a Deputy Commissioner of

Education appointed by the H.S. Commissioner of Education who vas to report

directly lo the Commissioner.

A similar concern that top bureaucratic rank be guaranteed ha,

demonstrated when the Congress created a separate Department of Education on

October 17, 1979. At that time the Congress authorized an Office of Special

Education and Rehabilitation Services, to be headed by an Assistant

Secretary. This Assistant Secretary, nominated by the President and confirmed

by the Senate, r,port.6 directly to the Secretary of Education.

CEC was deeply involved in the realization of an independent Department of

Education, the Joining administratively of special education and

rehabilitation services, and the designation of an Assistant Secretary at the

top line of the bureaucratic hierarchy. It was everyone's understanding among

the various part'es involved ta the creation of the Department that the then

BEN, now Special Education Programs (SEP), would have equal standing, directly

under the Assistant Secretary, with the Rehabilitation Services Administration

(RSA) and the National Institute for Handicapped Research (NIHR),

We are beginning to have reason to question whether there is adherence to

this understanding, and since the existing EllA section 603 pertaining to BEH

must now be rewritten to conform to the statutes authorizing the Department of

Education, we urge that the opportunity be taken to once again make clear ay

4

36t;

statute the administrative p.,silion of what is now SEP. Thereinre. we

recommend that the statute (Part A section 603) requir,

1. That there will be a principal agency for administering and tarrying

out program, and projects relating to the education and training

the handicapped.

2. That ouch principal agency shall he headed by a Deputy Assistant

Secretary for Special Education appointed by the Secretary of

Education.

3. That. such Deputy Assistant Secretary shall report directly to the

Assistant Secretary for Special Eder

4. That there be six positions for persons to assist the Department

of

l'on and Rehabilitative Services.

Assistant Secretary carry out his dotites Including the position of

Deputy Director.

Such re,tirements are nothing more than an updating of the thrust of the

original EliA langoaA, In light of the statutes creating the Department of

Education, and w.,11 serve to erane any potential future doubt as to the status

of the agency responsible for special education programs. Bureaucratic

structures in our age are critical reflections of Congressional policy, and

cannot he left to chance.

We also request that the statute specify that SEP have administrative and

planning responsibility for federal activities on belif of gifted and

talented children and youth. This responsibility previously resided with BEH

and SEP. While there is presently not a program for the gifted and talented

to administer, ae urge that SEP be charged with overall program

responsibility. We wi'l discuss our rationale and other proposals for the

gifted and talented later in the testimony.

367

National Advisor./

Mr. Chairman, In 1979, under the aegis of P.L. 91-230, the Congre,;,,

created ee National Advisory Committee on Handicapped Children (section 604,

EHA), That committee func?.loned until its statutory termination on Ott Ober 1,

1977.

CEC has not historically been an enthusiastic supporter of national

advisory committees a. 3 general proposition. We du recognize, however, that

Ole advisory which functioned from 1970 to 1977 offered valuable Insights attd

data which ,mtrihuted si! ifirantly toward the Important provision, to MoV0

the Nation forward toward full and appropriate educational opportunity for

handicapped children. Our point is that at times national advisories, given a

specific charge, given precise reporting time lines, and, most importantly,

given the requirement that their findings and recommendations shall lie

transmitted to the Congress, can mat., a useful contribution toward informing

and sensitizing the public In a particular area of national concern.

When the EilA was last reauthorized in 1977, a general effort was underway

primarily from the new Carter Administration but with the cooperation of the

Congress to ,eliminate as many national advisory co:aritt'.tes as could be

reasonably justified. In that spirit, while the statue authorizing a national

advisory was retained in the 1977 EHA reautho2ization, one short sentence was

added at the end of that authority, The Advisory Committee shall continue to

exist until October 1, 1977." CEC did not see suff'0.enr reason to quarrel

with that termination.

However, as we struggle to maintain and .romo e compliance under P.L.

94-142 in the 1980's and 1990's, and at the same time enhance the quality of

special education for each and every exceptional child during the same period,

we feel that it would be valuable to reconstitute the national advisory as the

Nat tonal Ad viso t y t',Vtt it t o t A t [Alm at Inn, MAnV have heel. lot f

suggesting, on and off Capitol Hill, that 4 '111aa'1,11 commisqlon

teat ff t rt r and lye.. regulatory 144ues In leder.' I special ..ducat loo

.re not certain that such A v itetelt m.I,ot 1, 00,egtiA ry . the ether

hand, t e In, nt .t an advisory A tnnM1 t t en with h Is all-rat., on the Lool,s, an

advisory h (sold /gate and reir..rt on A (Mtn her Willett hero re us dt

thin time' whether the provision of related tietVICen, the ACM evement of

quail t led 1 nt,t in t Iona I personal, the application of new technology, t

provision ol set vire. e 1 rum birth through t .111d 14 through 21, 1. 0 'lame A

fewcould indeed be helpful.

tionle would wonder if the existing National Council on the Handicapped

(NCH) does not already serve this purpose. Our answer 1st no. It was

clearly understood from inception that thin council would advise in matters

primarily relating to the Rehnbilllalion Services Administration (RSA) std the

National Institute for Handicapped Research (NNW). The general lack of

special education expertise on that council reflects this Intent. Moreover,

to add special education to the responsibilities of this council would be to

give it more than it could reasonably handle.

Early Childhood Education

We would like to discuss Improvements In the federal effort to provide

early childhood services for handicapped children from birth through 5 years

with B!vc1fic reference to Mk section 619, the Preschool Incentive

An; Program, and section 623, the handicapped Children's Ea r? ',ducat ion

Program.

For some time it has been postulated that providing the preschool

handicapped child early intervention serv_ces during this period of rapid

learning and development would increase the possibility of lessening the

369

affects of the ltodi,spped. The research atudien of the past decade confirm

this hypotheaiu. Preschool intervention for handicapped children appears to:

1. Increase intelligence in some children.

2. Produce anhatantial gains is motor development, language, emotional

stability, cognitive abilities and self-help skills.

3. Prevent the development. of secondary handicapping conditions.

4. Reduce family stress.

5. Reduce child abuse.

6. Increase family Income potential.

7. Reduce 'societal dependency and institutionalization.

8. Reduce by up to 50 percent the need for special clash placement at

school age.

9. Be cost beneficial by as much ac 236 percent.

It is clear that preschool services for handicapped children are essential

for handicapped children, their families, our schools and our society.

State education agencies (SEA) resorted that in 1982, 227,801, 3-5 year

old preschool handicapped children received special education services. The

National Center for Educational Statistics estimates that in 1982 there were

approximately 10,182,800 children ages 3 5. Thus 2.2 percent of the 3-5

population received special education services. It should be noted that hk,l,

Start reported that they se ved 41,339 handicapped children. However, we havt

no data on how many of the Head Start children are or are not In the SE!

reported count. A highly conservative estirr.,-e of the percentage of the

preschool population requiring special ed.'sr, F,,*.Lces in 5 percent. Thus

we are presently serving, by liberal eatiu.ste (Ali-, 7,0 percent of handicapped

children ages 3-5 in need of special eeuLa

370

rhe bit 11,0.11 it .1/, It e1 1+Itnt, ,rt t1 tl,i mat t t !hitt . .,""'

I nt an I `4 .1 r *. t k.,1,1 /. WII I. hitt It del e, l', I1 i.el in.iy load to handl,

condi t Aiiee e. r .01,1100 I tel aim . are 'aerie pretrial nue and t r

quit, a to l.t t sad., e I h..eml nit handicapped I. Witt le tame. prOgr.,, 1.. "'III,. Id,'

I el serving t11,, tl r t h it 11411.11i' ..stln, rillvo vat I v.. I v

to over 51711,UUl, chi refl. no ilata exi its een how many re het rig nerved.

Sample stud Ie. nugget: t the number I ti nit el

rh sit thr ll.rnd le apped Art contains two m.t Jur prctittleole 1

comptenete ICI,, t I en a.' 1, t he 11,,111 f c,i111)141 h.,, Iv

F.elur,tt ten Pr evram 1111.:EP) The prlm,iry p,n lits; .11 l I. , l ha.; been t

encourage the eqtabl eilement of lieW eftert the early ethicat lee t

twindlc t( Itit 11 throughout the states and term tories through 'support

demunst rat ',Jr 11 projects and technical assistance.. ei recent

comprehen '1.111.1th on Of the program vas k'ondot ted by Hoy I.ft t le Imre,

Astern: :trete, Inr . l hi. y report eel that :

1. Project s serving 21,000 handicapped children exit:I fre every state and

in several territories, In turban as well o rural areas.

2. More than 30,600 children have been served in cof,tinuation projects

at no cost to the HD:EP.

3. A total of 2,157 replications were identified; 1,991 as a result of

outreach activities and 166 from projects in the demonstration phase

serving over 100,000 children.

4 Replication programs are known to have served 107,850 c.

5. For each child served directly in the demonstration proje,-s, 6.4

children received service.° through continuation of derannh. at inn

projects and through replication of projects.

371

0. Vol evsty lirrEP dollat e'.puded in ptogramming. 1,18.1/ has1,."'n

generated in programming for children and their famMen.

/. Fifty-live percent (i'it) of the children who leave HCEEP

demonstration projects ale placed in integrated settings with

non-handicapped chi drew whlrh Irt Iretn expensive Ihan more

spec tali red placements,

H. Sixty-seven percent (hM) of the children who leave HCEEP

demonstration projects perform In the average and above average range

in relation to their peels, according to stall of the reguhar and

special education programs to which they graduate.

9. Eighty percent (801) of the 280 projects are still continuf.,,, to

serve children independent of HCEEP funding.

10, Extensive amounts of training have been requested and provided to

personnel of other agencies.

11. :tore than 1,000 producla have been developed by HCEEP projects and

widel;.disseminated, many through cc iercial publishers.

toport concludes: "The accomplishments of the HCEEP projects as shown

by the survey results are greater and more varied than for any other

documented e...%ation program we have been able to identify."

The second preschool component of EHA is the Preschool Incentive Grant

Program, section 619. Because the Congress would not fully mandate services

to handicapped children ages 3-5 in P.L. 94-142, it established a financial

ictntive. For each 3-5 year old handicapped child served, a state would

receivc. an additional 1300. However, because of limited actual

appropriations, states are only receiving approximately 1110 per child. For

states already committed to serving these children the funds are of great

372'

e, 1M, 1.1 ,41 I III Fnmull 11110111 11, In 111 IV.. 11111

all 11 1.111. I VI' at Its Pre ne tit I lve 1 .at :ma Ise,.

A I aa1111 Iona I Iorvat Ions:

1. Sluce 1'11111, I here has 1 , 1 ' 1 1 .1 2 percent 1, flue I n t. he number ot

year old hand trapped chi I dt en helm; s,I ved.

Fewer states mandate preschool services toddy than at the t Ill

passage of 1'J.. .14.-14...

f. It.1111' t 011, In I 11K for 111'4111. I1 1111d !;t71.' {al s,rvlro pro),;..uns

Imp. 1 I ol,; p t V i i 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 I l r I Y l i l t the ht It 11 II t I'e

110;11110 t

The Council f or Except lona 1 Chi ldren would I Ike to recommend that :

I. The Cony res fully fund t he preschool Invent I ye.

That states be perm' t Led to count for reimbursement handicapped

chi1iren Ito m hi rill.

1. That. the mandat es be 0%1.1,11(10d to 11111111 ICal/P111 ell I ld r111

from hi ri 1. ut a phased 111 bast s.

However, we reap ze t hat these recommendat Ions ,.tre probably not

politically or econnmicav realistic at thin time. Ne therefore propose some

more mod est amendments:

1. Amend the preschool went lye (section 619) to permit states to

utilize the funds to serv,, preschool handicapped children from birth

to 5. Present law limits usage to children ages three through f lye.

Amend the HCEEF program (section 623) to add a new state planning and

implementation authority in the area of early childhood. Let us

emphasize, this new authority would be in addition to, and would in

no way replace, the existing authorities and consequent programa for

early childhood education under section 623 of Che ERA. We would

ocomit,..1.1 I 1.1 I 1.11 I {. nulu ht. 11101411 IVA' I Aid I 141 Ale 1,1114A

agencies in liaison with other state agencies responsible feel vet,'

young children to assist them In planning for the provision ot

apecial vdtpat1.1 and related ,,et vices to handicapped and other

developmentally delayed .telldion !tom birth thtough years 01 age.

There would he three levels of grants?

a. A planning grant, 175,000 A year for ma,imnm eel two'years tor

states to have conceptualized a plan, but need resources to

fully develop It.

b. A development grant, tion,000 a year tor a maximum of two yours

[or states who have completed a draft plan, but need to work out

Its detail and approval.

Impl-mentation gran'':, $150,000 a year for a maximum of three

YA1.4. for .tar,o. will 0 state plans, but who need

resources to develop policies and procedures and strategies for

implementation.

Further, the Secretary should he required to provide technical

assistance to the states. The Secretary would also have to report

annually to the Congress on the state of preschool services,

including specific required data. Finally, states would be permitted

waivers from certain federal regulations which are found to Interfere

with the carrying out of their state plan. The cost of such an

activity is estimated to be about $6,000,000.

Regional Education Programs

The Council is increasingly concerned that more concrete progress needs to

be made tnwar meeting the continuing educational needs of exceptional persons

beyond .poletion of a traditional elementary and secondary education. It is

reeogni tea t hat 11n.. Y. epl I.1f1,11 (WI t'.11,1 Wilt fit I h 1,i111 rr I. be, 1,11 I v ilek.loted

haat education beyond the fige Itutu n 11,1.11 't 1.41 IIP 1111e,I lur 1,1.1 11

et1111-11l 1,11. nm1r I1 al en 11/150 I' XI ended (Ile r.111,:oe . I int ntell eXCI.1,1 I., I

per oiniri. 11.11.41Vt. 1, Ills le .11 1 ,111 n I Ile ',in.. I 1 i

rdur AI i11,1 In I he efint',11 11 ,.et VIM', .10101 11. F.Xt 11,1 1.11.11 I!,11.1 11.140

Ilintung 1r,Irnlny, nt 1..11( louln,l ...In, /It inn need., 19 110 nii /111111 n, In../1,1111

I//1 I element acv and Se, e t i n e i l t l i l y . I ilc reliqlny, I y , common! IV, .11

provld such opport not, t en In I- he general pub' it, with apparent ly minima I

regard illf the 1,pec 1,11 .'durst 1011.1 I nn,' n ut except tonal

the whole Issue 01 it t ect lv, t molt et lots, t he wee I.1 t work.- .

compreherts !VC Ildt 10(1,11 attent loo and a., Inn,

fieyond t he Efta, ch;(*. eon( ime to work to estahl ash d meaningful f'y

have 011 1401111 Of 11.1nd Capped Arnertr,tnx in the f 01 1 OWt Ile, federal activities:

vocat Iona I elo,at I nu; adult 'ducat Ion; career .'ducat ion and 1 ifelong learning;

cont. inning edlitIli inn; and CETA, Youth Partnership, and other joh t raining

programs.

With respect to EllA, We recommend that sect ion 625, Regional Postsecondary

Education Programs, he expanded to provide f or an enhanced model authority f or

programming in all areas of post secondary education. At it mt nimum, we ask

that t. Ile Word '*('(It I111/ I inc luded with the existing "vocational,

technical, poars,,condary or adult" authorities ,n the ,i(atute, and that the

definition of "handicapped persons" be revised to conform to the existing

definition of "handicapped children" in Part A of EHA, thus guaranteeing

inclusin of the entire handicapped population as intended for all her

programs.

37r)

e,.rttt

Pall it ni l PA, Will h prnvides tonne, t tit! let of hi3Otet wind at Ion,

alate and in, al education agtwies A,1,! ,dhof 11,,1 11,0 !",,, tad agenet,. Ittr the

t d p l e n a r i n g nernnnl t t a the .he Arlon ot handicapped children, Is

the oldest EPA anthorily (19'011 rn l pethaps the program having fl. surd

mignitieant: impact on advancing and Imnrnving services nt any of the EPA

,nil but it twenty t ivy year.: ago the Con{ ro ice ogu I 1,1 IV we do today,

that. the key I. eihnlive servIces for handicapped children is to develop and

maintain an ,idowlito kiod well plepoted nt sIncial heatinn nersnnnel.

The ma in rity nt the 1,1'1'0,110cl In the field ni special e dud ail" , Itunt

clasnroom teachers to administrators to univernity personnel, were 'AIU,At,d in

pf.KrAM. 4.pp,,tAvd ender Part D. A recent study in Illinois found that d', of

the graduates of pecia1 education teacher preparation programs In Illinois

came trm supported under Part O.

Perhaps the gtvatet challenge and test tt Part. D came following, the

passage of P.h. 94-142, and the eommeusnrvtte need for,sIgnificantly Increased

numbers of special edneatlon personnel. In the three school years from

1876-77 to 1979-80 the number of special educators employed increased by

43,000. Since it Is estimated that the annual attrition rate In special

education is 17 percent., compared to 6 percent overall in education, the

achievement Is even more Impressive.

Despite this progress, the Department of Education reported that in school

year 1979-80 there were 3,200 vacant special education positions nationwide

affecting an estimated 58,000 handicapped students. The Department of

Education also reported an ntimated shortfall of 8,a64 prepared personnel in

1981-82. Despite the evidence that Part. D significantly contributes to

meeting the personnel needs of special education and the evidence that severe

n t h . " , iron,. i l l 1.41 it Aoil 6.11 1 i ..111 1 .1., 1 t n 1.11 , lid , pn oi,d, 1, ,, .

nut It t tat tun budget rdact low, and pa 1 icy f I 11,1( IOW. I1.11,

111.1 11 6I I

We he I hat f er,111 h, I he l ungi.' 01 I in Ient "Er of I he 1010

funds and new tegnlat I onN hy tf, Admi ol st tat ion will Provide the Ilan "el Ing

this program needs if It Is to rema io ell en t ye. Won urge tin,' hob,' num I t nun In

na I t no support I or Pall , ail we od l n.r only t In, l o t !owl ng i echo', a I

1171811,1 (fie til

Doi Ike no het P.. i, n on t hilA whin in have hot In a giant ate? i ant tart aid hot 1 t Y.

Part D duo..., not n .tit a I o an otut horl ty for the !lee ret ry lu cot et Into cl.1111'0,t

With I'islitutlon, of Iigher,ducatl, d1 or at ate eth,at 101),11 .geodes I; I provide

t ra Iii rig opportkttilt 1., lot spec lal educ at Ion and support personnel. An a

revolt , the Ilennartment most rely on general grant announcements In

dist ri,noting ,here funds and does not have a means of concentrating at least a

smith {nit ion nt lhele lauds toward specif ic Cat CgOr tell of persittnel, i.e.,

t each., rs of t he emot tonally disturbed, mai t !handicapped , ort hoped !cal 1 y

imps! ed, physical therapists, occupational therapists, and geographic areas,

i.e., rural, where there are known shortages. In order that the Department

have t he meant; to begin to respond to these needs in a forthright fashion, we

recommend that sect long 631, 632 and 634 of Part D be amended to allow for a

limited contract ing authority. In this regard, we would recommend that the

Congress specify that in any given fiscal year not more than 10 percent of the

available funds cuull be used for this purpose.

Research and Demorst r

Research is the s zond oldest federal authority, coming a few years after

the initiation of personnel development programs. With respect to the federal

role in spec !al educa,ion research, we are reminded of the criteria employed

1,./ t I,, ,I I I l4,. I.,

4hal her tin I al r.,tIv. takotiitt I I. I wad vta In pt, I I t. 11,11 /. I

I b. 411, .01 ptIv.u, ,,., 1.,1 uIll hltr, Ile, go

Iry p1 I viii 10,1 tt, I 11 I 11,11,

11110 I 1101. I Vv.? , ,,d I o c a o l I , . I I 1 ,,..1

retpnti 1.1111y, t I Iy tl, tal A .v. Ino de, 11,11, I nv.,lve,l, fdu, .ti Inn

reti.141, h I 1 an IS( I 11,1I vold1111)1 e I 101 / uhl I, lot, hilt I, al Ivr 1 I h it II 1,1s.ft

1I tapo% Id) 11 1., thli I , h., I

the I ,, 411, a1,1,1 : havl iI; Itat at,l

1,rnf .,nd t Ito cm/m-1r t the In h. "Ha v I 11,. valIa,

In t I, rlaied he toot1 of Itivettin.,att

Hr. 'Aid r,tn, I1. t Vtara Inno,11,111," Inl InwIn di r ndet mew ii 11,1..

'14 -1L In, he avd11.1,1, under the reflit,I ill alit 11,11 Ity nt idd

I I 11 muted iniplt-m,11 at 11.11 Ana rv.tludtlun fit the

Implement AL ton at that law, We would not quarrel with I hat emphasis dui lug

Cbe first years of '14-142, but we rge'th Congress Co make clear that.

the essential and overriding mission under Part E should be intensive applied

research Coward Improvement of the quality of instruction of all exceptional

children. Research should focus on the continuing improvement of special

education in the areas of methodology of instruction, instructional

environment, and curriculum.

Moreover, we hay, said "applied- research rather than basic research. In

the vital area of basic research, we would trust that the relatively new

National Institute fat handicapped Research will carry primary responsibi,l,y,

thus leaving Part E funds free Co be directed toward application for

practitioners ttnd children.

378

Finally, we urge the Congress to stress, either in statute or report

language, the critical importance of utilizing the Part E authority toward the

continuing application of technology in special education instruction. M'ny

examples may be cited on the potential of technology, but may we simply

observe that, from 1980 to 1982, the number of microcomputers available in the

schoOls for instructional purposes doubled. The increase is likely to be even

higher in 1983 and 1984.

A careful reading of the Part E statute also suggests that this is the 'ne

authority in the ERA which may allow for model demonstration programs on a

flexible basis, that is, not specifically target..d as elsewhere in the ERA on

a specific group of chilc2en, i.e., early childhood education and the severely

handicapped. We urge the Congress to make it clear that Part E does in fact

allow for such a flexible program of model demonstrations because such an

authority is urgently needed. Two target areas which provide examples of the

urgent need to develop model demonstration activities may be found in the

education of seriously emotionally distrubed children and in the area of

secondary7transition education for all handicapped children.

With respect to secondary education, if high school is a momentous time

for all of our nation's youth, the challenges that must be overcome for

handicapped youth are truly staggering. This is the time when the basics

learned in elementary education must come together to produce personal

fulfillment, independent living, postsecondary education potentials, and

realistic opportunity in the world of work. All of this occurs in the midst

of an e7er changing job market. Further, all of this occurs in the midst of

the normal transitions of adolescence, compounded by the individual learning

difficulties of one requiring continuing special education.

379

Thua far, model demonstrations have been traditionally in the elementary

area. Secondary special education cannot be dealt with simply by an extension

of elementary special education or by minor changes in existing secondary

curricula. It is increasingly apparent that secondary level special education

requires significant alteration in instructional methodology, organization,

and structure. We urgently require a serious national investment in the

preparation, testing, and replication of

proven models in secondary special education.

The Education of Gifted and Talented Children

As the members of this subcommittee know, The Council for Exceptional

Children also speaks on behalf of gifted and talented children and their

special educational needs.

The history of recent federal activity in this area has not been

encouraging. On October 6, 1971, the U.S. Commissioner of Education, Sidney

Harland, submitted his now much quoted nationwide assessment regarding the

status of gifted and talented education to the Congress. One of the clear

messages of the Harland Report was: efforts to stimulate the development of

gifted and talented programs through the use of unspecified federal

appropriations were not benefitting gifted and talented children in any

significant way. Partly as a consequence of thirt evidence, the Congress

created in 1974, and later expanded in 1978 --with the support of CEC--amodest

but important program of federal support specifically for gifted and talented

children. That program included a state and local support component;

demonstration, research, and clearinghouse authority; and designation of a

U.S. Office for Gifted and Talented Children, which was housed in the then

Bureau of Education for the Handicapped.

380

But all of this was swept away and the evidence of the Harland Report was

disregarded with enactment of the Education Consolidation and Improvement Act

of 1981 (ECIA). The block grant proponents were given their day, and the

'gifted and talented program dissolved into that education block grant (Chapter

2, ECIA) along with most of the rest of the authorities under the prior

Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

What limited information is now available on the actual use of the block

grant by the states and local school districts with respect to gifted and

talented education is not encouraging. The National Committee for Citizens in

Education (NCCE) recently reported that only five states specified that a

percentage of the funds going to local education agencies for educating high

cost special needs children include gifted and talented children. The

percentage varied from 10 percent in Alabama, Velaware, and Washington to 5

percent in New Jersey and 4 percent in Oregon. Even if the local districts

adhered to these statelevel prescriptions (whether they are required by law

to do so is in doubt), this would represent only .5 percent of the 3437

million distributed to the states in fiscal 1982.

Only slightly more encouraging news comes from a recent preliminary report

to the U.S. Department of Education. Nineteen of the 24 states reporting

indicated that th,..tir localities are utilizing the block grant for educational

support for the gifted and talented, representing a total of t3.8 million and

representing a percentage of 3.03 of the total Chapter 2 allocation. Nineteen

states means less than half of the states, and when one factors in the

territories, it could be argued that barely over onethird of all

jurisdictions report allocations for gifted and talented education. It is

also worth noting that the prior, targeted Program was operating at *6 million

in actual appropriations before being liquidated.

381

We do not mean to dismiss potential for gifted and talented children under

the block grant. But the block grant approach does not conotitute federal

leadership at a time when the experts are saying that it is essential that the

federal government return to its role as a catalytic agent. In fact, the

history of efforts for gifted and talented children presents convincing

evidence that the states and localities follow the lead of national trends and

federal priorities.

For CEC th:: role of catalytic agent means vigorous federal activity in the

following areas: professional training, inservice training, demonstration

programs, innovation and development through research, and state leadership

expansion and training.

The Council for E:aeptional Children remains firmly committed to the

inclusion of gifted and talented children within the exceptional child

concept. It should be recalled that historically the majority of special

educators have used the term exceptional in referring to all children with

special needs (both gifted as well as handicapped) and likewise, as

practitioners, have always perceived themselves as belonging to a profession

committed to the education of all exceptional children. In addition, there

are presently 28 states that administratively house their gifted and talented

educational programs' within their statelevel Special or Exceptional Education

Units or Divisions.

We believe, Mr. Chairman, that it is time for the Congress to signal again

a priority concern for gifted and talented children and their special

educational needs. We have a number of recommendations to again establish a

federal leadership role in this area, but at'this time we make the following

specific recommendations:

382

1. That Special Education Programa within the Department of Education be

required to include gifted and.talented children as a priority

population.

2. That, wherever appropriate, the Secretary discretionary programs

(EHA, Parts C through F) which are administered by the current SEP be

expanded co include gifted and talented children as an eligible

target population along with handicapped children.

3. That the reconstituted Natidnal Advisory Committee on Special

Education inilude among its responsibilities issues relevant to the

education ot gifted and talented children.

Hr. Chairman, without going into great detail at this time, we would like'

to observe again that the proposed enlargement of the exceptional child base

is by no means revolutionary. Many states, including Connecticut, have such a

base, either in statutes or in practice. And again, in the special education

profession there exists a long established common base of expertise with

respect to the whole spectrum of exceptionality, handicapped children and

gifted And talented children.

In conclusion, may we again thank you for this opportunity to offer,

written comment for the public record. We stand prepared to make the full

resources of The Council for Exceptional Children available to this

subcommittee as it fulfills its legislative charge with respect to

reauthorization of the Education of the Handicapped Act.

:383

Senator W1.1(1<Eu. I have no .further questions. I think .ydu. haveraised some very Interesting points, and believe me, I am going tohave staff work on this.

I might add, as we do incree.ie our knowledge, we learn anew,and' that is the whole business of science. There is no point in stick-ing with something that is I() years old, or whatever, in the sensethat you can improve the result, whethcy it is in terms of fundingand tile use of that funding, or whether n. in terms of the basiclaw itself. Itwould seem to me that these are two comparativelyeasy and necessary changes.

Dr. GALLAGHER. i think the interesting thing, Senator, is thatthere is almost near unanimity among the professionals in the fieldon the importance of that early time period, and it is only the ad-ministrative mechanisms that have prevented more effective move-ment forward in this area.

Senator WEICKER. I think it is, great.Mr. WEINTRAL113. Senator, on your question, your point earlier,

about Public Law 94-142, in fact, our findings are that Public Law94-142 in the preschool area has served as a disincentive; if Stateswere not mandated to serve preschool, but mandated to serve theschool age, and resources were tight, what happened was the Statesshifted their resources, so in fact, in some degrees, we have lessgoing on under State actic.n at the preschool level than we hadbefore Public Law 94-142, simply because of the economic, legal,and other pressures, and I think we need to balance that out.

Senator WEICKER. Gentlemen, thank you very much, for somevery valuable testimony.

The next panel will consist of Dr. Dennis E. :f.-lanley, the execu-tive director of Mountain. Plains Regional Center, and Dr. WayneSailor, profess°. at San Francisco State University, and Presidentof the Association for the Severely Handicap9ed.

Gentlemen, it is a pleasure for the .committee oto have you both.here. Obviously, both of you made a great effort to come a longway. Please proceed with your testimony; and I might have somequestions to ask as we go along.

We will be informal, so you car unload. The idea here is obvious-ly, to get your views on the record, but just as impor.antly, to helpus in our task, and I can assure you that I do not pretend to havethe expertise of any of the witnesses here today. End certainly, in-cluding those in front of me right now. That is why your visit hereis so valuable to me.

Please proceed.

STATEMENT OF' DR. DENNIS E. HANLEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,MOUNTAIN PLAINS REGIONAL CENTER, DENVER, ('(HA).; ANDDR. WAYNE SAILOR, PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF SPECIALEDUCATION, SAN FRANCISCO STATE UNIVERSITY, PRESIDENT,THE ASSOCIATION FOR THE SEVERELY HANDICAPPED, SANERA N(7ISCO, ('ALIT.

-Dr. HANLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.I am Dennis Hanley, executive director of Mountain Plains Re-

gional Center, Denver, Colo., administering deaf-blind contracts ina nine - Stair, region.

384

sincerely appreciate the opportunity you have given me to tes-tify before this subcommittee in regard to deaf-blind services. Icam'? here today to communicate three basic messages to you.

-First, administration, funding, and operation of day-to-day deaf-blind programs must become the sole responsibility of individualStates Second, Federal support and regional center provision oftechnical assistance must be continued and intensified. Third, theidentay of deaf-blindness must be retained.

We, the centcz.s, States, and local agencies, have been urged bythe Federal administration to achieve State assumption of responsi-bility for program services. The nine State center I represent hasachieved transfer of 65 percent of the funding, responsibility forday-to-day programs, and 95 percent of the program evaluation re-sponsibility to States.

This transition is not accidental; it has been purposefully and ac-tively achieved to assure appropriate continuation of programs. Myfinal report for the current 5-year contract will contain State assur-ances that current level of education programs will be maintainedby State and local agencies. The transfer of these responsibilities isconsistent with the position of the Forum Report in 1981, a nation-al survey of all State departments of education, published in "TheNational Advocate" in 1982 and in a third study by the AmericanInstitute for Research in 1982. Further conclusions from all threestudies and surveys support the need for deaf-blind centers to focuson technical assistance.

It is time for State and local education to assume responsibilityfor day-to-day education of deaf-blind children, with one exception.Educational services have not appeared to develop as rapidly in th'trust territories; thus, current services would be jeopardized if St.port is removed.

It is time for leaders in the field of deaf-blind to again be on thecutting edge of further appropriate development. Deaf-blind pro-gram administration has become a manager of things, for example,operational budgets and compliance. When it had not been done, itwas innovation; now it is duplication. We, as deaf-blind educators,must again lead people, become innovative, and carry appropriateservices to the deaf-blind that next necessary step.

I am convinced that there are compelling reasons why Federaland regional support roles must remain and. continue to providetechnical assistance to the States.

The level of intensity of technical assistance needed in the areaof deaf-blind services is like no other. Children who are identifieddeaf-blind by title VI-C have a very low incidence ratio-1 in13,000in the zero to -21 population, yet are distributed over allStates, and are some of the most profoundly handicapped of thetotal population. Because the teachers and support staff servingthese children are geographically isolated, providing staff develop-ment and training activities for them becomes extremely difficultfor any single State. Regional centero can provide a structure fordelivering technical assistance to States and their deaf-blind pro-grams efficiently and economically. This emphasis and intensity isnot likely to occur without a high-impact technical assistanceeffort.

t)

385

An issue in services to the handicapped concerns integrating thedeaf-blind population into that of the severe and profound populartion. That must not occur. There is a critical need to maintain thediscrete identity of the deaf-blind population.

The severe and profound classification is a broad, all-encompass-ing term, identifying anyone who functions at a very low level.Deaf-blindness, also qualifying as severe and profound, identifies aperson with a specific handicap indicative of specific service needs.Still, there are similarities in some areas, and I encourage you toenable centers to share training and development activities withthose who provide services to the severe and profound.

Because of the obligation to serve all handicapped children,State. s cannot affor I to expend the time and effort to further devel-op and improve services for small populations. I can only concludethere is a compelling reason for a continued Federal and regionalrole for deaf-blind services.

The following recommendations are respectfully submitted: (1)Enact continuing legislation requiring clear identification of thedeaf-blind handicapping condition; (2) transfer regulatory, fiscal,and program administration to State and local agencies, except inthe trust territories; (3) establish multi-State centers to providetechnical assistance to the deaf-blind population; (4) enable centersto extend services beyond the scope of the State education agencyin the development of appropriaL, services; (5), enable deaf-blindcenters to cooperate and share tech:ical assistance activities withState and local programs serving. the severe and profound; (6) focuspriority on preschool children, zero to 5, and adolescents, 15 to 21;(7) identify the direction technical assistance will take by stating aspecific scope of work consistent with the studies cited; and (8) es-tablish a voluntary commitment process for States to participate intechnical assistance activities.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the committee for the opportunity to tes-tify and I stand for your questions.

[The prepared statement of Dr. Hanley follows:]

386

Ur:ITED SENATE

SUBCOMMI1TEE ON lilE HAnICAPPED

TESTIMONY op DENNIS E. HANLEY

Chaijan Welct.or, nut..0.r:l if th. Senate Snbcomn,it.tee on the

flaP6I,0PI,ed, I an; Dennis 'Hanley, ENctli(iVI Dire,:for oi Mountain

Plain Regioni4) Center, D,Ilvc1, C,I,rad., iiii tcrilif deat-hlind

contracts in a nine-state region. I incorcly apprcciale the oppor-

tutlifl,' you have given me co testify before this subcommittee in

,ree,ard to doat-blind services and Title VI-I: proglams. In addition

to presenting my plepared test imisly, I reslwctItilly ,tibmit myself

Iii your ,iaestions.

Iraro; here today to communicate three bash messages to you

Firstadl!,ivistratien, funding and operation ot day-to-day deaf-1,1 ind

education pr.tgrams must become the sole responsibility of individual

stales. Second, lcderaL siipport, and regional renter provision of

technical assistance must he continued and intensified. Third, the

identity (classification) of deaf-blindness ilust be retained.

In PL 91-230; Title VI-C, Sccion 622, created Deaf-Blind

Centeis and directed them to develop .and ;u:rvices for deaf-

blind children. Thane service,. were implemented and have been main-

tained throiutlt l'7,83, It is appropriate that stater now assume and con-

tinue chit managenwnt of Jay-to-day educational pru;;Yam!;. It is time

for Deaf-Blind Centers to redirect their attention to innovation and

development of servides needed but not vet available to deaf-blind

children. Federal funds have almost alt:ays Iii', ii used in this manner.

,l4e, the Centers, states and local ag:.:ncies, have been urged by the

federal administration to proceed toward gradual state assumption of

responsibility for program services. To this date, the nine-state region

I represent has achieved transfer ofsixty-five percent (65%) of the

funding responsibility for day-to-day educational program!: and ninety-

five percent (9S%) of the program evaluation respousihility to states

U

bt (ii 'Y LvialiLITLE

387

with only monitor ins; activity performed by the t:enter. This transition

is not accidental; it has been purposefully and at:Lively achieved

to assure approptiatecontinuarion of provrams. My final report for

the current five-year contract will contain sinned good faith assur-

ances, by each state, that current level ot oay-to -day educational

programs will be maintained by staie and agencies. Thu Center

has, in this transition, become nviv,d in significant

'technical assist:lin,. referred to in Wortseope Opt ionsi (Attachment #1).

Reutinsibil ity_of StAt Pros.:,rams

The t roust er of day-to-day Inugram respono ibili ty is consistent with

the posit ion of the. FORUM tiepin t. (At t achment 1'') pub 1 i shed in 1981, a

nut i ona 1 ey of al l state depar s of ,ducat ion pith! fished in The

Nat'l (Ala :1,ivocat in 1982 (At tachment (/ 3) and in a third study by the

American i cute for Reseal chi' in 1982 (Attachment (I)). Fur ther con-

e lie; ions troll all three ;incl ;tipport. tllo nixed for Deaf

Blind -t On!. ir t o locus upon technical ass.i t once.

It fir, tine for .t:t at e and local education to assume d i ect fiscaland program responsibility f or day-to- day educational services to de:il

'I, 1 'Id chi Idren with one exception, E,IlIcA lOnA I services have not appeared

to develop rapidly in Cho trust r t or t hui;, maintenance of

set V doV, Opl,1 if StIppol't I ctuV,41.

I t t. !;t. t t .r.stan, I he tuan.ly.C'1,11t of in ,!;t At, I i';Iled

And proi,ram in deaf-!ii ind education. It ir.tme for leaders in

the deaf-hlind tiold to to again he on the cutting edge of fur-

ther appropttate dud ovordeo dev..lop::ent, Deal blind program

administration has he,.ome al I.anamet of thitiv,s, :,4' o:.d6;:plo, day co-day

pro6raIns, opetational ,nt.! ',:hen it hid m,t been done,

wurk,cop, ,Jptions

vokun E.- port, "Selectee! Is

Anly H, 1q81.in !'wIvi, helivory to Is,al-hlid Children,"

3The National Advocate, Vol. IS, May Ii, "Service Continuityfor Deaf-Blind Children."

4 American Institnt for Research, `.eptomher, "Evaluabillty Assess-ment of the Deaf-Blind Centers and 'aurvices Proram."

0 0LJ

! t.

388

it was innovation; now it is duplication. We, as deaf-blind educators,

must again lead people, become innovative and curry appropriate services

to the deaf-blind that next necessary step.

Regional Centers - Vehicle for Technical Assistance

I am convinced that there are compelling reasons why federal and regional,

support roles must remain and must continue to provide technical assistance

to the states. The studies and surveys I cited earlier have all reached

this same conclusion. My own Board of Directors for the Mountain Plains

Regional Center has set this direction for the nine states in our region.

The level and intensity of technical assistance needed in the area of

deaf-blind services is like no other. Children who are identified deaf-

blind by Title VI-C have a very low incidence ratio (1 in 13,000) in the

0-21 population and yet are distributed over all states, and are some of

the most profoundly handicapped of the total population. Because of this,

the teachers and support staff serving these children are unique and geo-

graphically isolated. Providing staff development and training activities

for them becomes difficult, if not impossible, for any single state. In

addition, these same training activities and other technical assistance

needs to be provided for professionals serving the deaf-blind who are sep-

arate from the educational agency such as staff under the divisions of

rehabilitation, social services, developmental disabilities or health.

Regional Centers can provide a structure for delivering this techni-

cal assistance to states and their deaf-blind programs efficiently and

economically. Appropriate and focused attention, not possible through

traditional education, can be given by Regional Centers to the needs iden=

tified in the studies cited. Emphasis and intensity can be directed to

innovative development that is not likely to occur withuut a high impact

technical assistance effort.

Deaf-Blindness - Retain Identity by Classification

An issue in services to the handicapped concerns integrating the

deaf-blind population into that of the severe and profound as a single

category. That must not occur. There is a critical need to maintain the

discrete identity of the deaf-blind population. The severe and profound

classification is a broad, all-encompassing term, identifying anyone who

functions at a very low level. Deaf-blindness, also qualifying as severe

389

and profound, identifies a person with a specific handicap indicative

of specific service needs. Still, there are similarities in some

needed service areas and I encourage you to enable centers to share

training and development activities with those who provide service

to the;generallopulation of severe and profound where appropriate

and feasible.

Without identity a body of expertise, experience and directed

effort to deaf-blind will disappear. Because of the obligation to

serve all handicapped children, states cannot afford to expend the

time and effort (intensity) to further develop and improve services

for small populations. Finally, the combined disabilities of deafness

and blindness, and, in many cases, added to other disabilities create

learning obstacles that grow in size geometrically not additively.

Teaching methods and activities cannot he applied by adding those of

deafness to those of blindness with any hope of success. The best ex-

ample is in the area of teaching the child to communicate. A child who

is dea? -blind at birth (80-85% of those in my region) is catastrophi-

cally limited in the human senses necessary to form a language system.

While there have been advances in this, area, there is much to be done.

Loss of deaf-blind identity will'result in loss of focus on need for

further development. I can only conclude that there is a compelling

reason. for a continued federal/regional rule in technical assisice

for deaf-blind services.

The following recommendations are respectfully submitted:

1) Enact continuation legislation requiring clear identification

of the deaf-blind handicapping condition;

2) Transfer regulatory, fiscal and program administration of

day-to-day educational and related services to state and

local agencies, except in the trust territories;

3) Continue regulatory, fiscal and program administration of

day-to-day educational and related services to deaf-blind

children in the trust territories and provide those terri-

tories with technical assistance;

4) Establish multi -state centers to provide technical assistance

to the deaf -blind population;

:3 9,

390

5) Enable deaf-blind centers to extend :services beyond Lhe

..ape of the state education agency in the develoPment of

appropriate services, for example, Lu institutions, develop-

t',ental

6) Enable deaf -blind atotels to ..n.perate and share technical

a6sIt.ana act ivities, where apploin late and feasible, with

!mato and local plugrans serving the more general handIcapp-

ing condition of severe and profound;

7) Focus priority on pro-school children, 0-5, (early inter-

vention) and adolenceuts, 15-21, (transition to adult ser-

vices);

8) Identify the direction tchnILI assistance will Lake by

:ntating a specific scope of work consistent with the studies

cited, (example is provided in Attachment

9) Fstablish a voluntary comnit.ment process for states to parti-

cipate in technical assistance activities.

Mr. Chairman, Ithank you and your committee for-the opportunity to

present my testimony. 1 place myself at your dispoio1 for questions.

(Yale: It. the interest.o econmy, certain attachments accompanyingMr. Hanle;;'s prepared statement were retained in the riles of the committee.)

Senator WK1( la:11 Thank you very much.Dr. Stilor'.).Dr. Smi,ok. Thank you, Mr. Chairmaii.I am Wayne Sailor, and 1 am with the San Francisco State UM-,

versity, department of special education, and current president ofthe Association for Severely Ilandicapped.

I very much appreciate the opportunity to respresent severelyhandicapped children and their parents and giving this testimony.

The children that I am talking about are primarily severely retarded, may also have other multihandicapping conditions, and ingeneral are encompassed Within the lowest functioning one percentof the population. I think that the first statentent that is probablyclear to all of us in this room is that the severely handicappedchild and young person of this country has benefited enormouslyfrom Federal involvement, particularly from the passage of PublicLaw 94-1-12. Just 5 years ago, I was employed as a psychologist in amental retardation hospital. I was responsible for developing treat-ment programs for individuals on wards within that hospital.There was very little mobility from the institution to the communi-tyin fact, virtually none, I think it is safe to say. There werelarge numbers of children in beds, getting bedsores, being improp-erly positioned, improperly fed, very little attention being paid toskill development, and so on and so on.

Those exact same sort of children today are in special classes inregular public schools; they get around in all aspects of the commu-nity including recreational facilities, including storesall of theplaces that one would expect to see the same age person with nodisabilities, we are now seeing the same severely handicapped kidsthat formerly were warehoused in hospitals.

I am sorry to say that not all of these children are being reachedin the same way. We continue to operate mental retardation insti-tutes, and we continue to see children who deserve and, I think,are entitled to much better.

I believe that one of the most important aspects of the Federalinvolvement in the outcome has been the increased visibility of se-verely handicapped children in the population. In the city that Iwork, San Francisco, I am pleased to be able to tell you now thatwe are fully integrated in San Francisco. There are no severelyhandicapped children or young people in a segregated, handi-capped-only facility for their education. All of the programs for se-verely handicapped students are now located in regular publicschools or private schools in San Francisco.

That increased visibility has enabled the children who are non-disabled to begin to enlighten their parents on what these kids areall about, and I think that is having a very beneficial impact inCalifornia and the bay area.

Education of severely handicapped kids has undergone two majorphases, I think, since passage of Public ,Law 94-142. The first wasthe effort to develop a curriculum to meet the educational needs ofthe kids. The early efforts of curriculum development tended to bepatterned after some earlier work that had been done on preschooland early childhood kinds of developments, and it led to what wecalled the cognitive development and age discrepancy-based cur-,riculum efforts. These efforts to teach severely handicapped chil-

39c-,

392

dren the kinds of skills that would be characterized by preschoolprograms and by normal kindergarten programs and so on, I thinkwas beneficial in one sense, and that is that it led to a very, verystrong teaching technology to be developed, because these skills forthe most part were very low in their motivation for severely handi-capped children, and it was difficult to teach them, and it led tothe efforts to train very, very sophisticated and competent teach-ers.

The real breakthrough in education of the handicapped occurredrecently, I think, in about 1979, when we shifted from a cognitive-based curriculum to what we now call a functional life skills cur-riculum. We made a decision that what severely handicapped chil-dren need educationally is everything that we can give them to in-crease their ability to function independently in a normal commu-nity in the post-school years, and that brought very much intofocus the issue of where education should take place. It now be-comes necessary, and I think absolutely appropriate, to serve se-verely handicapped children in the most normal environment pos-sible, and we believe that now to be the regular public school: Theinvolvement of the nondisabled age peer has proven to be a criticalaspect. in this curriculum development, and if we are going to suc-

. teed in increasing independence and making nondeadend sorts ofjob placements_ possible for very severely handicapped persons,then we have CO begin that process early. We have to be in multi-ple-community environments. We have to have regular, face-to-faceand daily contacts between our students and nondisabled age peers.The nature of that contact, we believe, should be not only a friend-ship and a social contact, but should also have instructional capa-bilities built into it as well, in the sense of peer tutors.

Because of the relatively small amount of time that has passedsince this conceptual shift occurred in our own program develop-ment, we see the need for a continued strong Federal presence inthe education of the handicapped, specifically for severely handi-capped children.

These programs, as you know;-Mr. Chairman, are very expensiveat the local school diapitC and Stat- level. They are difficult tomanage relative to- the more familia, special education programsfor less severely disabled children, and there is a tendency to,segre-gate and isolate severely handicapped populations in the absence ofa strong Federal incentive to do otherwise.

Up to now, the services to severely handicapped children havebeen by general authority and by Department of Education policy,rather than by specific, designated authority for severely handi-capped children.

Should Congress continue a major discretionary law to directeducation of handicapped students? The answer, we feel, is a defi-nite "yes." We feel the needs of severely handicapped children forimproved competencies in their teachers to carry out a functionallife skills curriculum, to improve service delivery models certainlymandate a strong continuing Federal presence. We additionallywould hope that the statutory language specific to the growingneeds of severely handicapped students could be added to the exist-ing education statute.

393

I have addressed six concerns that 1 would like to see included insome Form in that specific language if this is pursued.

The first issue is related services. We continue to have a problemat the local school district level and at the State level in the provi-sion of needed therapy services and other related services to se-verely handicapped students. There seems to be a great deal of con-fusion concerning who is responsible for the payment of servicesand the provision of these services. We find jurisdictional lightsover cost and administration. Finallyone of the thing, that hasbeen of most immediate concern to usis the tendency for relatedservices to seek to tie individuals to more restrictive placements.The argument here is we can only prolvide physical therapy if weput all these kids over here where we can have a therapist and anoffice and a therapy room and so on. We now know that that is notthe case. We would like to see statutory language clarify the rela-tionship between the concept of the least restrictive environmentand the provision of related services.

The second issue has to do with Dr. Hanley's discussion on theintegration, or lack of integration, of deaf-blind services with se-verely handicapped programs. I think we have possibly a minorphilosophical or conceptual disagreement on that particular issue. Iwould like to see a much closer integration of services and pro-grams for deaf-blind individuals and severely handicapped pro-grams. I think the technologies of the two are parallel, they areclosely related; I think we benefit each other, and I would like to,see those programs amalgamatedparticularly with respect to sec-ondary programs and the development of meaningful least-restric-tive environment high school vocational training and so on withdeaf-blind students.

The third issue has to do with early childhood programs for se-verely handicapped children. We agree with the earlier panels'presentations. We feel that programs for early childhood have par-ticularly benefited mildly and moderately disabled very young chil-dren. We would like to see specific new early childhood procure-ments that would stress severely handicapping conditions.

We would like to see special language under this section for re-search and demonstration projects for severely handicapped youngchildren and with a mandate that these programs-also be carriedout in the least-restrictive environment, particularly in regularpublic schools, where we maximize interaction with kindergartenprograms.

The fourth issue is personnel preparation. We consider this to beextremely important. A recent issue of "Education Times," volume4, reported a survey of personnel placement officers at universitiesaround the country. The survey revealed a shortage of special edu-cation teachers that was second only to the shortage of math andscience teachers. The specialization of severely handicapped withthe specialized training that is necessary for teachers to work in afunctional life skills curriculum with this population is particularlyvulnerable in the absence of a strong Federal effort in personneltraining.

My own university, the Department of Special Education is oneof the largest three departments in the country, and yet, in theclasses that I and my colleagues teach in education of severely

21-971 0-83-26

a 0

394

handicapped ,:todents, I will find only seven or eight trainees en-rolling in these courses. The unHersities are unhappy with classesthat are seven and eight. We are under very strong pressure toclose a class out if' we do not have at least 14 students in it. Myfeeling is that without continued strong Federal support, we wouldbe at jeopardy to he aide to provide university and college-hasedtraining with the severely handicapped specialization.

We also would like to see inservice training he returned to itsprevious high priority within the personnel training specifications.Many of the teachers hired to educate severely handicapped chil-dren and youth up to 1979 lack the competencies to carry out afunctional life skills curriculum, and to effectively utilize the pres-ence of nonhandicapped age peers in the instructional process. Webelieve teat a strong Federal role in procuring that inservice train-ing effort would be very helpful.

The fifth point, demonstration projects. Research, innovation, de-velopment, and demonstration projects fbr severely handicappedchildren have come out of a general pool of funds for all programsof this type. We would like to see specific procurement for severelyhandicapped children to facilitate continued research and innova-tion and development.

Finally, instructional technology, computer applications fbr ourspecific populationwe would like to see new language in statutethat would facilitate the movement into the education of severelyhandicapped students of some of the current breakthroughs thatare occurring nationally in science, technology, and the applied useof computers. We would like to see this authorization call for spe-cific research and development as well as demonstration activities,and appropriate training in the uses of computer technology, withspecific application to severely handicapped students. The uses anddevelopment of specialized adaptive equipment for the enhance-ment of vocational and community living schools, uses and develop-ment of specific communication devices and their relatiOnship tocomputer technology, and uses and development of specializedequipment for the enhancement of mobility.

Thank you.[The prepared statement of Dr. Sailor follows:I

",. ;,\ link, I'll. IL, l'Itl.:;11)1.,N, 'rift , A,',SgiCIAI()N SVIt1,1'N MICA ITED

: mush appreciate this nopfortunity to provide testimony

!0 Hui ifion of the Handiralwed. I shall in this testimony

ifi,ally the hoods ot severely handicapped children and

..tudenC., whin are r.everely retarded and who may be

ed additional severe the children for whore

henefitted enormously from the free appropriate

itior .oat wA, quaranteed to them in 1974. We now see children,

woo oi,i a de,lade ago were hidden away and treated as if they were

r , I 0111.111 .1 111-(11)11!111c in N111111.1'. publ IC SC 10015,

,! , ,t1nopino centers, public 1'0 dtionol facilities,

)4 fro elates that their non-handicapped age peers

this increavd visibility that has resulted from

!fle idoc.ation of the HandicaPped Act that we believe

, iv ,e,,pon',ible for the heightened netional aware-

for el,p.ation and the preservation of the

,:.pcu, late education for all students with disabilities,

pro.;,:. in the education of severely handicapped students

op;ler.p,r two pha,.e,, from it: inception in 1974 to the

pre-..ert -In the first ri,ase that lasted until Apo roxifria tely 1979,, r '111 etfoct was expended in develoning appropriate education

cu,'".: ,la, in onstructing d viable service delivery system and

Preff,acirt, the cadre or leadership and seeciali?ed Personnel to

deliver tni educational experience. Then in the second phase,

beginni the tu,n of the present decade, a very significant

conceptd14 :.rift occurred in the definition of the curriculum needs

of severel/ handicapped students.

4

396

During the Ile,t. ,e, irrI.iilum developed Inc education

of severely handicapped students Yid', hd';ed on earlier work growing

largely out 0 preschool handicapped early ififvfvefffioN prograf"

the tmitvot tf these programs stressed discrepancies between

age-expected skill levels of normal children and severely handicapped

children in coundtive development and ire 1Q-related behaviors. If a

child, for e<ample, happened to be I7 years old and yet could do none

of the kinds of things that are exhibited in d typical pre-school

programwifh non-handicapped three or four year olds, then the basis

for an educational program for the handicapped child was often found

to be an effort to teach precisely those pre-school kinds of skills.

The imoortancP of the educational environment had not been realized

to any significant degree prior. to 1979.

In the second phase it was recognized that the content of an

appropriate educational program should tdk,. a very different form.

It horlqio recognized that the most important needs of severely handi-

capped students were for functional life skills that would enable

them to live with increased independence in normal community environ-

ments in the post-school years. Now, for the first tine, the full

importance of where the educational program takes place became real-

ized. As an outgrowth of that realization, we now see that the only

appropriate eclacational environment for a severely handicapped

student is one in which non-hardicapped students of the same age

range are also receiving their education. The presence and involve-

ment of these non - handicapped peers in now recoonized as a critical

and extremely important factor in the implementation of a functional

life stills curriculum,

397

It is prel Hely bef a.se of thi, major conceptual advance in \

the education ot ;euvrely handicapped children and youth that we

see the need for . coctinued strong federal presence in education

ot the handicapped. Federal program; for severely handicapped

students have been of extreme importance because these low - incidence

Populations have proven to he very expensive and difficult to manage

relative to the more familiar special education program; for less

severely disobled children. furthermore, there is a strong national

tendency to segregate and isolate the severely handicapped populations

in the ahs.-nre of strong federtl incentive to do otherwise. Up to now

this fedcral role has been accomplished by general authority and by

Deportment of Education policy rather than by specific, designated

autheritv,.

!,o, to address the question, "Should the Congress continue a

sr di;.iretionar/ low to direct the education of handicaoped

,,,tadents.'', the answer, we feel, is a most definite yes. The needs of

!,everly handicapped students fur improved competencies in their

teachers to Provide . functional life skills curriculum and the needs

for improved curriculum and service delivery model; that reflect

education in the regular public and private school would certainly

mandate a clear and strong continuing federal presence. Additionally,

TASH would strongly recommend that new language specific to the grow-

ing needs of severely handicapped students be added to existing educa-

tion statute. The specific content of this new language should, we

believe, address at least the following major concerns:

398

i ' l a ' 1 1 , 1 t 1 1 . 1 I Iit I l i t I II, a I hunt

I I I t I s, I I I,I I 1..1 t 111..11 111 t 11111 W' HI,

I I II I

11 ii it in .1 '.1

t a h I

IIII 11 t fi wtio I '. I I. .1,11'. fr f 1,0 rll'}f all It

Id, I II I LII I 1,1 11, I It ,,,1 ICI /I' 1, ray' II ',111111,

' 14 I 1,1111,1.'1 t t. t r' l'ilt

r X11 it I to t 41, I , Ihi, ',atm, tntia

t,, tak, ( of t.il io It ion in an int t (t1 tri(1

t". .it 'in , LI, , ra.t.ilint5f,nd Ihdt. 5 I a Yu. e,i'y

1 It' 111 1, 1 toll; fl r'. it uvl ion at r t t. v t

i 1 i 01.1' is V I III PH. be ( onl melt

v/ I t at, I I r -RI itl.1

aoa t ti I i tid 1, roa, ',i1'! IrlIt's organ i to

(,a.,h !II .1 iI(1 I d(`I'l i IlOY v,.(1

1,, ; I n ha hi r II In our attempts to Lope

.vo th 1, ' i I f),I II I I ,tr,`11 . I id 'I; gum,. ,Ind

1 t r eilUcst t ()nal

at I, to integrated With general CV

it," I ,'udPhts. TAM reiwniiihnd; that special-

if -:,11n11 nut and that {articular attention

1 r ,1 Orli! I in.f icr 0(1 t',1 Levi Corrit,url Hying need of

al' -,,hdhnt- vord mpairTnnt, but in a manne that

, ton 7 ,ith Iii rodrai,, and 1 s for

otna, Jr.n

399

11tI f 1hr ,q PI I t IIIIrf1111 r11'('I Il Lill I III?' 11

'loll p If)), t110 I I. II, 1111 dh! d h rtql

one, I 0 1,0 I on! ini10,1. We Icy I ,

I, I riorr rr r 1r I HI,' I Ori r,

1,1! ;;1/. 1 : / ,tr ,( ', $1' d d vl' i/Pird'flt

pf ,ft /1'0 I., ((Ictl t r rl,

r rr I o h ,/ ir (1 t inn,f1

lin, .1 0,001 I ',.n !, 0,lntr fhll t tftf,,

,!!rl In rt I Hit! !NH f V It n ,11.,.'1110r1

I, r I!! If .111!! i» )1 Irl 'it' with rnt rn

100 f ',0v,rvli 'Tyr 01 i i,t hri

t t t .11 i It nf. 1111110,n

t H I i, 1.I1f I t` !in( !I t

0 , (.1,, I )1',1 ,f i I educd-

.!,,, 1.Ie llt 11,1, h .Ind mince te,tch(!rs

t l f 0 , 1 f rtir 1110 , Itrt iculirlY fur; ,1, I, 1,11 '1f oVOH,, I Itandi,nn

t,1 Hrri i t

, I I! 1/11t ;01 !) nc. u to forr)} I ow ,!nrol 1

thic re ,IS 0 n

r or. r

, i t ,

inn r Hri ; r 'I r (trim. fr'ler11 ,epport,,t this. . The

, 1'(''1 r',ttiOrt aC t, tipr. i 1 l .! ' 1

40.

400

fiC,a lotthn, thir lh,.0,v1.0 tiatninu tin vntormil

to it,. proylow, htqh priority Within Idm",onuel PreParatinti iJ

flrltlnns, Many of the teachers hired to edim ale severely handi-

,appvd ,hildren and Youth op to larl the competencies to carry

oat a fun,tionr1 life still ,orcpcuium and to effectively utilize

the prc,encr nt nnn.hdndhapped age peers in the educational process,

An outreach effort to upgrade the .lilts of these teachers is urgent-

ly needed,

hemonstration Prpjepts; TAW recommends that specific language

be developed to recognite that legitimate need for innovation and

development projects for the school -age severely handicapped population,

presently, venters for research and curriculum development, such as

reflected in the current Institutes for Severely Handicapped Rese,-rch,

receive their appropriations piecemeal from existing general research

funding, Innovation and development projects for severely handicapped

children and youth should stand on their own specific procurement,

grounded in statutory languade, This language should clarify what is

meant by model programs and should direct authorization specifically

to the development of educational programs that occur in the presence

of educational programs for non-disabled, age peers and that include

deaf - blind children and youth as a part of the severely handicapped

procurement.

Proposed New Part - Inst ctional Technology for the Severely

Handicapped Population: TASH recommends that a new authorization

be provided to facilit5te the movement into the education of severely

handicapped students to current national breakthroughs in science and

401

f I. I II. 1,0,, 1 / 01,1 1 //lit I ,/,1 / /1111 .J11111111

II 1 Iiil 111, II ".// 11' /// /!// I ''1/11 1 // 1/011 I .1', iI1111111`, l',11 /1111

! I1II 1,1,1 11,11 .,11 1.11 I 1.1111/11.1 111 I II,/ .I JI 111 1111111/1/r / 1/1 /111011)11V

,4 l / li r I I 1. if I 1/ 1 //,/' 1 ',III/it/11/ /, , 101,,

1/H It., . I ,11 1 Ii,1 I I I .//,1 I Ivr 1,1,111,.//11/ f11 hi. 1.1itlo t

nl v) I1 'null 11,1 , ruin I I .I , (11. vt.111)1111.il It

.,1,1 11 I /i. 11 1 t. 1,1/ 11,11,111p tII 1111g111II r

11/f 1)11,11 end I ill, .1", Ind II VI, I ,,1,11'pIr I 5h1'Li 11ilyd equlpn11 .11i tnr

I ill, 1/11 In, /// .`11 / IJ / I I I .

,init` 1, 111,11 111,11 IIII, to .1 1:.!1,1l,' ,,I0111 III Ihn /,11Ii(:111111/ii t tl/e,

In,/ 1 will /*A ; I 1,. filet IA t ri1 rt.,/ V III InnII91t it II

,I,v1.1,1, 'I lien that will «Int it1111, 11, hen f t

t ht.

4

402

S(411001' V KICK Thank you very much, Dr. Sailor, I appreciateyour test lomy,

I only have one question, and that is for Dr. Huntley. Dr, Sontaghuts told the subcommittee thud the 1)()1'11111(.1a or Ethwittion canconfidently shift the focus of the centers away from direct services,since the States now have the capacity to provide these services, Towhat extent are the State and local education agencies assumingthe responsibility 14 providing direct educational services for thedeaf-blind children?

Dr. IlAtsu.t.N. Senator, in my nine State region, in 1981-1982, 05-percent assumption was achieved by our member States. Projectedfor the current fiscal year, they have projected 80 percent assump-tion. So, we are looking at it 20-percent assumption differential forthe upcoming your for duty-to-day education programs.

:.ienuttor WEIcKKa. I suppose, then, my next question would be,even though they are assuming, how well are they doing?

Dr. II Armr. I think they are achieving that function of day-to-day service quite well. What is needed, and what they have ex-pressed to us, and others around the country, through the surveysthat have been conducted is that they continue to need other sup-port kinds of services because of geographical isolation, and thosesupport services are such things us varied kinds of technical assist-ance, program development, et cetera.

Senator WEICKER. Well, I thank you very much, and I might add,too, you must take great pride in, in effect, changing the publicconception; it is possible, under the toughest circumstances, and Iadmire both of you very much for the work you are doing.

Thank you very, very much.Dr. HANLEY. Thank you. .

Dr. Smolt. Thank you. I also admire you, Senator, for what youare doing.

Senator WEICKER. The last panel will consist of Dr. KatharineButler, director of the Division of Special Education and Rehabili-tation, Syracuse University, and Dr. Robert Black, director of theOffice of Programs for the Handicapped, Department of Education,Columbia, S.C.

Is Senator Thurmond in the room? I know that he especiallywanted to introduce Dr. Black.

STAFF. He is coming.Senator WEICKER. He is coming, I will tell you what that means,

those of you who do not know the Senate. He is coming," can mean1 minute, it can mean 15 minutes. I am guilty of this, and this isnot Senator Thurmond; this is all of us.

I think what I would like is to proceed with the testimony, andwhen Senator Thurmond gets here we will afford him the opportu-nity to introduce Dr. Black.

Dr. Butler, it is nice to have you here, and please proceed.

103

STATEMENT OF DR. KATHARINE (1, BUTLER, DIREVI'OR,DIVISION OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATION,SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY, NEW YORK; PRESIDENT, IIIMIER EVILCATION CONSORTIUM FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REIIAMUTATION AND DR, ROBERT S. BLACK, DIREVI'Olt, OFFICE OFPROIMAMS EMI THE HANDICAPPED, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCA,TION, COLUMBIA, KC,Dr, Thank you, Senator Weicker.I am most appreciate of your invitation to comment on the

reauthorization of FHA. 1 11111 director of the Division of SpecialEducation and Rehabilitation lit Syracuse University and am thecurrent president of the I ligher Eaucation Consortium for SpecialEducat ion.

It is critical to review section 631, part I), Training Personnel forthe Education of the I hindicapped, and I would like to particularlycomment on the recently issued regulations by the Department ofEducation, which are really more in tune with the times and pro-vide more appropriate strategies for meeting the current and pro-jected shortages ()I' qualified special education personnel through-out the United States.

My address this morning will focus upon the need qualifiedpersonnel as well as for quantity of personnel.

Certainly, the Department is to be commended I' needed re-finement of existing regulation. They reflect a nil' ation in thedirection of preservice support for personnel train l'iwy will beof maximum benefit to handicapped children, thee. it ion, andtheir families.

In my view, it is appropriate that the first priority Le 1.4 contlaueto support personnel training programs and institutions of highereducation which provide special education training.

It is particularly important that this priority focus upon preserv-ice education at this time. Certainly, Public Law 91-230 was origi-nally designed to provide teachers and other specialists as a cadreof uniquely qualified individuals to meet the needs of handicappedyoungsters.

Certainly, recent reports across the Nation continue to reflect adramatic shortage of qualified personnel, as Wayne Sailor has indi-cated. The number is somewhere between 43,000 and 67,000 specialeducation teachers needed to serve the kinds of children we haveheard described today. A September 1982 national survey reportedthat personnel shortages were in many categorical areas, withsevere shortages of teachers for the emotionally disturbed, thespeech impaired, the learning disabled and the severely handi-capped, as we have heard.

Attrition is a problem in the majority of States. For example, theattrition rate for teachers of the autistic averages 50 percent. Moststudies of teacher shortages do not even take into account eitherattrition or the use of unqualified personnel. A very recent study,February 1983, surveyed all State departments of education andfound, for example, that speech language pathologists were in sig-nificantly short supply in 39 of the 50 States. Twenty of thoseStates with vacanciesand these are real vacancies, not a wish-forlistthose States have reduced the certification requirements in

41

404

order to meet, the shortages, and they use less than qualified per-sonnel. However, even with such a reduction, the strategy has notbeen successful, and the shortages remain. This is true throughoutall of special' education. The strategy of attempting to utilize lessthan qualified individuals may well result in a disservice to thehandicapped children they purport to serve.

In fact, if all factors were considered, the needs for trained per-sonnel are undoubtedly considerably higher than the reported43,000 to 67,000. This is not or a national concern; it must nowbe a Federal priority.

The only possible way to provide an appropriate education for allhandicapped children is to assure, by an adequate level of Federalsupport, preservice preparation. It is only through a longitudinaleffort that the needs for qualified personnel will be met. It is re-grettable to note that 30 percent of special education teachers insome States are on temporary or emergency_credentials. It is evenmore ,regrettable that we must expose our most vulnerable childrento individuals, be they regular or special educators, without suffi-cient training to serve them well. To utilize ill-prepared individualsis to court disaster over time.

Indeed, an integral part of this long-term training initiativeshould include the preparation of leadership personnelthat is,doctoral level training. This priority is long overdue and will yielda direct benefit to handicapped children. The training of highereducation personnel will provide the necessary leadership in re-search, development and evaluation. It is only with the continuingFederal interest and support that the needs of the Nation for lead-ers in special education can be met.

Personnel training programs have undergone, as you know, a siz-able reduction in Federal support over the past several years. Atbest, in the face of this shortage, this is shortsighted, since qualitytraining programs take decades to build but may be decimated in amuch briefer period. Presently proposed budget cuts in the 1984Federal budget of $15.7 million is counterproductive to any at-tempts to overcome current personnel ,shortages. Preservice train-ing funds, when available, significantly assist in attracting the bestand the brightest students.

I would like now to speak briefly to a number of other priorities.Senator WEICKER. I will tell you what I am going to do, because I

have some questions for you, and I know that you have got-somemore on your statements. I am delighted to hear some of the com-ments that you are making, because I will tell you, it will educatemy colleagues around here. They think that regular educators andspecial educators are one and the same thing. You can sort ofthrow them all in the same basket, throw them out there, and theywill do the same job. I think you are making some excellent pointshere for all of our edification.

What I would like to do now is, since Senator Thurmond hasmany other obligations, and I know he would like to introduce Dr.Black, why don't we have Senator Thurmond introduce Dr. Black,and after that, I am going to return to you, Dr. Butler, and then wewill go back to Dr. Black.

Senator Thurmond?

411

405

Senator Tfitiftmorw. It is a pleasure for me to come before thissubcommittee and such a distinguished chairman, and I am hon-ored at this time to present to you the next speaker. I am verypleased and proud, Mr. Chairman, to introduce today Dr. Robert S.Black, director of programs for the handicapped in the South Caro-lina State Department of Education.

Dr. Black is currently serving as president of the National Asso-ciation of State Directors of Special Education. Dr. Black completedhis undergraduate work at my alma mater, Clemson University.He received his masters in education from the University of Vir-ginia and obtained his Ph. D. from the University of Miami in Flor-ida. He was a teacher in the public school system for 7 years,where he taught the handicapped. Dr. Black was also the local di-rector of Special Education in Florida for 5 years.

Mr. Chairman, in addition to these credentials, Dr. Black hasbeen the director of the office of programs for the handicapped inthe South Carolina State Department of Education for 10 years.

I commend the selection of this fine, capable, experienced man totestify before this distinguished subcommittee, and I feel that hisremarks should be very helpful to the subcommittee.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.Senator WEICKER. Thank you very much, Senator Thurmond,

and with the exception of Dr. Black's attendance at Princetonwas that where he wentthat was a very unfortunate choice of in-stitutions, but I am sure that he will be able to weather that, be-cause whatever he did, he made up for lost ground when he wentto the University of Virginia, which is where I also went, after Igraduated from Yale.

Senator THURMOND. Well, I might mention that in addition toClemson being No. 1 in football the year before last, they also havevery fine scholarship.

Senator WEICKER. Very good. Well, it is very nice of you, Sena-tor, to be with us.

Senator THURMOND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.Senator WEICKER. Dr. Butler, why don't you, if you could, con-

clude your remarks. Then, I will wait on the questions. We willgive Dr. Black a chance to talk, and then I will ask questions ofboth of you.

Dr. BUTLER. Fine, thank you.I would like to address just a few of the other priorities. I was

going to comment on the preparation of related services personnel.We heard earlier comments on that.

Personnel trained within this priority continue to be neededin-dividuals who provide developmental, corrective, and other sup-portive services. Both preservice and inservice are essential forsuch individualsfor example, psychologists, school nurses, and soforthto permit them to provide the appropriate services to handi-capped children.

The specialized training of regular educators as a priority re-flects the continuing commitment to the needs of handicapped chil-dren, as well. While local education agencies and State educationagencies have moved strongly to meet this need, the monumentalsize of the task must be recognized. There are 16,000 local educa-tion agencies in the United States. It has been estimated that $84

41,Z,

406

million would he necessary to meet the inservice needs of regulareducators. Thus, adequate funding certainly remains a problem.However, it should be noted that 5.0 percent of part B funds havebeen allocated to this effort, which supports, then, in turn the in-service training funds made available through part D.

The preparation of trainers of parents and volunteers also .re-flects an area of support to be continued. Parent centers have beensuccessful and have effectively demonstrated their ability-to-Makea contribution. Parents, incidentally, are least likely to be servedunder any contemplated inservice funding, but their role in thePublic Law 94-142 process is indeed critical.

Finally, States have been required to submit compiThensive per-sonnel development plans, called CSPD's and to establish statewideinservice training programs. The training and research activities ofpersonnel preparation programs in higher education should bejoined with CSPD programs in particular to address the serious in-service training needs we just referred to.

In summary, the shift in emphasis represented in the proposedregulations should be supported within the context of the reauthor-ization of Public Law 91-230. It is a positive step in the correct di-rection. A Federal role is crucial to meeting a. national need.

[The prepared statement of Dr. Butler follows:]

407

TESTIMONY BEFORE

THE SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED

RELATIVE TO

REAUTHORIZATION OF SECTION 631, PART D

'RAINING PERSONNEL FOR THE EDUCATION OF THE HANDICAPPED

Katharine G. Butler, Ph.D.

DirectorDivision of Special Education and Rehabilitation

Syracuse University

PresidentHigher Education Consortium for Special Education

March 23, 1983

408

!II I MI' I hut /.1! inn if t hi! Cducaliun the Handicapped Act,

it t.0 review Section 631, Part 0--Training Personnel' for the Enuca-

lieu of the Handicapped as well as the proposed regulations which would imple-

ment. Part. DIof FOA, as amended. fliese recently issued regulations by the

Department. fire mom in tune with the tinvs and provide more appropriate stra-

Aeolus for meeting the current and projected shortages of qualified special

education personnel throughout the United States.

Perha0:, the most significant portion of the proposed regulations deals

with the 444 priorities for support of personnel training contained in Subpart

B, Section1 318.10. The Department of Educationis to be commended for a needed

refinement, of existing regulations. The most significant portions of the pro-'

posed wgulations appear to be the proposed priorities, which reflect a modifi-

1

cation ini the direction of preservice support for personnel training, which,

when tiplcqoirited, would he of maximum benefit to handicapped children, their

education, and their families.

In my view, it is appropriate that the first priority be tr continue to

support personnel training programs in institutions of higher education which

provide special education training. It is of particular importance that this

priority focus upon preservice education at this time, since this reinforces

the original intent of Section 631, which was (1) to provide training of pro-

fessional personnel to conduct training of teachers and other specialists; (2)

to provide training for personnel engaged or preparing to engage in employment

as teachers of handicapped children, as supervisors of such teachers, or as

speech correctionists or other special personnel providing special services for

the education of handicapped children, or preparing to engage in research in

fields related to the education of such children; and (3) in establishing and

maintaining scholarships for personnel to be trained. P.L. 91-230 was designed

to provide teachers and other specialists as a cadre of individuals uniquely

409

qualified lo !wet the needs of handicapped youngsters,

The Fourth Annual Report. to Congress (1982) by the Department of Education

stated Thal, when P.1. 94-142 was enacted; it quickly became clear that neither

the types nor the number of staff requiredjo implement 'he goal of providing a

free appropriate public education to all handicapped children were available.

Recent reports across the nation continue to reflect a dramatic shortage of

qualified personnel, with the number ranging from 43,000 to 67,000. A September,

1982, national survey (Schofer and Duncan) reports that there are personnel

shortages in it,iri/ categorical area,., with severe shortages of teachers for the

emotionally di,J,irh,d, speech iqiairyd, learning disabled and severely handi-

capped.

Writ. inn i% reported to be a problem in the majority of states. For

example, the attrition rate for leachers of the autistic averages 50%. Most

studies of teacher shortages do not take into account either attrition or the

use of unqualified personnel, An example of a very recent study (February,

1983) which surveyed all State Departments of fiducation found that speech-

language pathologists were in significantly short supply in 39 of the 50 states,

including Washington, D.C. Twenty of the states with vacancies have reduced

certification standards to meet the shortages and currently use less than fully

qualified personnel. 'Ewen with a reduction to unqualified personnel, the

shortages remain. As throughout all of special education, the strategy of

attempting to utilize less than qualified individuals to serve the handicapped

is fraught with difficulties and may well result in a disservice to these

children. If all factors were considered, the needs for trained personnelare

undoubtedly considerably higher than the reported 43,000-to 67,000. This is not

only a national concern; it must now be a federal priority.

The only possible way to provide an appropriate education for all handi-

capped children is to assure, by an adequate level of federal support, preservice

4 .

21-974

410

preparation. H. r only thrtHolh ,t longitudinal effort that the needs for quali-

fied personnel will he wt. It 15 reerettable to note that 501110 states have up

to 30' of their '0,00.11 ducat run teachers on temporary or emergency credentials.

It r., ever ,,,u,ttahle that nit nnr,t expose our most vulnerable children to

individoai thy; regular or ;ppciol p+tcotor,.) withort sufficient training

to serve tfp. ill-proNod individuals is to court disaster

over tick, Only Irma -term support of field-based teacher education programs

with thr capability to Meal with children with special needs can meet the

intent of p.t. 94-14?.

An integral part of this long-term training initiative should include the

second priority established in these proposed regulations, i.e., the preparation

of leadership persoluiel. This priority is long overdue and will yield a direct

benefit to handicapped children. We are pleased to note that this priority re-

flects the national interest in the training of higher education personnel who

will provide the necessary leadership in research, development and evaluation.

Only with continuing federal interest and support can the needs of the nation

for leaders in special education be met.

Overall, personnel training programs within institutions of higher educa-

tion have undergone sizeable reductions in federal support over the past several

years. At best, this; is short sighted, since quality training programs take

decades to build, but may be decimated in a much briefer period. Presently

proposed budget cuts in the 19134 Federal budget of -$15.7 million is counter-

productive to any attempts to overcome the current personnel shortage. Pre-

service training funds, when available, signifidantly assist in attracting the

best and the brightest students. Support for such individuals is not only

critical in today's economy, but is essential' for the delivery of services to

handicapped children and their families now and in the future.

The priority which addresses preparation of related services personnel

411

Lontinue', previow, of fort', to ..up port this group, and should ngnain a priority

of importance. Por,;nnnel trained within this priority include paraprofessional

and professional individuals who provide developmental, corrective and other

supportive serviaes. Both imiservitai and inservice are essential for such

individual, (for e,ample, psychologists, sahnol nurse':, etc.) to permit them to

provide the appropriate services to W.05t handicapped children to benefit from

special education. (Prowrvice personnel training of certain types of special-

ists, for example, early childhood educators, educators of the severely handi-

capped, vocational special edt.cators and adaptive physical educators occurs

under the first, priority, preparation of special educators.)

the ,:,pecialized training of regular educators is also of concern, and its

retention a priority reflects a continuing commitment to the needs of this

group. fn; rvio. !raining of roaular educators and administrators is frequently

if lnr.,ii nil state education agencies, While

LEA's and hive moved r,trongly to reet this need, the monumental size of

the task must he r(.wlized. !here arc 16,000 local education agencies in the

U.S. and it has been estimated that 114 million dollars would be necessary to

meet the inservice needs of regular educators. While adequate funding remains

a problem, it should be noted that 5.61. of Part B funds have been allocated to

this effort, thus supporting inservice training funds made available through

Part D.

The priority regarding the preparation of trainers of parents and volunteers

also reflects an area of support to be continued. Parent centers have been

successful in their operation and have effectively demonstrated their ability

to make a contribution. The inclusion of this group is consistent with infor-

mation stipulated in earlier legislative hearings. In addition, parents are

least likely to he served under any contemplated inservice funding, but their

role a; parents and their participation in the P.L. 94-142 process is critical.

4 2)

412

the (omprohonsive 'd/stem ol Personnel Development (CSPD) lc supported in

principle by d mifjorify of priOessicdols, Ifs implementation among states has

been very uneven (Applio, Monannment Sciences 1983 report). States have been

required in plan, for such it cOmornlinmive system, and to establish collab-

orative statewide dovelopmfult of inservico training programs. Certainly, the

needs for inset-vice training remains; tit' report indicates that 41,000 special

educator, and /00,000 regular classroom teachers have serious and unmet needs.

As reported here and by Powors (1983), it is also evident that there is a signi-

ficant (d.P rOr' 1. bcd,c interaction and coordination between institutions of

hignor ',tato Departrvot of Education's CSPD personnel. The

training and resitanJi activities of inctitutions of higher education should be

joined with tho field and inscrvice activities of CSPD personnel to provide

practitioner; with the necessary translation of research into practice.

In summary, the shift in emphasis represented in the proposed regulations

should he supported within the context of the reauthorization of P.L. 91-230.

It is a positive step in the correct direction for the training of special edu-

cators and the remediation of current shortages. A federal role is crucial to

meeting this national need.

418

Senator WEtilmt. 1)1., Black, I did not mean to insult you. I understaad it was Clemson, not Princeton; is that right?

Dr. 131,Ack, That is correct, Clemson,Senator WEtmmt. I will grudgingly take hack my insult, I Mt

anyway, I see we both landed at the same place for it few years forpostgraduate study at the University of Virginia, which I thorough-ly enjoyed.

It is nice to have you here, and I inn delighted that SenatorThurmond could introduce you. Ile obviously has a great esteemfor you, having made the appearance here,

Please proceed.Dr. BLACK. Thank you, Chairman, and I thank Senator Thur-

mond for such a generous introduction.I am indeed Robert S. Black. I am presiient of the National As-

sociation of State Directors of Special Education and State directorfor programs for handicapped children in the South Carolina StateDepartment of Education.

In preparing my testimony, I have solicited input from State di-rectors of special education throughout the United States. There-fore, my test imony purports to represent a consensus of nationalopinion from that body with regard to the regional resource centerprograms.

The passage of Public Law 94-142 was clearly landmark legisla-tion. State departments of education and local school districts didnot at the outset. know how they were going to comply fully andproperly with all of the act's provisions. Basically, the early yearsunder the act were devoted to the implementation of its basic re-quirements. Simultaneously, States began to assess problem areasunder the act and often turned to Regional Resource Centers fortechnical assistance in developing solutions to these problems.

In a number of cases, regional resource centers were able to de-velop solutions to immediate problems. In other instances, resourcecenters were able to provide for the sharing of information and so-lutions among States which proved to be both valuable in a pro-grammatic and an economic sense.

Time does not permit a lengthy discourse of past RRC achieve-ments. I did bring along additional documentation of those achieve-ments which I have shared.

I would, however, with the briefest of litanies, include some ofthe achievements of the past. One, as part of assessment activities,RRC attempts to define thoroughly the problems prior to seekingsolutions. Public Law 94-142 brought, for example, problems innew directions and new imperatives traditionally outside the realmof State departments of education.

RRC's have developed a vast collection of information and pro-moted sharing of these findings among States. Regional resourcecenters have been able to link States to the best information avail-able nationally. With their flexibility, they have developed conceptsfor service delivery specific to regions and States, that is, inter-agency agreements, facilitated curriculum development, developedtraining programs and retraining programs. They have brokeredexpert consultants when concerns beyond their expertise had to beaddressed.

4

414

Regional resource centers are uniquely structured and therefbrecomplement State department and local school district personnel.They are able to employ and access persons who possess specificareas of expertise not traditionally located in these units. Employ-ment practices and limitations of funds preclude short-term em-ployment ()I' expertise needed in a variety of areas; that is, finan-cial theory, high technology, social policy, law, medicine, basic andapplied research, ad infinitum. The listing may well be infinite, forhandicapped children and systems to serve them transcend manydisciplines and fields of knowledge.

Special education programs within the 11.S, Department of Edu-cation cannot really provide the kinds of technical assistanceneeded by States and localities, Even a massive increase in staff atthat level still could not impact significantly on all 16,000 schooldistricts in the United States.

The role and function of State education agencies is in constanttransition; precipitated by confounding and often contradictory var-iableseconomic swings in stability, political action at local, Stateand Federal levels, population shifts, increasing knowledge of thehandicapped children we serve, and the rise of an alternative soci-ety with changing demographics.

As I perceive the evolution of Public Law 94-142 and its furtherimplementation, a number of persistent problems confront Statedepartments of education and local school districts. Based on thepast achievements of regional resource centers, it seems logicalthat such a structure is in a unique position to facilitate resolu-tions to these challenges.

First, we need to continue progress in those areas mentioned ear-lier. It would appear ill-advised to discontinue this work at atimeof increased demands with diminishing resources.

The explosion of high technology holds great promise for the in-struction of handicapped children. While microcomputers and soft-ware readily come to mind, there are other questions associatedwith computer-assisted instruction. What disabled children canbest be taught through computer instruction? Under what condi-tions and to what degree? What does a classroom look like for suchchildren, and such teaching methods?

There are other aspects of high technology to be considered. Thescience of neurometrics is emerging, networking, genetic engineer-ing and so on. All would seem to have an impact on the instructionof handicapped children. A great deal remains to be done in devel-oping systems to accommodate due process through mediationalprocedures and other techniques to insure equity to all.

The regional resource center must continue its role of serving asa vehicle for communication and the exchange of ideas amongStates, for needs are clearly going to continue to change.

If meaningful interagency agreements are to continue to be writ-ten and further refined, the RRC has the capability .to assist withthis need. They have gained a greater amount of knowledge in thisarea in the past and this, coupled with the fact that they are notpart of the State education agency, places them in an ideal positionto lend meaningful assistance.

For these reasons, and many others that time does not permitme to detail here, I would urge that the regional resource centers

be continued Their continued .1110 as PIO tivr in the education ofhnicpe children is critical. We in the individual States oftenlost, perspective on problems told issues that tilfect our tinily oper-tions. The ItIt("s can broaden our perspectives nd help us to

bring improved programs to our Nation's handicapped children,Thank you, Mr. l'hoirniin, Ibr permitting me to shore tIu views

o:' t State directors of special ('ducat(The reptre statement of 1)r,

4

416

I I IMON1'

Regional Itesmirce centers

Mari h 21, 1911 1

Robert S. llI,u

President, National Association of State Directors of Special NASDSE)

I)irei for Of Programs (or the Handicapped,

South Carolina State Department of Education

U. S. Senate Subcommittee on the Handicapped

Lowell Weicker, Chairman

My name is Robert Black. I am President of the National Association of State

Directors of Special Education and Director of the Office of Programs for the

Handicapped in the South Carolina State Department of Education. My colleagues

and I are most appreciative of the opportunity to testify on behalf of the Regional

Resource Center concept.

In preparing my testimony, I have solicited input from state directors of

special education throughout the United States. Thus, my comments purport to

reflect a consensus of national opinion from State Departments of Education.

The passage of P. L. 94142, The Education of All Handicapped Children Act,.

was, indeed, lai,dmark legislation. Clearly, this legislation set forth a federal

commitment for full educational opportunity for our nation's handicapped children.

Such an undertaking was, and is enormously complex. State departments of

education and local school districts did not know how they were going to comply

with all of the Act's provisions. Basically, the early years under the Act were

111 . .1,-,

1 I 1 1'

.1,

, 1,11,,

,1,`.

it .

11

I ,i

1'111' 1.,1111 I

1 h'

I 1,11 I 1 r'.

.t. 1 .,!, 11,.

, ;11 11, ...11 It 1 11 I .I'lt 111 t11.11

11111, It ,11 ..11 .t1111. 1111.1 1'd 11 .1.1V1'111

r,"..,1 1.t 1111 .1.1 1 rd.". it, .1 1 ,c1.1

.,1 1' ',Lilt",

1 '.111 ,1,11 .1 r l 11,. 11,t 1111,11 I11,I11111I .1,..111,11114

..t.i., it e .1411vetY

.111r 1111.1

dod

Arll11 I 0111 rt11, 1.eyolid their

1,1.1 to 1).

I. I. put...-. .tru. ttird.,1 Add, tlieretor.

,f..10. thy trt.i.ertt .11 '.t 111)111 '11Ark I Hit/ art. abk

m;)doy ...p.t it titds of expertim not tr,IdttK)r),Illy

I)1 tt1.11 tti,.., pr..11 dnd Iimit,ittOrl of funds pre( Ilide Short

4 2 z

418

term employment of experty,e needed in a variety of areas; that is, financial theory,

high-technology, social policy, law, medicine, basic and applied research. The

listing may well be infinite, for handicapped children, and systems to serve them,

transcends many disciplines and fields of knowledge.

Special Education Programs within the United States Department of Education

cannot really provide the kinds of technical assistance needed by and

localities. Even a massive increase in staff at that level still could not impact

significantly in the problem areas with which 1 am acquainted.

The role and function of State Education Agencies is in constant transition

precipitated by confounding, and contradictory, variables, i.e., economic swings in

stability, political action at local, state and federal levels, population shifts,

increasing knowledge of the handica ?ped children we serve, and the rise of an

alternative society with changing demographics.

As I perceive the evolution of P. L. 94-142 and its further implementation, a

number of persistent problems confront state departments of education and local

school districts. Based on the past achievements of RAC, it seems logical that such

a structure is in a unique position to facilitate resolutions to these challenges.

First, we need to continue progress in those areas mentioned earlier. It would

appear ill-advised to discontinue this work at a time of increased demands with

diminishing resources.

The explosion of high technology holds great promise for the instruction of

handicapped children. While microcomputers and software readily come to mind,

there are other questions associated with computer assisted instruction. What

disabled children can best be taught through computer instruction? Undr what

conditions? To what degree? What does a class for such children locik like?

419

There are other aspects of high technology' to be considered. The science of

neurometrics is emerging, networking, genetic engineering and so on. All would

seem to have an impact on the instruction of handicapped children.

A great deal remains to be done in developing systems to accommodate due

process through mechational procedures arid other techniques to ensure equity to all.

The RRC must continue its role of serving as a vehicle for communication and

the exchange of ideas aanonr, states, for needs are clearly going to continue to

change.

If meaningful interagency agreements are to continue to be written and

further refined, the RRC has the capability to assist with this need. They have

gained a greater ,Amount of knowledg,2 in this area in the past and this, coupled with

the fact that they are not part of the State Education Agency, places them in an

ideal posit kin to lend meaningful assistance.

For these reasons, arid many others that time does not permit me to detail, I

would urge that the Regional Resource Centers be continued. Their continued role

as a partner in the education of handicapped children is critical. We in the

individual states often lose perspective on problems and issues that affect our daily

operations. The RRCs can broaden our perspectives and .help us to bring improved

programs to our nation's handicapped children.

Thank you for permitting me to share the views of State Directors of Special

Education.

4 2

420

Changes m Characteristics of State Education Agencies Impacting on Services to

Handicapped Children

II

I

*

As a result of a redUt Iron Of I v.,rl yippor I for State Education Agencies, there

has been a substantial redo..:tion in staffing throughout the nation. Thus, State

Ed.i.'..ation staff are compelled to expend almost all of their time in compliance

monitoring (Public Law 94442) and program maintenance.

Owing to low turnover in SEA positions retained, there is limited access to

new information and/or specialized practices.

Peduced funding to obtain external consultation.

Increased resistance to allocation of lands for services to handicapped children

due to competition for finite resources.

Variances among states in program characteristics.

" Difficulty in direct and immediate access to relevant information on

individually defined state needs.

421

The Need For Reauthtlrization/Continuation of Regional Resource Centers

1

' There is no otht.r substantive program of technical assistance available to

State Education .Agencies (rein the federal government.

II A greater priority exists for inter-agency, collaborative programs.

There is a significant increase for involvement of state educational agencies in

related service areas (as defined by Public Law 94-1421.

increased emphasis on the use of case law and judicial proces:ses in

determination of rights and responsibilities for service.

.\ persistent need focuses on information sharing linkage systems to capitalize

on Lest practices and products from state and national research and

demonstration activities.

Owing to oroadened age ranges and increased knowledge of handicapped

children, there is a significant increase in the need for pre-service and in-

service training for general and special education personnel.

There is a marked increase in technology for application to instruction,

managernent. ce,r....onication and functional augmentation.

423

422

PARTIAL IR C113.1EN FATION OF PASTACHIEVEMENTS THROU BFI REGIONAL RESOURCE CENTERS

The Department of Education funded the Communication TechnologyCorporation of New Jersey in an \effort to assess the overall capacity buildingacc:o nplishments of the Regional Resource Center (RRC) program. Their reportstated the following:

1. The RRC program has s+n impact at both the state education agency(SEA) and local educatio i agency (LEA) level. SEA ratings of RRCservices in building state icapacity to implement Public Law 94-142 arepositive. At the LEA level, knowledge of the requirements of P. L. 94-142 have increased because of RRC activities. The dissemination efforts,materials developed and t le training conducted by the RRCs have allcontributed to the advanc einent of the level of knowledge about theimplementation of P. L. 94 142.

2. RRC clients regard the Rsystem.

C as an excellent general resoUrce delivery

3. As a result of RRC services, there is added capacity to provideeducational materials, trained teachers and positively .affect theirnplementation of IEPs.

4. Local special education directors and parents surveyed, indicated thatRRC instigated services have had an impact on appraisal and evaluationservices at the local level. Parents also indicated that RRC services havehad an impact on [EP implementation.

5. There is evidence that RRC services have had a positive impact on theattitudes of LEA directors of special education, teachers and parentstoward IEPs.

Source: An evaluation of the Regional Resource Centers, conducted by theCominunication Technology Corporation of New Jersey, funded by the Departmentof Education.

The Tennessee SEA prev id.::: a specific example of the impact an RRC canha-x. or. au SEA, far many of the practices introduced by the Mid-South RegionalResource Center have been adopted by the SEA. For instance, a technicalassistance model designed by.the RRC, is being used by the .SEA to,a5sist its LEAs;vision efficiency materials and training once provided by ther:_RRC are now beingprovided by theeSEA; and an instate team of trainers was formed by the SEA toprovide training for all their field-based staff in the child services review systemthat was introduced by the RRC.

Source: Impact evaluation conducted by the Mid-South Regional Resource Center.

423

The Mid-Atlantic Regional Re.,otirce Center developed a training'"lit" for 1E13implementation in cooperation with'West Virginia's eight regional coordinators, Thestate disseminated these teacher-oriented materials to the fifty-five LEM and theyare being used by regular and special education teachers across the entire state.

Source: Impact evaluation conducted by the Mid-Atlantic Regional'Resource.Center.

A training package developed by RRC West for training regitlar clasroornteachers in California has been used to train 2,557 teachers in that\ state

\,Source: Impact evaluation conducted by the RRC West.

The Mid-South Regional Resource Center assisted the state of Kentucky indeveloping series of five parent information booklets concerning communityresources, development of community support, the educational process, theprofessionals working with handicapped children and keeping a child's records. Thebooklet., have been reprinted three times with a recent reprint of 15,000 copies. Afourth reprint is planned for 44,000, to be followed by a request for another 120,000copies.

Source: Impact evaluation conducted by the Mid-South Regional Resource Center.

The Mid-South Regional Resource Center has developed handbooks for parentsin Delaware, West Virginia and North Carolina to guide them through the educationprocess. The handbooks were customized for each state and have been disseminatedto parents throughout the three states with 10,000 copies already distributed inNorth Carolina and West Virginia. Also, the RRC has completed an updatedadaptation of the guide for parents in Maryland.

Source: Impact evaluation conducted by the Mid-Atlantic Regional Resource Center.

The Illinois SEA has adopted portions of the "Report on Extended School YearProgramming" developed by the Mid-West RRC and has incorporated it into theguidelines it disseminates to LEAs for future planning.

Source: Impact evaluation conducted by the Mid-West RRC.

The. Special Education RRC at Syracuse, New York, coordinated a multi-state,multi-region agreement establishing minimum program standards and ira.erstatemonitoring standards for private schools serving children with handicaps.M'assachusetts and New Jersey have signed the agreement and the remaining NewEngland states are expected to sign soon.

Source: Impact evaluation conducted by the Special Education RRC.

424

As a. result .)I t'ic 'Ne..t PP( e ut eyaluatim4 the Ilts of stateschools, the Ilepartment art Elementary and Secom1,11 iiti011 111

tleSW,Il to study 1111's and hoolsacross the seat..

t ted \Ve'it

analyzed a inaior y howl sy,,teni to ileter1111110 whereill the (Villaiiti,)11 and pl.Kement pio.ess .kciarred. The results L.vereto ill the process.

Source: !Irma( t evaluatIon conducted by the Mid-West RRC.

As a result of a statewide hilingual «mterence conducted by the New I.Mglarirl1212C,.five school districts in 1:liode Island created ;1(-_.onsortium for the purpose of

resowrus and strengthening direction/support for bilingualhandl, t!),11- ru .:21011

Source: Impact d ration onducted hy the New England 121(2,

The Mid-.miltli 12 RC developed with the state of Virginia a State EducationAgency/Institution of lInMer Education conference model to increase knowledge andcooperation betv:pen `,E.As and Ili Es responsible for a comprehensive system ofpersonnel development. This model has been implemented in Virginia, as well asTennessee, and is planned for use in Kentucky.

Source: Impact evalllation conducted by the 'Aid -South RRC.

As a result .mf a conference for state legislators designed by the New England1<1<i-i state directors of odu,ation 'reported an increase in communicationwith key state legislators, and conference pat ticipuints indicated they felt morecompetent to handle the problems and issues in special education.

Source: Impact evaluation conducted by the New England RRC.

A Futures Conference sponsored by four Regional Resource Centers - Florida,Oregon, Minnesota and Iowa - provided exposure for the first time to regulareducation bosses of special education directors on how RRC's and state directorswork together to accomplish state activities. This should provide a pilot for multi-state endeavors that would prove to he a most efficient and cost effective. servicedelivery strategy for the states.

Source: Impact evaluation conducted by. the participating RRCs.

125

1.110 111(0111101111f WI 1'1.1,11 i I r, r 1111 (.1111,1 .11/011t rapid tr,iiismission ofdata, SEA decr,loris Anil the Heed f +i best firm t odor:Halloo ,molt the ie,f' ()Ielei troth of (1,ita tllrJUllfl 1111(1(./Computers.Rcpresrntatives from it, . Colorado, lltah, North 1)dt-iota, South

- I , computer conference. As it. result,1011f of the < - lail;ota and Wyoming, - 111

C011,1111/1.lt 1 11 .1101 11.11 IRV( 11..11111 it l'1.11111( 1.11Z1 , C01111111(.:111(1 Statl.W1dCit rocomputer itiao

!),,. the let(r

II' \ 'sootn st,lif his pro,: ;tattoo to the lelllietiSe SEA'-(t.L11 [111' i'111( 11(1.1110 111(1 111((t.111,1t01i of microcomputers, progjains forspi anart data 11.1( 111(111,1jy.41(111t L.LAs in the stitt

Sourt ondti, tent the Ali 1 -ti tuth ftl'C

I ti it ,aar cement Kith the state of Iowa \wliii.:11tiii r., t(..yising couries to

in, ludo maren in general eilmi:ation.111.1

lsoor,:

the South .\th,op Rift' diveloped informati,n for ry.io state technical;issistani;e papers relative to empliance with Florida's new specific learningdisabilities ',tate iSoara rule. Thirty-three hundred copies of the paper were printedand distributed to every local regular and special education administrator, as well ascollege and university personnel. This material is now used in eligibilitydetermination in every district in Florida. One paper presented the new rule,presented variations from the previous rule and clarified sections of the rule forLLA service providers. The second paper presented tables showing certified cut-offscores lone con Sideratrio In determining eligibility) for various IQ and achievementtests. This paper also presented .,;eneral tcgt and measurement inforination anddiscusses how these scores .would be used in determining eligibility.

Source: Impact evaluation on( by the \lid-Atlantic 12.RC.

4 ,9

426

Senator \VP:II:KER. Thank you very much, Dr. Black.Dr. Black, in a recent evaluation study of the regional resource

centers, sponsored by the Department of Education, there was arecommendation for the program to be more responsive to thechanging needs of the State and local agencies. I would like toknow from you how the regional resource centers are implement-ing this recommendation.

Dr. BLACK. In my judgment, Mr. Chairman, with a1,1 the var-iances among States, I think a good illustration of that would focuson the development and implementation of interagency agreementsto bring full services to handicapped children. The State I live andwork in, for example, is organized quite differently than our sisterStates of North Carolina and Georgia. Not only do we have to grap-ple with all the constraints, motivations, and so on and so forth, ofall those agencies in effective full service delivery, but we often-times need to cross State lines and transcend it to a regional-typeoperation.

In response specifically to your question, then, in the last 3 yearsparticularly, I have found that regional resource centers have fo-cused very well on regional-type problems confronting State depart-ments of education.

Senator WEICKER. Thank you very much.Dr. Butler, in your testimony, you support a shift in training pri-

orities from inservice to preservice. While this shift will assist us inmeeting the dramatic need for qualified personnela shortage, Imight add, that is estimated anywhere between 43,000 and 67,000how should we address the ongoing needs of inservice training forspecial and regular educators?

Dr. BUTLER. Certainly, no one would deny the need for continu-ing inservice of regular educators and special educators. In fact, Ibelieve it is estimated that 740,000 individuals in those two catego-ries have inservice training needs.

Funding is, of course, the issue. It is simply a matter of strategyas to how best to meet inservice needs, because they truly exist.Meeting inservice needs through national discretionary funding,such as part D funds, may well, however, be impractical due to theextensive amount of funding which is required. Part D funding forinservice, I feel, should continue to.support inservice experimenta-tion and the development of exemplary models of inservice deliverya catalytic approach, which is best exemplified at the national leveland at the level of funding possible for part D.

On the other hand, part B funding is potentially available tomeet local and State inservice training needs. As previously notedthere are 16,000 local education agencies, and it is estimated that$84 million would be necessary to meet inservice needs of regulareducators, at even a minimal level.

Certainly, then, we would suggest that additional funding for in-service he provided under part B, and that part D moneys focus onexperimentation and model development. It would seem impracti-cal to attempt the training of more than 700,000 teachers within aFederal discretionary program with limited resources. It is amatter of resources and where you might wish to place them, butthe need is evident.

43:3

427

Senator WEICKER. Pr. Butler, thank you very much, and Pr.Black, thank you. It was a great pleasure having both of youappear before this committee.

I can assure each one of you that your comments will providevaluable input into the work product of the committee.

Now, my good friend, Senator Boschwitz, has arrived. We hadgreat testimony from Mr. Lauritsen from Minnesota. You shouldknow that. They acquitted themselves well, and now, we are goingto get a little added testimony.

Senator Boscilvvrrz. We are going to get a little added testimonyabout the program and about Bob Lauritsen. I was suppqsed to behere to introduce Bob, but the Foreign Relations Committee wascalled to meet with Secretary Schultz at 9:15, and so I was unableto be here. But you and I, Mr. Chairman, have talked about BobLauritsen and the program for the deaf that we have in St. Paul, anumber of times. I have been thereI have been there two orthree times, I thinkand I have a great interest in the deaf andcan sign very slowly, and indeed, I think that this is one of the bestprograms that I know of in Minnesota. While Bob Lauritsen'sname does not appear on the front page of the newspapers as oursmay from time to time, because he is not in political life, neverthe-less he is one of the real contributing members of Minnesota's andindeed, the national community, in what he does for other peoplewho are handicapped. It is just a marvelous program, and I amsorry I was not here to introduce him and to speak about it before.

Senator WEICKER. Senator Boschwitz, thank you very much.The Senator has been enormously active, Bob, not just for your

programs on Minnesota, but indeed, in behalf of the handicappedand the disabled throughout the country, and we very much appre-ciate your attendance here.

Senator BOSCHWITZ. Thank you.Senator WEICKER. Thank you all very much.At this point additional statements and material submitted for

inclusion in the hearings follow.[The following material was received for inclusion in the record:]

44%1

'128

)N.11, ST VII:NIENT,-;

,, r i' ; ! I . .; 1 : : \ "I ' ' ',

I

I' 1 . 1 , . 1 , , ! i ! , , I I il , 111fli I I 1.4,

Il ? ?.,t' i1,11!:1 ?'1., ? : ,i? .111,1 1???? ,t11 Pt".,Ii11.1,,,1:01?1,1?.????

Mr Chairman

I am 1t I eased t 0

or the ;04114;1111444w 4,1 a 4,0414r4 4n41

and 'ft a i ni int Cent or 1c44141 I he au, 444,1

fol. Handicapped Rest, trch iii oldei

of my proposal to provide

Ye Pat i fic It,isin tica rCh

I . 1110 ILI? ion,11 Intitit.utc

AW! rt.., I hi- unique and

criiIntl heal h tnd rehabi litat 14in 44t t he E',tri1ic Basin.

s not i44t1 ha,; eer, vcd after several .yar4. of discussion with

my colleagues, Senator Weicker, Randolph and 1latsunaga. Our

proposal seek to initi. etc syst ermi tic process of long-range

planning for and training ot approialato personnel to address

the rehab' I Hn needs of this ref,iun r,n the in tun ru fiILeenyears. individual.:; will finally be , high quality services

appropriate to their needs.

At the end of the 961:h Congress during our deliberations on

the Continuing Resolution for the Department of Education, House

and Senate conferees unanimous17 agreed that the department

should give high priority to the special needs of the Pacific

Basin in its plans for long-term initiatives. I 'can assure

YOU that this proposal has the enthusiastic support of the

Governors of the Pacific Basin, who on many occasions, have ex-

pressed to me their concerns about handicapped persons within

435

1 11. ' 1 .11 It, 1 . 1 u t ,1 , I

.129

Ili 11,. I eNpee I ;III r

t.hittley ,,t.ti.itt at 1 tout t he A I ct,11111 'tit. 1/111)t, Altura.. mill lt111.i1H.. h i ,it (AltrVIIIA) t.1 t ht. ['HI ottl 5111th:;

t,t ir, t1, Iht 1,11t.H .1 yr 011'011 '111101 111;11

1 ,111 Apprr1/1 1.11 inns ,,,;4(.1 111.11101. In

virt 11:111%, lilt we Have pas:aul 1 11111 aililress.s t. he

1)ep.irt wont of Iltt.i1111 .111,1 11111:1i111 h;erVii.1.:1 ;Intl Itolt;tt tmon1 (1

rdlic.tt 1011

Lt. 111, I ,.1,1 11.111 :;;111,0:1, (I1h1111,

.1l 1 h ; : i .111.1:.; 1 1.111t1h, ilh,1 the

I I : Amri,.111

,7 t, i t hi, t t h.1,11 1s 1

( t I I 11111 ' 1 i C

I C 1 ,,ner- spread ,ivel- more than 3. 5

rtt I ; .1.1 h ttt IF tit I t.t. .10 .111.1 1..ttir111 t tltritr;ttrut- to the

1 ill.' 1111 it the I lit 111.'11( ill Fin I Oil Ft,tten. Where arc at leastIi 1,..,1 1 .11111 1,,11 11 r,(1\.',1-11,H,T1t WI hit ei)siplex relationshipsto t [linen t Mi,st of these i ands are small and

it I; : toTt11,111,1 omittuni Ation and transportat:ion facilities

t .)(1 in Haw: 1 i t !T:1,-;modic and unreliable in the

relflt)1P ,rr t nri c:>. The ropu la t ion of approximately

million peoplo is composed of many different ethnic

roups with aivorse cultural and lini..uistic traditions. As

riult t Ihf !tic ia , and culr.ura1 charac-

teril.tles, prohlems in the delivery of health and

rehabilitation :wrvico,. 1,11,;( chAllptwo to rradltInnal

pattern.. of service dot ivory.

Aelivoly addre:iHn reh.ibilitation problems of the Pacific

In 0,Y 06Wwili, one has actually

/1.k! ?he Hyoitnoity tc, the Pdrilic le0on, the lael, of

,,,me f mie.t ulidimentJry hC011h C.IYV componentl; is !.imply

omprehenHhle. fo !;10tP perhap:; rho Dbvious, the level of

h,a/th care in J hiWivfy olfects the overall quality of life

ler all and An individual's a:Tirations for the future.

Yet, available estimate!, of health problems of this area only

h.in In !11.t.t o' of the critical problems faced by

individual:: Hymn; in the Pacific Basin. Hearing disorders are

rampant, .-lany of the, Pacific islands of the Trust Territory

and on Guam harbor .,rious local diseases of viral nature

which attack the central nervous system and affect hearing,

eventually leading, to paralysis and death. Serious middle

car infections are an almost foregone conclusion for many

inhabitants of the islands. The resultant transient and

permanent losses of hearing are virtually unattended.

In the Marshall Islands, nearly half of those 50 or over

have diabe s. The incidence of childhood leukemia in Ponapae

and Kosr,e is 10 times the expected'rate. Incidence of

high blood pressure in Guam and the Northern Marianas is 35

percent for those over 30 years of age. Major alcoholism

and drug abuse problems continue unchecked. Adolescent

431

1,1 4 I i i

; ;,;I 11 1,1

;.1, 1111 Li 11; It, I .1,

!I; I thia I h tidi1.1ppet1,

litit.111p1 ,)1 nude I t;,1;Iloy,;t1.

I t11,1hi I It ;II 11,11 if

I ;!t

i;rtH; t.,r ! ! I II! It 111 11.; II II Ic!,

I!1 t 11, iC l',11111tIt

All r, lout l; on! , urtittutilore, tlit re i

t in t pr,.',;r,IHI to rt,. t I

lu all of the Trust orritories, 111110 i::

on, rti,..tertd th,rapii,t, 1'. t%patrkite

Fiji-trained medical offictr,, all of who.11 art in thoir

witl. no now one, in the training pipeline, Thc

Pa ,c piagued by rho lack of employment opportunities

;:,, `lost of the young and middle -aged migrate

o and the cont. intnt ced Status, a i!,uptilat ion

,It viry :..oun'i; and old. Here i: An unprecedented opportunity

to train native profest,ional!; and paraprofe:,sionals to ...erve

ome basic health need:, of their r.ion

432

,!

in .

t:1;:to t

11.111:1: (..tplot1

'1H. '1 I I ',<(.1.1[ 1.' in ills

ul t; rtt:; kot'. t II ; rl(11

is

t I t . to. t :

tro t if ;.1 .1! :1;.' tThrtH I itat j.,111

I!

: ;;.]; ,. f r L ion

"1: ;it.. -;:t ;Ind r_ ,tF i CC. to

1' ; 1i,. i :.! Iona] i

1 t

1:Th

I: 11 : Ill, :11 y r< ,L ;t ,1.;1 tirld faor:II:1v

t :;-4:t L... \PIM t I. et.'

I !!!, Lion,/ of

A :4:;;0,1 t.; fore

;;;!:, \

tr,

439

: I

433

1JEAN, S.:iio1. OF luEUN1VERSIVi oF HA;;All

lore ths Subcommittee on the handicapped oflate Labor and Human Resources Committee

the

Rehabilitation :teeds,of the Pacific Basin

Yr. Chairman.

The-Amer:can parts of tau l'acific Ocean include my home

American Samoa, the Trust Territory of

the Pacific [stands -- also known as Micronesia: and a few

other itTaturic knobs. Guam is formally a Territory and is

d,- v,-loped place. American Samoa is certainly not

1..V..1,1p,,d latt bar; the advantage of print', relatively

c at Ile substance of my testimony today applies to both

.metic.in Uitmoa and Micronesia.

The Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands is an almost

LI;ottun responsibility of the United States, It covers

an area equal to that of the continental United States, but

is.made up of thousands of islands separated by empty stretches

of open ocean. These islands were once German colonies taken

over by Japan an the' outbreak of the 1914 War and afterwards

retained by Japan under a League of Nations mandate, They

were captured by U.S. military forces during World War II or

surrendered at the. end of the war. Kwajalein and Saipan

ct headline-familiar in World War 11 and,- for different

Mkini and Eniwetok became so later.

434

, d inCe 11

Nati(11 Trust which is due to

in 19S2. Aftor that time, however, the U.S. will

!,t;iin 1, ponsibilitv fur health, education and other funding

it i h, new iwiit icoI ,titities for a fort her fifteen years.

For many ditputed reasons, the quality of life in the

Trust Territory more resembles that of the so-called Third

World than a U.S. territory, except that eligibility for

Food !camp and Commodity Programs has eliminated the problem

of starvation. Great efforts on the part of the TTPI govern-

ment and special programs funded by DUBS have brought primary

Ldr, ;cad ho!:pitalization to the somewhat urbanized

District Centers, but the outer islands remain seriously

and r ,rved. Basic sanitary engineering is very deficient,

with most residents having no access to safe running water

and no sewage disposal system. Consequently, intestinal

parasites and water-borne diseases are endemic.

In this kind of environment it is not surprising that

rehabilitation facilities are almost completely Lacking.

For example, there is just one physiotherapist on the Island

of Najuro in the Marshall Islands, and no others. We wish

to bring the attention of the Committee to this problem and

to propose the development of a systematic and far-reaching

plan. We do not wish to propose some short-term funding

for short-term demonstration projects which are doomed to

the

435

AHd v,a1 11

the cimAry ho.t1Ch ,scat,

ia-,,,y,11:a; have died k,,,,:a1.1Y.C. they were desq,rted forIvo! v 1 I t.iot 1c i t ed er. poor.

fu ,nittiti,to to the i i tl..tt tht d i ridred Lake

pew. hi it y for t het;e it clearly in ourn.stitna1 interest to encourage stable and secure societies.

rr,ti tance of ( [ s a r i . a i., often overlooked

s Imply 1.(..c.nise 0; her gruat power has shown any overt moves.

Thu forthcoming indpendunce of some entities May well change

L he picture.

We [cr.,: 1.1 ';l to propose the development of a plan for

to the handicapped which will improve the quality of

life in :.'.i C rone:. ia and, at the same time, be a plan which will

fir they realities of Micronesia through the end of this century.

hi.. would he, in effect, an agreement which would delineate

in advance t he progress and expectations on the part of the

Micronesian peoples and the U.S. Government. A mutually

respected plan can lead to steady progress rather than the

usual sprinkling of good in ten * ions where they a're not needed

or are inapprOr iate.

We are here to advance the importance of developing, such

a program; we do not have one ready-made; the issues are too

complex.

Any plan will have to take into account the realities of

442to

436

.[I 1 iii I !.

. ., ii 1,711 .1;1,,11

It will also1! ,Old tb

1,41 ,!.! .: E.C1 iv ii .. 1;dild)ciipped.

r,.,1 a i 11 r Lip; ire the development of

in 1:40I, arias where we have

d hi ii y echnology pricht,d

"appropr late t echno10,,,y" wi 11 heed I. cc

t wi Ii nee,' to address the

1 u: peronnel for exa:;T le , arzony,

educated population.

.1 . ..lii. Hill must be ti e needs as perceived byp ii :1i cr ones i bui the details will

t ;L: a i pie mt (lea of exici icneccJ inpat . We emphasize

a,;a1.,1 ; hat proir.ims from the continental U.S.A. cannot ber imposed in the di fferent environments and cultures

it rat P.1c I f ic . Dr. Eliue.1 Pretrick, now\ Health

,H,: tor t. hi 1!rotid :f.tatLes of Micronesia, once said,!ha ni cc things that h-ippen to us do not work out

i 1 /..z,on,., many other ta ants, he is noted for his

poll I en a

in inc(, .;-t ii has come a long

, ft;.!!,t iv ITy respect , and esp(!ci ally in institution

443

437

c I .

'C.1:11 1,:',1.ttrI1-',

t:, i. i . i :IT ;MI

i Pitt: I i I: it P..1I Jilt' Lit(

Ly (tt i Schools, it. 'ob 1 i Ile;t1 t h,

I:1 ; ; I': ' t cmce ;aid,

t , h...1:11 I t to.;(.1 piand tytIl it:',/tth , 'trill in fu I 1 Hirt_t....rtthip.

tr r ;;'.cr.tnt.,.i,th po litical

444

438

INDIANA UNIVERSITY

March 7, 1983

Senator Lowell weicxerHart Building, Room 303Washington, CC 20510

War Senator Weicker:

IDAA HONIV IN Wright ddocation Building.3111 and tonldnBloomington, Indiana 47405

(812) 335-2734

It is indeed a pleasure to provide testimony on behalf of the re-

authorization etfort for P.L. 94-142,, Your individual leadership as Chair-

man of the Ssnate Sub- Casnittee on the Handicapped has helped to insure that

we have the law today, intact, with its accanpanying regulations.

Ms. Jane West-Stern, of your staff, requested that I address the Eval-

uation and Research section in 94-142. I was recomnended to her as the

Research and Special Project Chairperson of the International Council of

Aaninistralors of Special Education and as a leadership trainer of special

education administration. Forthe past eight years I have been annually

surveying local special education adtinistrators, preparing information

packets on selected topics of interest, and distributing these to the CASE

membership 04000) We have also .prepareda series of regional trainingconferences across the country on exemplary model practices in the education

of handicapped students. Local school personnel who developed and operatethese special projects in the context of local school settings were both the

major presenters and audience in our leadership development model.

Within-that backdrop I will discuss two sets of statements. First, I

will present data on local school needs for evaluation and research.

Second, I will recommend a series of evaluation and research studies and

pfocesses that I believe you should consider as you prepare a set of changes

in the re-authorization of P.L. 947142.

Starting in 1975-1976, local school special education leadership per-sonnel were obviously concerned with issues directly related to implementing

specific provisions of 94-142.

They wore in order of priority:

1) the interpretation and inservice training of all professionalpersonnel and parents regarding the provisions of the 94-142

itself;

2) the reaction of regular education personnel to the mainstreaming of

handicapped students into regular education environments;

3) designing and developing an individual educational planning (IEP)process that was efficient and effective which would be inclusive

of parents and necessary_ professional personnel;

439

It tint tally, vocatu7ial that. were appropriate toserve mildly handlcdppil :;tuderit,n.

In 1976-19/8, still other softiies of directors continued to.be preoc-olpied with the four priority areas noted above but in addition they added:

eost-lk,neiit analysis of alucation prograumi to determinethe efficacy of comiparative service delivery models;

6) overlapping ruler; and ring of central office mdmin-istrators and building principals in the identification andplacement of students, and selection and mipervis ion of staff;

7) private school placements started to 'surface as an alternative toexisting or newly developed programs that parents thought wereinappropriate.

In 197S-8(1, as they law wet; in full swing and the local leadership hadtiCg!t experience in its niplammItation, the local administrator txxmine moreconcerned about:

H) iurriulum for,special education students How closely it shoulddipliodte, or Lxt a:3 close to, the curriculmn for all students was thepenetrating question, rather than separate curricula by category ofhand icappodness;

9) lr,licy issues surfaced dracttically from 1977 when the regulationswent int() effect and in 1979-d0 due process, LRE, retention, lengthof school year, and approprtato alucation all became of primaryconcern;

In) Pinally, fiscal matters were also ot continuing concern. Financeformulas and issues of eguitysurfacal dramatically.

The last round of our needs assessment occurred this past fall along.

with a major planning study under my direction and that of the President ofthe International Council of Administrators of Special Education. Thesedata suggest the chief local issues are primarily ones of:

11) program and personnel evaluation. Questions of the quality ofspecial education programs are paramount today. A central issueis, can special education demonstrate its effect to hold off theopposition, to reduce special education and operating costs;

12) the use of technology in the education of handicapped students andits use in management of information related to the processing,placement, transportation, and programming of students, personnel,and accounting is the next most frequent contemporary listing ofconcern to local administrators.

In suivary of these data the emerging issues I would suggest the fol-lowing, evaluation and research issues. There clearly is a preoccupationwith the inpact of the reduced federal role on state and local levels with

regard to the handicapped. Over 70t of the CASE members responding to dateidentified a reduction in federal expenditures as leading to reduced state

4'46

440

ia I .11 1.. the ..alvat ion of .1 ,p it doal ill rlireetasHrif t and !l if 1, and

uuatr 1.41 t f t1nr1rf ac'tlif trig in 1 xgt :;1111 1,e1

III, 1.0 It trap rolat 10110tap 01 1onotal /regular education.at.a Wit. pioli am; Lula ,.,.1-vion; tor q..471,11 oducat ion becaiii.. a virtual

1,12- 'I'I t.drat preli Itnal.ly tx..C.1111 th,111./ thft; Ica 1411 ..11t .1 .111(1 :poking an alliOat Loll for their

Chita. tko-,P.W1 .1 r1.111 rpiiI.,11 education is, Jii :01,,1J aptS.

r1111,117, the Lind ,I,.1 Pat 1,41 u1 ,..410 haadioappal is 11 i,j1i on most.lilictitipstratin arid i.dtent Lists, especially in largo urban and suburban

iii ltngwtl, black, and other minority populations aret inding th.inslv s u, ;pctal education in strut urban settings. A swellingpopular ton rut student:, tailing in subax"ban schools are inappropriately beinglat111 larning ;:gt. state legislatures are pursuing the notion

(); ,/,;; or rat ion to strip, th ixuy,.nuny I,) population. Ikr.201 adminktra-tor,i st,to, thonuanclii school d.t.initions, rather than a.;..t 01 tiAoral guide' as to Nilo is IliincliCappall arid who is not.

ti u.,i I in.tI ly, tin, quill cry of special ,..ducat ion, and the lack ofwhat dia!,rofIco:; haVo rentlItod trail sp.x:i,a1 education pro-

rp the key ,iticst ions of the inid-191 0' s. We simply have very littleLit .1 on what hApperiS to lwriclicappoi students APITdi they are label led,is,,tanot, arid start their school life in special tclucation. Allow me to add

vocal t, u.ii educat ion has been a collosal failure as well as nattyptclf '1116 hlt t1.111,11,...,Ipiovi students.

c!i (,t t it t:; 1111.11t. conoerrir: illy re c-unlivnildtiom; foranti Oval aat ion quest ions that you Way want to consider, as

I vie schofilus.

v., dearly nod a conttnutx1 set of studies related for

STIVi Xa;5 11 the distribution of federal. versus state versus localresources spent on special ,alucation in local schools,interitextiate units, state operated programs, and forpr piatO placements.

The elect concerns here are the rat io of support bygoverrunental units, amount of dollars that actuallycol lows the student, and costs by program and place-avilt. typo. The recent Rand study is an excellentprototype for use in future cost studies.

an active and an immediate connitment, for 5-10 years,to the collection of data on the graduates of special

ten projrant; across categories and severitylevels.

RAT toNALE eic. have little to no data on how successfully we haveprepared students to adapt in post-school-environments,

!ill sty la

441

II A lea lin t II I Vt! v11.111140.1(111 studies 1111.1Ht. I 11111.

,11011,i WI' I I I 1,11 11411 111..11111'o in depth on a tew Bites toIeteimin the trait signit leant values key lit akeholdethold ,m11 as I III. 1,eiceivol worth ofnn.xarnti/iits viceu. Prom these incleptli goal i Lat. ivest idies, a sot of uspitionl. or groundol quantitativetesearch studies can be conducted to capture a largevow it ipecial ,Iiication evaluation activities.

(Al It tad (dual Oat Lye studies provide a sense of "you' ve beenOwn!". ".u1 know what it. hi to be deaf and getting

rt.,a1111lt into a reindar class for three hairs aday in Pt,oria." QUil I itutiye research approaches real1i 1e pr,et.rayalse of actual exa:r iences. This type of..lata helps the lay public and non-professional alikeget ander the Ain of the key actors in handicapped,duration. It otten provides the nettled images toas:;ist, decision makers in seeing the whole picture.Fran multiple cases a set of hypotheses or speculations.an ciserge which can he translated into mere(leant i tat ive research methods. We' ve had enoughexperience with quantitative incidence studies toknow our population paraneters.

RArtor.uii;

KA'n5

RATfuNALE

.11 studies Ecllowing up 1.E.P. implementation that tracethe movement of handicapped students into specialeducation and back to regular education programs.Studies that examine a =label of student J exitfrom up. -'vial education.

neat ly w. 11.1Ve 1 ittle data on 1.E. P. inplementation,Equisition of basic skills, and adaptation ofhandicapped students in non school erivironments. Thesestudies will help to focus air attention on studentoutconeo, not the processing of handicapped studentsinto special ,ducat ion.

An merging trend that is now a major area of concernis the introduction and use of eccputer technology withindividual handicapped students. Many believedifferent types of handicapped students will benefitdisproportionately from exposure to micro-computers.

our country's preoccupation with high technology iswell established. Special education interest in thisinnovation is escalating rapidly. Yet we have a shorthistory with its use.

6) Studies which investigate or support interventions thatlink special services with other regular &locationsupportive services may help us dationstrate how specialaincation expertise may assist other students notbenefitting frail our public schools.

448

. ;why 't

RA I' Ii NALE

442

..1 ',dent t 1.1111101 In 5i01.1)1 11111i Ihir1111 II lit IL11.:11.illEi 11011)ow .1 Ind pI 1101(ni ha tIi o growth in learningdriala lit ie.. and local .iehod ploiranti. We 11.11donenst rat Iv el lull to examine why thin iu occultingand how sp(:ial ..boat ton ean both (.:oti.t dub. andnot dilute itn services to student in neol nthi I load .ducat ion.

/) Mend Ity the developing technology ofteaching that can IA! unrrl in $6 above wi helpdetermine what is special about apecial ,oucal ion.while many may believe w(.! ana risking lie reputation of

..ducati ion, I believe WU 111051: confront theunique, mg ic feather quality that ixs-vades someleople's view of special (xlucatlon.

We need an informA statement that olucators can turnto to pick and chose those practices that deserveonulation or enhanoment for use by twiny in olucation.

In closing, research iind evaluation ..efforts should not overlook theaction research interest and capacity of local school entrepreneurs who seekthe challenge of cimonst rat ing what they can do. These saw entrepreneursare oltoi the hest silesi_ersons to their peers. Dissonination strategies of"41.it works" should seek to involve the practitioner as co-developer, inple-mentor, and disseminator.

I hq.! you can get a sense of history since the passage of 94-142 andits inpact on local school systems. I have tried to trace that history,delineate the and provide a rationale along with needed research andevaluation strategies for the future.

I have enclosed semi example materials which are prototypes of the kindof research and/or dissemination practices I would recormend to you. I'malso willing to testify before the ccianittee if we can arrange it.

If I can be of further assistance, please let ne know.

S incerely,

CreletLeonard C. Burrell°AssoCiate Professor

enclosures

443

March 10, 1983

The'Honorable Lowell WeickerUnited States SenateHart Building, Room 303Washington, DC 20510

Attention: Nina Bar-Uroma

Dear Senator Weicker:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on sections of the Handicappedlaw relating to evaluation and research. As you may know, the SocialSciences Center at SRI has been conducting studies on public educationprograms for special populations, particularly handicapped children andyouth, for many years. We continue to believe in the importance of bothresearch and evaluation for their value in enhancing the education ofhandicapped children.

Regarding Part B of EHA, Section 618, Evaluation

I believe that this section is extremely important to the soundadministration of the Act and for ensuring that Congressional intent ismet. A suggested rewording of Sec. 618(a) that captures what I believe to

be the purpose of this section is;

The Secretary shall conduct studies, investigations, and evaluations todetermine the progress of implementation, the impact Of the Act and itsparts, and the effectiveness of state and local efforts to assure thefree appropriate public education of all handicapped children. The

Secretary shall conduct those studies, investigations, and evaluationsnecessary to provide Congr.2's with information relevant to policy andprovide the federal and state education agencies with informationrelevant to program management and administration.

Section 618(b) might then simply request statistics regarding childrenwith various handicapping conditions, services received by those children,public and private agencies and institutions providing such services,expenditures by' local, state, and federal levels, staff employed and needed,

by disability category. This, along with the general policy and managementpurposes might be the best guide to the Education Department for collectinginformation that will actually be used; this may, in turn reduce burden.onLEAs and SEAs.

450

444

Si t I on 61 31( 1) III) Ell I miry the nmst'aipropriate agent I or

collet tiny those ',tatt,Ifc

Section 6180)1(21: I cannot see the purpose of this section. It

appears that funds spent to develop evaluation methodology in general mighthe funds better spent on conducting actual evaluations to improve policy andprogram management.

Section Odic): This does not seem necessary. It it is designed toreduce burden on LUAs And YAs, this purpnw might be stated directly.

Section 6lH(d)(1): This seems not appropriate as 15.

Section 6113(d)(2): (A) and (B) seem fine, but (C) focuses on only oneaspect -- preventing erroneous classification--of what SEAs must do toimplement the intent of Part B. The statistically valid survey forassessing the effectiveness of IEPs is also unnecessarily specific at thispoint. Perhaps IEPs, along with erroneous classification and otherprovisions of Part 13 could he listed as issues for special attention in theSecretary's determination of progress and impacts, mentioned above.

Section 618(e) This seems fine as is.

Regarding Part E of EliA, Research in the Education of the Handicapped

The purpose of Congress' promoting research is (should be) differentfrom its purpose for promoting evaluation. Evaluation should be related tothe law and the federal, state, and local roles in carrying out its intentand achieving its goals. The ultimate aim of a research program should beto help special education practitioners and others (e.g., parents, medicalprofessionals) improve the education and related activities of handicappedchildren and youth. Research and related activities (development,demonstration, dissemination) should 1) increase our knowledge andunderstanding of such things as handicapping conditions, teaching, andlearning, education-related practices and services, etc., 2) developtechniques and devices for enhancing the education and related activities ufdisabled children and youth, 3) demonstrate exemplary programs and practicesand/or 4) disseminate appropriate information to audiences whose activitiesmake a difference in the education of handicapped children.

Thus, I believe Section 641 is all right, but you may or may not wantto mention related activities by name (surveys--mentioned in thissection--are a method of carrying out research; dissemination is a relatedactivity but is not mentioned). You may want to focus Section 641 on

.1,15

"oroltletiP In illy oklItt al. 1141 (11 (,Itl (lvt,11" u, y(tit tatty wantto state that Its; purpose Is to "proolot.e knowledge In spec. a 1 cdulallnll andre I t.ed prat. t ices and procedures " These purpose statements, wily Ilinttry.wart,.11 too 11100.11, however, I t it t:It.41' under the second statement, fortx amp 1 t, Ihal invest I gat i nt ti the nature of handIcappinq (mini I t Inns

Lou I be pursued. Hut I Drink ..11,.11 invest hid t ions should be permittedunder this 1.1.,vdrt.11 '.t,tt.i on.

'1....1.1(tut 64? may be pnlituallypool i 'tutor taut but its purpose is obviouslyint:. Jutted in the 1 an9tJaatt t.iun 641 and It unnecessary.

'att. t i on 643 seems fine.

I hope the manner in whi thr!,1` sutpiesti ons art., presented wasar.cep tab le to you 3n11 that you sutlers hind our general viewpoints:( 1 ) research is rtitteront from ova I ua t ion in purpose and ( '2 I bothdrc extremely important to at.A.onutl i sh nu the purposes 01 the Act.

cow rely ',our,,

(,/ ) )7'(: ill,/Marian stvarnsDirector`30L, la 1 en t.enter

452

446

THE UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS:ichol of Vilocatoot

llotloy flailIow000o, 110045

march 18, 1983

Senator Lowell Weicker, ChairmanSubcommittee on the HandicappedSR11-?4

Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Weicker:

In response to a request by members of your staff to provide you withwritten observations conce'rning the Education for All HandicappedChildren Act (P.L. 94-142), now scheduled for reauthorization, we wish

to respond as follows:

1. Section 618, Program Evaluation. Program Evaluation is essen-

tial to the improvement of education of handicapped children and youthand to the evaluation of federal, state, and local efforts to educatesuch children and youth. It is important to design and validate methodsof evaluation that yield information useful for developing instructionalprograms, remediating learning deficits, and enhancing the overall de-velopment of children with a range of disabilities.

While it is important for the Secretary of the Department of Educationto continue to establish national priorities concerning the componentsof handicapped children's education that are to be evaluated, it seemsparticularly desirable for programs to be evaluated at a local leveland for the Congress and the Secretary to authorize funding mechanismsthat allow for local evaluation and for some local priority-settingwith respect to items to be 'evaluated. Frequently, state and local

agencies have developed innovative programs or have attempted toestablish important modifications for "standardized" programs,of

education and youth. It may not be the case that the Secretary setspriorities that allow for the evaluation of such programs. Yet those

programs may be highly effecti:o for handicapped children and youth,may become models for national replication, and must be evaluated for

these purposes. Thus, it seems important for Congress to permit theSecretary to allow a funding mechanism that would enable state andlocal agencies to evaluate the programs that they deem to be important,even though sof,. programs may not fall in the priorities set by the

Secretary.

453

447

Sectim6Pi, Parental [valuation. Under the current Sectionhid, evaluation tends to focus on the implementation of the law and atestablishing data-bases at state and federal levels for planning, appro-priating, providing services, monitoring, data gathering, and account-ability.

There is, however, a major type of evaluation that has not been under-taYen. This is evaluation 1.0 direct-service and state- service programsby the parents of the handicapped children enrolled in those, programs.Without such evaluation, otter evaluation of the quality and range ofservices provided to handi..,oped children will he done largely by peoplewho may have some special interests in the operation; of the programsthemselves or who may have some special relationship to the serviceproviders.. While we do not mean by any means to suggest that there hasbeen arty bias in the evaluation of programs in the past, it is clearthat the perspective of parents have mit been sufficiently taken intoaccount and that such a perspective i, an important one. It is importantfor symbolic reasons, for accountability purposes, and because, in thelast analysis, parents have valuable perspective; on their child and theschool and are ultimately responsible for their children and authorizesuch action as schools may take nirding their children.

Accordingly, we suggest the addition to Section 618 (b) (2) oflanguage that authorizes the Secietary ,to conduct studies to ascertainParental satisfaction of program:, provided to handicapped children andyouth and of parental perception. of the unmet needs of such childrenand youth.

. ,

3. Section 61t;, Annual Report; by Auency_to Congress. While wehave found useful tire four annual Feports drat the bepartment of Educa-tion has filed with Congress pursuant to Section 618(b) (1), we havenoted that there is some lack of consistency of reporting across thefour reports. We think it is important for the Secretary to be remindedthat fbr reports to he useful to the CongreSs as well as to the field,they should report on the same topics and in .a consistent manner andthereby provide comparison of progress made under the Act across years.This sometimes has been done and sometimes not, Moreover, some reportsseem to focus particularly on the "issues of the day" and to be somewhatoverly selective with respect to topics that should he reported. Ob-viously, the Department should be in a position to inform Congress con-cerning issues of current importince. But just as important is reportingto Congress concerning the proyress or lack of progress across the years.

4. Research, Part E of the Education for the Handicapped Actauthorizes the Department to support research., It is our understandingthat the research.component ha; not been targeted for an increase inthe appropriation but for a decrease. In our judgment, research mustbe increased. Allow us to set out below Some of the reasons that in-creased funding of research is important to the implementation of theAft on behalf of'handicapped children and youth.

It is clears\that the a cumulative impact of research is far moreimportant than the short-term results of individual projects. It isunlikely (but not impossible, that a specific individual project will

154

448

die 11,,iit oo, fedi, .1tir I.

, ;!..H.orly,rplp thetn 3 twit 11111111V.I t Inn., 1 it

, ,, . et ICTS of hand 'cap.

re,eArcn that in neces;ari to enhance academiccni!onen whit root linihi ties and to

ovntifiehs from being aggrevated requiri.s

.

tir exaolde, the prourey, achieved during the

I.., yeari, n t 1.11/ and III111 tip ly nand I nappt111 C11111111'11

rill n..1,11110,1 ill whit uart mit achieved10,1- r 1, H., .11.111 a ',01.11.., (II 1,111,11 project, tna t,

akmr. t11. 1 1.. treciimiloos 1,0 Pt,. t tit, In Itrile who, pr,..l y hoer i o to be 'i,er IOUS 1 y impa I red.

tt'H i 0 , r ') Part F, two important issues mutt ho

(H',1 p(tent to wvich the tedoral 9overtrien%

fond01 twe

''V.' I.

WItin r-scoct to tne first, for research currently being (oii

fed at ranc.i s University Researcn Institute on Learning Disabilities

I y ive-year program) has hail a significant e f tect in

wieg a,. t ly who th, learning disabled children are, (b)

ml' ; CillAro! ot learning disabled children to "think" hr

.13q"-1,1.1' in a way that is academically profitable, and (c)

iii:, f, t- to develop and validate intervention strategies that not

July c5 6idren how to approach problems but also hOW to solve

th,m and thvri,by onhanre their own academic And social abilities.

it non tdkpn nearly five years for' the Research Institute here to do the

'p imh'mmi vi orjy studies (a) (above) and to identify some of the disablingcharacteristics of learning diabled children (h) (above). Now that the

researchers here are on the verge of developing amelioation and remedia-

tinn strategies, support for the Institute is coming to an end because

or tin arbitrary fixing of a five-year life for the Institute. Clearly,

sw:h research efforts must be continued or else the "yield" on the

,uve,nirfent's investment will be less 'than maY.Jmoni.

Ihir, major investments in research are effective and can he made more

0 if enabled to continue over relatively long periods a f.ime, for

creating more useful data concerning who is handicapped, for determining

tfe nature of the disabilities for such people, and for creating more

successful teaciiing strategies, treatment programs, and even preventive

measures.

The Department of Education has made important strides over the past

several years in funding such research -effort: as the Kansas University

Research on Learning Disabilities and through funding field-initiated

research programs. The important strategy is for the government 0continue to fund still longer the research efforts that have yeilded

important results.

06viously, now that the nation has moved toward putting all handicappedchildren in a educational programs and toward providing an appropriate

t,

455

449

location to, nt..i ot the hothlloid,od children in public education,should h, mode at the quality ot the service',

..,1 liable tor such children, !hose effort,' %hould consist of Increased

funding tor training, demonstration programs, and research. Allow us togive yuu some examples of what might be dune to respect to severely/multiply handicapped children, pursuant to your staff's request.

a. The Department might choose to accelerate the training ofancillary Personnel to serve severely/multiply handicapped childrenin public schools (for example, personnel representing occupationaltherapy, physical therapy. psychology, speech, and other disciplines).

b. The Department might give d higher priority to assistingteacher-training institutions in preparing teachers of severely/multiply handicapped children by making recruitment incentivesavailable in the form of stipends. Likewise, the Departmentmight accellerate its training programs to prepare Public schoolpersonnel to severely/multiply handicapped children; the emphasishere would be on in- service training targeted at severely/multiplyhandicapped children (most in-service has focused on mildly andmoderately impairedchildren).

c. The Department might give priority to research in new andinnovative practices to educate and train multiply handicapped'.tuttetits, particularly by encouraging cross-disciplinary con-

sortiums to translate existing and new knowledge into teachingtechniques for severely/multiply handicapped children.

d. the Department might wish to fund research efforts to assessthe nutritional needs of severely/multiply handicapped childrenand the effects of those needs and the effects of medication ontheir ability to learn. Frequently, because of difficulty ingest-ing, the nutritional needs of some severely/multiply handicappedchildren are not adequately met. The same result often obtainsbecause of medication.

e. The Department might encourage joint efforts by educators inthe area of severely/multiply handicapped children to work witheducators of sensory impaired students to share successful inter-vention skills and to combine instructional technology.

f. The Department might encourage research that would identifythe critical factors associated with successful service deliveryto severely/multiply handicapped students, including thecharacteristics of teachers and other professionals, the measuresof student's success as a relationship to the characteristics ofteachers, the stability of family, and placement decisions.

g. Finally, the Department might encourage work done by family-care physicians similar to that done by the American Academy of.Pediatrics for training medical personnel to work with severely/multiply handicapped children.

456

450

H f ti, I In (a /III' III Ill t,111,11119 idof r 1'.1. t rOl 111'., 11..,1 1111r at.tention In

IF L' I u. toil In.II ,i I II I ow !oh; toil 1111 .1111.1,

-,...ir '11111 r 1., T Ink!. el Ir.01 ?- 111; i i I ,Ir eli .11111

wr,n th lien t your attention to another aspect of research that the1 log, nu ent. h . not addressed sufficiently, in our judgment.

!i.yo Tr, to .0 he d need for te,leral fundlnu of shirt -tens projectsly, 1,; 1,10nr0,, in ,tura t ion) that would phlress some of the

df t r. ..ues invo 1 v nu Inlbli1 p1,1IIy and the education of excep- '

tional 11, for eAample, would include the pftect,,Of .1Pte-llrallnitlon Open state dnd local educational dgencie, theof te,.t of nt parent pdrt ic ipat ion in the education of handicapped chi Id

totll the 011 d rph; t he t 01 I 1}, over d period of years. While we do,110. to trial these top ics are exclusive, we do mean Comh if a te that the federal government has a legitimate rule in fundingpot y- a tel re ,odrdn in sped i di education. To date, very little ofteat hind nj nas ohtiIned.

dully, we k,eii Id like III observe that one reason that research fundinghas been relatively low on the federal priority is that, apparently,many people nave relatively low confidence in education research, part-oularly w'fli respect to special education. We do not believe that thatop111ion 1,, ,veil founded. In fact, it is precisely because of researchthat hand icappeJ children now are viewed, correctly, as educableand lc of being included in public school.. Thus, researchwder') r ,Is so many other aspects of public policy and Lhe education ofnandifdpped ,.hildron. The important thing for the government to do is to,,ecare dr, In( rdniW in the level of funding dnd a cots itment Co demon-',trited research over d lung period of Lime. Just as researchI,I.1'. CO 1,e completed and benun Co be disseminated, i L seems that the

,.h dollar', are withdrawn from the particularly successful projects.Is a ,,nortten, and long-tern error, increased funding and longi-

f.uainal research are nece,,.ary it special education is to yield itsgreatest promise and if the federal investment in it is to be maximized.

ihr ,e are some of issues that we think are important. We hope thatwe have re-,ponhed ddo(pAtOy to your request. If you have any questions,you flay tfdeph011. in care of Professor Turnbull at 913/864-4954. We

aporecidte the efforts that you and your committee are making onhebdlrf of hard ic111110.1 people.

Very truly yours,

)

H. Ruthei-ford Turnbull, III, LL.M.

Chairman and Professor of Special EducationProfessor of Law

Edward L. Meyen, Ph.D.Associate Vice-Chancellor

Research, Graduate Studies, andPublic Service

Professor of Special Education

Douglas 2 Guess, Ed.D.Professor of Special Education

4 5 "I

451

Consortium ForCitizens withDevelopmentalDisabilities

Training and Employment Task Force

Charles F. Dambach, ChairmanEpilepsy Foundation of America4351 Garden City Dr., suite 40fiLandover, MD 20785(301) 459-3700

Training and Employment Task Force

of the

Consortium for Citizens with Developmental Disabilities

Statement Relative to

HEAUTHOR1ZATION OF THE REHABILITATION

ACT OF 1973, AS AMENDED

March 18, 1983

Members of the Training and EmployMent Task Force include:

Asso,litlon for Children/Adults with Learning Disabilities

Association for Retarded Citizens

Disability Rights Education & Defense,Fund

Epilepsy Foundation of America

Goodwill Industries of America

National Association of Private Residential

Facilities for the Mentally Retarded

Council of Sta;e Administrators

of Vocational Rehabilitation

National Rehabilitation Association

National Association of Protection & Advocacy Systems

National Association of Rehabilitation Facilities

National Easter Seal Society

National Society for Children and Adults with Autism

United Cerebral Palsy Associations, Inc.

458

452

Introduction

The Training and Employment ?ask Force of the Consortium for

Citizens with Developmental Disabilities (CCDD) is composed of

organizations which serve persons with disabilities. A list of Task

Force members endorsing this statement is on the cover page. These

organizations provide services for and represent the needs of

millions of developmentally disabled Americans. The Task Force

members wish to thank the Subcommittee for its continued interest in

and support of the Rehabilitation Act and its pirograms. Many of the

people who are served by programs of the Rehabilitation Act are

affiliated with our organizations, and a significanieportion of the,/

people we serve have been helped by Vocational Rek!bilitation

programs. ThererOre, we are vitally concerned with the extension of

the Act.

Persons with developmental disabilities often have substantial

impairments which offer a unique challenge to the rehabilitation

community. The purpose of this statement is to highlight those

programs within the Rehabilitation Act which have an impact upon the

lives of persons with life-long and severe disabilities. Some of

the persons whom we represent may only require a minimum of services

in order to achieve independence and employability. Other

individuals may require more intensive habilitation/rehabilitation

services in order to reach their full human potential. All

453

components of the Act are vital and if they all were funded and

worked together then a full continuum of aervioes would be

available for arsons with disabilities. This Task Fore.: is ready

to assist the' Subcommittee as it continues its deliberations on

programs whi,oh are authorized within the Rehabilitation Aot.

The Task Force endorses exteniion of the for at least three

years and increased authorized funding levels to meet the need for

services. The Task Force firmly believes that all programs within

the Rehabilitation Aot should be renewed. Vocational Rehabilitation

programs are a proven, cost-effective method of providing vital

services to persons with disabilities. Since there has been a

decrease in the number of disabled persons served and rehabilitated

over the past few years,iie feel particularly strongly that the

authorization should be/increased for the Basic State Grant Progam.

In addition, certain;iarograms have exceptional potential for

increasing the number of disabled persons placed into competitive

jobs and expandingAhe independence of disabled persons. The Task

Force feels that programs such as Independent Living and Projects

With Industry should receive significantly increased authorizations

to accomplish these purposes. We also wish to suggest a

modification in the Client Assistance Program.

11

New FeJerallno

('nil year, the Reagan'Administratlon has again proposed that the

a,:i be included in New Federalism or block grant

broP)sals.Those pruponals would dilute the focus of the program

and would taKe away the strong financial base needed to provide

continuity. The Rehabilitation Program has always been a

cooperative arrangement between the federal government, state

government and the private, nonprofit rehabilitation community. The

Vocational Rehabilitation P.ogram is already a predominantly

state-run program. In FY 1983, 91 percent of the monies available

under the Rehabilltatldl Act were allotted to and matched by the

states to provide services to disabled people. The balance of the

funds are spent on research, training, independent living and

various demonstration programs which can best be managed from the

national level. The federal presence helps assure equitable

distribution of resources and reasonably uniform standards. Thus,

turning the program completely over to the states would not achieve

administrative savings and could cause duplication of research and

training programs. The dissemination of knowledge gained from

national level expe4mental and demonstration projects would be lost

since few states would have the resources necessary to engage in

such large-scale efforts. Therefore, this Task Force is opposed to

any attempts to include the rehabilitation programs in any block

rant or "New Federalise proposal.

4 6

455

,fate Grants

The central onmponant of the Rehabilitation Act is the State/Federal

11,1,,1111..111,m Program. Now In its bird year, this program

enntinuns as the focus of our nation's effort to assist disabled

Americans in their effort to broom,' gainfully employed. In recent

years, however, the caseload volume his declined significantly. Thu

number of persona rehabilitated in FY 1982 declined 11.31 from the

previous year. This decline can be partially attributed to

decreases in the purehasing power of the rehabilitation dollar

resulting from the effects of high inflation. The resources

available, to state agencies were further reduced when Social

Seeurity Vocational Rehabilitation funding was cut from $124 million

in FY 1981 to approximately $3 million in FY 1982. Approximately

110,000 eligible persons went unserved by state vocational

rehabilitation agencies as a result of this funding decrease.

Finally, continued emphasis on providing services to persons with

severe disabilities requires more intensive rehabilitation efforts.

We fully support this emphasis, but recognize that it places a

greater demand on the limited funds available. In FY 1982, 59.6% of

all persons served were severely disabled; the highest such

proportion ever recorded.

462

Despite the Initegodte resources, the program continuos to nerve, and

rehabilitate disabled persons who have the potential to work.

tf,,IrA shooll he incresed in order to nerve more of the eligible

perioni who go unnerved. Therefore, the Teak Force recommends that

the legistaticn extending the Rehabilitation Act contain

nothorizatlonn for basic :Ante Grants under Section 110(b) (1) of

tneHenabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, equal to $1,037.8

millinn in Fiscal Year 1984L$1,141.1 million in Fiscal Year 1985;

eol miliion in Fiscal Year 1986.

Theme authorizations would in part achieve the goal of restoring the

p,Imhallr.g power of the rehabilitation dollar to the 1979 Section 110

federal spending level. FY 1979 in viewed as the last year in which

the State /Federal Rehabilitation Program operated at full strength.

In order to adequately and effeotively meet the vocational needs of

disabled persons, it is imperative that we inorease the

suthdrization to these levels.

Independent Living

Title VII of the Rehabilitation Actauthorizes several different

approaches to promoting independent living services, particularly

services to persons too severelydisabled to qualify for vocational

rehabilitation. The 1978 amendments to the Act envisioned a major

statewide service delivery system,"Comprehensive Services for

4 6J

157

Independent Living," in Part A. However, the Administration and

Congress have restricted the program to the federally admInistered

Part 1.1 Centers for Independent Living by falling to request and

appropriate monies for the Independent Living state grant program.

These centers are often staffed by professionally-trained disabled

persons who assist Clients in obtaining appropriate services,

training and employment necessary to achieve independence. More

importantly, the :staff also Provides crucial peer support that can

be the key to the successful transition from dependence to

independence.

The primary concern of the Task Force with the Independent Living

program is how to create a transition from a federally - administered

series of model and demonstration centers which have proven their

value to a statewide service delivery system for the severely

disabled population. A key factor to implementing this transition

is the start-up of Part A while maintaining funding continuity for

existing Part B centers. The Task Force believes the success of

Part B justifies the expansion of the program at this time.

When enacted, Title VII of the Act offered great potential. It

remains a vital key to the door of employment opportunity for

disabled people. But we are dismayed that Parts A and C have not

been funded. Title VII is a comprehensive attempt to provide the

464

.11)8

50PPrt., rwo )orue.1 and .411.1t.,111,,,1 urti,I,A 101 11 hig Independnnea.

'leverely 'It:tabled people, the Inittp..ndent Iiving program

pr,,v1,11 lip. I Vtl , ly Iasi itui.lunal 'air,. NOW is the

ttm to let Title VII login to re4,1, ita fall Potential.

Thy TAlk Forc,! ro,:nmmW1 thAt $W mull ion be authorized for

Independent livinw services. This would allow for $3:i million to

initiate Part A, S-.4 mIllioh to maint.alhPart In anJ $3 million to

initlAte Kir. C.

Project., With Industry

The Pro,,ects With Industry (PWI) program authorizes contracts or

Jointiy-financed cooperative agreements with employers and

organizations fur projects designed to prepare disabled individuals

for gainful employment. Such projects provide training, employment,

and other services in work settings. PWI increases the chances for

successful placement because the client is exposed to and placed in

a real work environment. The process of permanent placement is

simplified becauss the employer already knows the client and only a

payroll transfer may be required to hire a PWI graduate. Business

and industry are more involved with the client, and attitudinal

barriers are reduced. PWI is part of an overall rehabilitation

Program with special emphasis On placement. Last year, 72 PWI

Projects were funded at SE1 million. Over 9,000 placements, costing

an average of Lab raah, made this a succeanful Job-trail:14g

program. Placement retention :ava were over V.4. The average

annual wage for Nil graduates 1445 $9,000; total income for persona

placed by the program was $78 mIllion. Taxes paid by PWI graduates

alone offset the cost of the program.

The success of the PWI program and its_positive cost benefit ratio

lustlfy an Authorization amount of $25 million for the next three

flsohi_years. Documented savings in public assistance and taxes

paid tIL the program clearly exceed the authorization for this

Other Progams of Significance

The T41$ Force has addressed authorization levels for some of the

major components of the Act. But the Act is composed of a variety

of programs concerning training, research, recreation and

rehabilitation services. Each component reinforces the others,

together constituting a program capable of providing a statutory

base for the appropriate rehabilitation services necessary for each

individual. Following are some of the programs vital to the

continued strength of the Act:

466

460

Rehailitatioe Training

Rehabilitation, because it is individually tailored to Le

un(;ue needs of each disabled person, tiepends upon

well-prepared professional, to deliver a wide range of

services. Whether the service is medical, psychological,

social, or vocational, the quality of the service prov'",r-:.

in directly related to the qualifications of tha prov.

A strong training program to provide qualified personnel iv.

integral to an effective srviee delivery program, and we.

regret that Condltig for Rehabilitation Training has

gradually declined over the past six years from $30.9

millicn in 1977-78 to $19.2 million in FY 1983.

Special Demonstrations

The Rehabilitation Act. authorizes Spe..al Demonstration-

"vhlch hold promise of expanding or otherwise improving

services to (severely) handicapped individuals." Special

Demonstration Protects and centers are on the cutting ed,,e

of developing ..nd refining methods by which the vocational

rehabilitatior program improves its capability to

successfully serve severely disabled persons. The scope of

the projects is national, with the emphasis on the

deveiopmant of projects which can be replicated it, all

states once service delivery models have been refined.

461

461.

Recreation

The rote of recreation in rehabilitation is an important

one. Recreation and rehabilitation professionals indicate

that there is a significant therapeutic value to

participation in recreation programs and that recreational

activities are an essential element of a balanced

lifestyle. When Congress passed section 316, it recognized

that the lack of adequate recreation programming for

disabled individuals was one of the most glaring gaps in

our existing social servioe,funding. Continued support for

Section 316 programs is essential to make recreational

opportunities accessible to persons with disabilities.

Client Assistance

The Client Assistance Program was established in 1973,

along with duo process procedures, to strengthen the

clients' voice in the rehabilitation process and provide

the olients with a means of redress it' the process was not

responsive to their needs. Gradually 37 states have agreed

t, participate. In most states, the VR agencies have opted

to run the program within the agency. Approximately five

states have placed the CAP program in external independent

advocacy agencies. To guarantee that all clients can

obtain the information and services necessary for

successful rehabilitation, the Task Force suggests

the following modifications within Section 112 of the Act.

468

462

a) Ma.la It uandAury fur all states and territories to

Provide a Client Assistance Program.

in Authorize funds necessary for a minimum allocation

to each state and territory.

c) Revise the language to state more clearly that

rehabilitation agencies have the option to operate

t'.e Program internally or to place it in an external

independent advocacy agency.

National Institute of Handicapped Research

The National Institute of Handicapped R4earch (NIHR), which

was established under the "Rehabilitation, Comprehensive

:services and Developmental DisabilitiesAmendments of 1978,"

prr,mJtes expanded research in both traditional and

i-novative fields of rehabilitation. The Institute also

provides support for the dissemination of information

acquired through such research and coordinates federal

programs and policies related to research 'in rehabilitation.

Despite initial Congressional intentions of significantly

expanding research in the area of rehali7itation,- the

NIHR budget has consistentlyreceived a smaller

appropriation than the initial funding level of $31.5

4 6

463

'1111"" I" FY 1919 and FY 1980. In addition to fewer

absolute dollars, BIBB funding has also been further

eroded by inflation. By shortchanging the research

aspects of vocational rehabilitation, as has been the

case SibCC the eatabil3hMeNt of hiHR, we are denying

the beet possible services and ohtdomes to persons with

diflabliltles, as well as undercutting the success of the

vocational rehabilitation program. The TasK Force

recommends an authorization level of $40 million.

InnovatIon.and Exhanslon

Innovation and Expansion Grants are authorized by Section

1:0 of the Act. These monies allow state vocational

rehabilitation agencies to pursue innovative programs which

xIght not otherwise be fund.-1 by the haste state grant

program. Traditionally these monies have been used to

se,Ve unserved or underserved populations, such as mentally

retarded individuals, persons with cerebral pally, and

disabled persons who are also disadvantaged. This program

was last funded in FY 1980 at a level of 1:-.775

The Task Force recommends that Innovation and Expansion

Grants be authorized at the 1950 level, at a minimum. We

believe that these monies can be umuc for a number of

activities which will enhance employment opportunities for

the severely disabled. For inn, Ice, a part of these moniee

could be used to apply renah.ltatIon engineering to the

4

464

wa.kalte, thus enah1114 many persons heretofore though.,

to be "unemployable^ to take their rightful place in the

working world. Finally, the Task Force believes that thc

grants should be reauthorized because they provide the

opportunity for rehabilitation agencies to use creative

!.nods to help the hard-to-serve client. While we are

fully oognlzant of the fact that these are difficult

economic times, we feel that unless such innovative

programs are, allowed to continue, rehabilitation for

the severely disabled will suffer both now and in future

years.

Reauthorize Unfunded Programs

The Task Force also asks the Subcommittee to reauthorize the

programs that have remained unfunded. As we noted previously, the

Rehabilitation Act must be viewed as a comprehensive plan addressing

all the rehabilitation needs of a diverse disabled population. We .

will urge Congress to appropriate funds for these programs and

projects. The unfunded programs include: Grants for Construction

of Rehabilitation Facilities (Sec. 301); Vociltional Training

Services for Handicapped Individuals (Sec. 302); Loan Guarantees for

Rehabilitation Facilities (Sec. 303); Comprehensive Rehabilitation

Centers (Sec. 305); Community Service Employment Programs for

landicapped Individuals (Title VI, Part A); Business Opportunities

for Handicapped Individuals !Sec. (,22); and Protection and ..uvocacy

of Individual Rights(Sec. 731).

465

The Act Must be Extended

The Amery point that the Task Force wishes to make 1s that the Act

must be extended. the various components of the Act have proven

their effectiveness in providing the best possible balance or

rehabilitation serviten to a diverse client population. We must

maintain and, in some cases, expand research, training Programs, and

services to meet needs that are currently not being met. We

appreciate the opportunity to submit, this statement to you and look

forward to working with the Subcommittee to ensure that all disabled

persons have the opportunity to become productive, independert

indtvtduelm.

472

Ur)

National Recreation and Park Association1101 1,,,,, C.., vi Do.v. Pogartl, i V./11,4,21w .1,ti s Hoc -Pica

PFNunerial I Ill',11114.11110 IIII'lllail,11 hiii'll'ii

tic:v.. :alb,

:le iiaedl,Pt," 11

;., j

it ...bat ot

fl Not meal Theraictitio rocicoo, a branch et thealt 1,ital tinre,it ion ,id Park Asirciatiin, V.X,111(. like to t;tli LINA*, r-

eret,dina aerto Pai 'III, of lb Pthabilitation Pei and r`rundi-critii,Public taw 'Ile 76iticual Peer at ion Mid Park. Arrioci,it tFOiiTtiiirr:principle Pul i i, iniret optaniv.aticri representing cit.izen aryl pr.ofss,ionilladers/1in in the: P4, .t71d pn.Ii VrA,PrIlt in the United tltater::, and Canada.Ii National Pecreat nit arul Park Pssooiatiiin's rierlership of sort 16,000 ineludes

Pri:lessicrials working in Public Pork and reirreot icu agencies, resiers of policynuking lairds and cir-lissirns, eiluc,itors, leaders in the Private recreation andleisure indust corner:riled citIoutis. He are tli:dicated to but-mina and ex-Frani-tiro, ,,eorturLities for prir iral deollorricnt and fulfi ,runt_ through barks,rricruoition and leisure activities,

The National Therapeutic Pecreation ilticie.ty is me of the seven professionalbranches of the National Pr:creation and Park Association. It is dedicated to theirrirovernent and expansicl, of Leisure se :-vices for picnic with disabilities, The;T:ps renrrsuns over two thrii,iand nrofessirnally trained indi:Auals Presently pro:-

serviioos for the disabled. in institutions, ccrrrarnity recreation agencies,rslICY)IS, and rehabilitation facilities.

intent, of Gtinirress in establishing section 316 was to provide ft: Is n insurethat the leisure needs of individuals'with disabilities sere beinci riot. :it -ilarorrohasis was placed on recreation activities that would "aid in locbilit: '

tion." In eact, during the original hearing ^n the. Pehabilitation Act, wasau:roosted that in scree cases the only way to increase independent functiobing for seep'.`' aided individuals is through the use of carefully selectckl recreation -ivities.

It th IA ief two year history of section 316 is examiwx1 several is Lucienclear. IAA ino the first year of the program, fiscal year 1981, twenty f of theeighty projects suiriitted were funded at a total exnenditure of $2,000,000. Cightyprojects may not seem like an overwhelming arraunt hodever, it is itrairtant totertsrber that Fy 81 was the first year of the niogram. In additicn to the newnessof the program, the grant announeerrents were nublished two rronths late. leavingapplicants less than sixty days to ccivlete the process. Given the -io-arstances,the ItIty avp1 ications represent a significant numbor.

4 7,i

177'. '7 1777 . '1' 17 '77 ' 1-1 7,...171 I 1 17 I

, 'tri U,.' 7, 7 7 71il

,:

"tr , ,1

I.

1 , I. 11.11, I ; I , I .11 I

'1'17 .71777 1.1 .777 1 1.7 IV

!, !:,1 1,! .'1,!, !:

4- 17 1' 7 I . 1 7 I .1 I ! 177, ,. 77,

171.77.1 :. 17 1,7.., 17 ..,117 1,1171, ,,f171717 h.]: 117

',.1.7,.0 1. 77177111o. 11177 :77.1,17 7:7 7 7 fol, VT 7,1,1 ,

171.7,7 1:..71 1 117 Ili77.1 7., ! 717171.7i1 171 1/7 711171t..1 1,1, 1.771 7 1 7 1711 '...177 Ut 1.7711I171 .1(11t id , -

,KI.1,t n 7i. )7,111, 11,...,1.'7 71-1177 71 )7.7 111 17.11711,'7,

7. 1 r. lety of-171 , -,1:! 41 1 1 7 11:7..77 .171.17J7 ,d11,at i

-0.7.. 77:7.1,7' :7.'1 .7.7 717.1 1 117, .17..77 777 1,77.7:1,1: I :. H7 1 `..7

. .7. .1,177,7 , . I 7, 7 7.: ill, 1.'1:7111

I ( I I 41; I' I 11 .1: : .. 1:I. 'lit sf 1,171'Nt I 11, 7 t 1 747,77 111.1 .174.711.,

.077 (.71 4,17,1 7'1 77,11 L. 1 1 .117.1 ,. 11.1.;,:ti t,.171,2ir.,al v...1 41 1,7,11',1711 le:, a Peoair,, ,ntor 7.77,r...1.:77 71:1 a

c1107 High, ku., 7,, tr,L,,. f',',,, all:' in?ort,tt 11,77 anO.111 ',140 ,r(cie(77. W.11 ru,Viti,

iI,11 11, r(71,'1 at r(.01-nalIII n.771,41,11 rift77,11 hunclred ro,x)1, will 1-Pcei.:e

lectlati. t nu' till In-ej,!,t

I.',1,:to:11 c.7111 Ind Vorat 111n41 Center, Inc. 11.7., :

( r-tro l'cl;r:4" Ls n te.,rateFand77i:IivIdu.t1t; into existirvi: airrunIty-basecl recreation activiti,:s,.'*) : IV a thoraoeutic recrtiaLion nreyirar and in f ormt ion referral

r han11ckax-rx1 individuals in eartem North Carolina.'114. inforratim referral center prarran will

lal,le .711 a(wrncle:- f4.!rong IhindicalsI,1 individuals inthe

474

I , 1, 1.11 11, II 1

!, 1!11. 11.1 110 t, It,

',1 111 I

. I, It f1.1 ,L111 111,i1 1111, 11,, , ,; 1., '1,4 1 !., It,'

.1,, .4 ,t 110 .'1,11.,'14

tit,' 11.1.

1 .1' -1" ,/,,,14 I t:1,.4 1 '1, 1'1 114 /14 1.141 1,1 1'.11,1.01,

. . 1 , 0. 4:1 1,11.1 1 '1, 1 -1,401y...1 111.1 1114,11,,,11 lll

1 ..1 4"t4 I. 11' 1.1'1', 1,0 ,.111,1,', 1,, t 1.111 r01111,1.1'. !.1' 141011.14. 1'111.11', .111' .1. tit thl. 111,1t.t 11!1.1.4 Ill, ,411,1 III

.,1 ,,"( .1 141.

1, 1011 .' 1'111 t

III WO 1 , ht.11,1',' ., i ,t ,..4t141, 1', 4111.1 ...4.41

1:11 1'11.t..t, 1.. '.1:'t . 11, I 11' tit, 11,1,01 It tit, 4.14: .11,1

h:!,74, 4.,1 it 1....,:t1 !, t, Jfl .,,,ti. ih,,,. 1,,1,1 . 1,1 ..t ' : 1, ,',11:t '1111,14 'tit-- ttt ..,c1,1, 11Z1411.11 V 101 OM.,

't 1 ,tt...1 In illi. ./0,1141 10 ,I1',..., /11111 1.1'10,'t ! tt , : ...." ill 0.11. Iti,1 rt.,AI,it 'Ill 1,1,1114 6, ,,,,,,,t,),. 4),,

:, .4 1.w111.1.1,11., .41,1 in Ity,,,.j,,1,41,4 1-,,1 jt,vt 11,4 tl,h., 1, '.11t.! 1, .' i,',1%. 4,...11411, rdei:thi 1 it.v ,11K1 .1,,,,ulni tile

I., I . . u ' , . - a p p , , I . 1 1 , 'I:: i . , : , .:.-.,-e'. 1,nt III ,...Lr....,... .. .,,,.., ....ii-: ,.t ',I, 4 hill, 14,1 tt 1,110 .1.4 h .i11.1 ,1 t

(l1p."!,.1".

tt,,. 1.1 4, 0 1.0,..1. 4 Rti.. 011 thitt' 1 1 , 1 I . , I 0.1,0 I 1111 40 '144,11 tlit' .11 htt11,11 14011111,..-;tt1041,11

114, 1 1011 t.1..,1(21.7 ti1.1011.11`,'

'4, 1 1,' 1.-411,1 ' 10 14 ,,,krt.hy r,ect.i.on if the1 .1 , 11 111,. I i,n Ill assureo that. pe(v1.,

wi : t,, :0 ,t lo for 1 icr (n.1.11 ity vi1 , i t 4400 tIe- ! t 1 , ! ! . 1 1,00:11.1111111 101,11/t. I itta.ii..14

i art ,1:;. 316 resr,.ctstt:t tn,! 1 .1isabi lit icl; by proviLling

it it 1(.4:,11 if I 'LI' form of 1-(1.,:xt mixicy for,':11011,14,: tt

in ..thhlth ULM.. ,)1.14,,priation level ofto tin t :71-.et gerierat-J-:,1

1:1 the 4-11,1t .,1.,ors. It is also 1.11r,

'cut it t itisurt the rr.c.r-.,al.!,141:1LIII.Ni irkii.4.411411,1444 .114 1,1 ,4,44 1411f41:t..

4 1-1'. t)

r

I. r r r r i 1 O r rl. I r I I I I I I / r.. I rr I rr',11 rl .,r11. tr '11;iII,. 1, Ir Illlrh rr r,i trrr rf

! l'ir' rrr. 11,r rl-[ r'tr 1 ,, II r I.

/ 1'1

476

470

National Recreation and Park Associationi MP P.O. I ..,.., 11,, . AN,...,,,I,,,. V r,.1 I 11 1111 /1)11 :1014 1.$0

\Ilium's/ I het 111 1c11 tie Ill tett:ion .S4teiet

411.I i *1,011.11Ir.C.

,1 11 111.

.1r

I . 11.1 1.1.

I

1.11.11! got N,0 [,41.11 1,1.0,1'10 It' 10,110 inn '...eioty, a brand) of the'1.01.41.11 .110 bilk. Ass(viat Would ti, sdrat. testinc)ny 011 thel'',rd tot IA I, pi. bIW '1-2 in, 'rho Natir.c.11 'Illeravout 3r Pt.,creation hcoiety

I, it., or Iva,. 1-1 'III IIII 1

2,000 'individuals who are professionallyt I.W114.1 .11.1 MA.ry of toreat.i,n .111.1 leisure services for haridioarlod

In the past decade ),t !,k.erved 111 mu wth dowliRr,it for recreat irnprPtessional pro.trat ion .1111 rei)eareil ende,e.n)ri; for the handicaPped lecause

or filo :rail tnit viriorous !vat irll>ittint try till Itureau )f I.:titration for theThe disetet ionai-y program in rec-reation for the handicapied

,.ruiinally were f-antiated try P1.00-170 Part V "Phyincal Nitrat ion and Pecreation:'raining and Poseald) for the itandicapped."This legislation inclined a National NlviiK)i-y

t. ';11i(21 and Peet-eat:ion for the Handicapped as ;sell as

,t,111.1r unts ainut tr lin in11 of mcreat ion i.ersonnel and research and demonstration.a:fleets et P190 -170 ineinTorated into P1 91-230 involved wrsonnol pr,-,,irat ion

IIS-,,:trrh and derr,nstratiext in physical education and recreation.

Throuel101.11. .1070.:1 itrowth and itivr..,...nt occurred. The incrcrtti-714,r.S and .ru11it.1.. of trained fersonnt in therapitit ic rereat.ion saw afproximat_ely

sop eortecl in personnel preparation and outstanding research:1101,.ts ai1301.1 in tiv .Iivelonnvnt of better tectuliques and services to handicappedchi 13 :''n and youth. The ft.xleal uovertrent in concert with the therapeutic recreationprofession was answering the public and Contrressional mandate for improving the.11).ilit of life for millions of handicapped individuals throuoh quality leisure andrecreation ;,;er.riCkL,S.

nfla Pulately in the pa-it. fiw years, effort:; to cont inure to suptx,rt ).-1,11.ion aslort.1111 Part ' tho ,51(rat ion of handical.3,Pd children ha'.' been dimu.):,fed.

,0. 1,11 that ororrains and funding support in S11' 1,r-senile) prekitat ion forsr...,:i.ILiSts has doe:Tr:I:A-xi at it much more Significant rate than the actual

171

1 1.1.11.11 , !, ;

10 11..11 ,.1118.,1 1.11.

,1,11 l',it

h 11!1. 111 4"..cri 11:,,1/1.1,1,1

. , 1

1, 111 1.1 1!.11 14 ,t iit` hi,. with 11o,

1. I, ;1, Ih. ! At-1)14 I!.1, 1,, 1 1., 110,-0

.-1 1.,111,11,'1)1, 01,1

1,1.0,0 1 , tt 11.1 1,{1,11 1,41

, ,111\,1. .'-!111111.11110 t,ll It 111 11.r 1(.11N11..10,1,1I.,: 1,11 1.1I1,11,,,, I. It, 1,1,1 {11I 1. a nr ; 11, In I I. 01. .1111, ,ktiT.1' 11,'

th1111i1,'111.,1 1170! Ti . ,0171 1!,,k1L. 1,,,111q1 .111.1 1.0 lilt.

h,

'.111' t11,11),1 11,1,11,11t1,1 Cklir,11i1111

LI ;Li

1,111,L1I Lt

' ' I i, 1,..11,1, hVAt1,11,:is t!io1. ,f111T'AISitt,1 t,iVI Writi , 11 1 14 1 t tv111.7.,tticr. of

i 11.11 .111 Pc, Cet. 1'11 1c1(1::1! 'S !COIL

,. ,/' .4,111(l 1.2 to!,, i.r.trirnr frnr this leoish:ttion.

/ ,

I. Pcirt vanChair, WP-9

478

.1 7

.172

1 II

1:(11(

REILAP,I I. TA1' I ON 1)1V 1 L.; ION

ri.' viwATI(1N;',1.

1 CCC..;

173

ttt 1. I I to t" .1 .1 1,, 1.11

C1,111111111,4' 1.11 .11 1,,../1110'. HI I I I, it

I ni I.ttt, , .01,1( ,ulItql1.11.1i'.4. ';1I t'.1 1.11 i .1r I '.' CV

t"..b t..t 111 .. 11

I I I i i t ,. vi I tie 1,1

7 it 0.11 it li iv Iitt.it ii iii t ,1 I

It it_

11,10,:k C.:11111_ 1.q11,11.11C, dt I I v it it Viii o I,

v of !Icv:Itl.1 Ii 1,4 ovii iiii ii. i, olpp..rt ed I Ile 7,1 1., I 1

R.J1:11,1 ii i 1.'let a I. tit,' la: with ,,rt at. tt iiiIi t 1110 iv iiiitI . A.

, that, chi doer. net iiliii 'atte I VI,

rodetAt I. s i t a r t . I tit I at I on 1..li ' into t City. 1111,0 f.ii!Iii 1 with LIi. Lvvi it di, ii I iii v Trt funds 11111,1, t et, .aa

I tt,t, et I .3.ibled t". vad.tt illy 11111r111.V...r1.1y

Chic like vol. Ii ii itiiiiiiNiitli o t. CIII ;evcri.' I y

. i ,t 1 YI...ar 11)81 , i 011AI -

f (id ii IC ft ye:tr ill It'A>c, tot :11..Cliri I. V 111onev Ii 01;1 1 he

Trt.IAL toniC toe 1 i t . , _ 1 1 it DI s[thi. I it y 11fficc AIR! dtip1I evilTi: s Coil; and CI ru t ion cotit:t latt.te ccvii Nd

in .1 Cate service motley. Gas,. service motleytd.st."..l Lt.) providv t titi nece"."..;d:y sertv h.:es to atitti st, the di sable,'

Lu relict; I t i "tua I t lit It 1 1 1 1 1 d t v e ttar ill

474.

'the vocational rehabilitation counselor might involve himself with the

most severely disabled client, usually upon his release from an acute

Icare center. Now because the counselor must spend from General Fund

I.money and wait for reimbursement from Social Security for severely

idisabled clients, he defers serving the most severely diiabled indi-

viduals who are potentially costly in terms of case service dollars

until he can be assured that this person is medically stable and

feasible for services: For example, before funding cuts, around 1976,

a 19 year old fellow in Fallon, one of our rural communities, was

paralyzed in an automobile accident. He spent one year in an acute

care center out .of state. These cmts were paid by his insurance

company. His insurance company covered only short-term costs. It did

not cover a wheelchair which was one of his immediate needs following

his release. He came from the acute care center with a list of pre-

scribed needs including a wheelchair, the need for driver evaluation

and vehicle modification, typewriter, various assistive devices like

eating utensils and hand splints. Many of these items he needed

immediately. He was not eligible for Medicare for two years following

his injury. In that interim year the vocational rehabilitation coun- /

selor got involved in the case to assist him to find ways to pay for /

costs and assess his future. The client's most crucial need was /

transportation. He needed to get to doctors, therapies, and vocation-/

al assessment. -His parents did not have the vehicle to accommodate

him, nor could they lift him into their car. The counselor first

addressed this need. The client and counselor planned college training .

to assure the client a job that would support not only his basic

needs, but also his special needs. Often the costs of the severely

",-

0 Pt 11 NM

48i MITIT NOMIFEM

111E MR?

475

disabled person are overlooked. He cannot exist on minimum wage. He

needs repair and replacement of assistive devices like wheelchairs,

attendant care which may exceed $600 a month considering the $5 an

hour wage of an attendant, medical supplies--catheters alone may run

up to $60 a month--housing modifications. Remember, when the disabled

.individual goes to work his benefits cease. That is why vocational

planning is so important, and why training resources and. employment

opportunities are essential. At present, the disincentives to be

dependent are greater than the incentives to be independent.

Our counselors Ae great scroungers. They look to, all programs

and sources before spending their case service money. They know how

far they must spread their funds to benefit their clients. They serve

from 150-200 cases a year. This client's counselor did his share of

investigating other resources. The counselor paid for driver's eval-

uation, modification of the client's van, some school costs not covered

by a grant or loan, and some assistive devices like a typewriter.

Over the last few years this young man has moved to Reno to attend

college full time. His vocational future looks bright.

Last year another young man was paralyzed in an auto accident in

Elko, another rural community without public transportation. The

young man has returned from the acute care center and he has a similar

prescription of needs as the Fallon young man had. But the avail-

ability of resources has decreased. The counselor realizes that

without Social Security funds his general fund money has to be dis-

tributed where needed to serve his quota of clients. The counselor

482

476

has no assurance that this severely disabled client will be success-

fully rehabilitated. With many very severely disabled individuals

medical setbacks are not unusual. At present, reimbursements,by

Social' Security is after the client has been successfully employed for

nine months, Since the progression of services necessary to reaach a

vocational goal is usually long term for this disability, the coun-

selor is looking at years after expending General Funds before / reim-

bursement from Social Security. The impact of resource losses, par-

ticularly on the most severely disabled is that the counsel° /has the

potential of using his whole case budget on one client. For/example,

in 1976 a van modification cost around $8,000. Today, a van/modifi-

cation costs in excess of 415,000. There is no agency that pays for

that cost. Inflation and funding cuts on other programs hI

/

as slowedi

the processing of assistance. Increases in the costs of health care,h

assistivc devices, medical supplieseverythingmeans the counselor

can do for disabled clients only what is available in resources._,

/

I don't want to misrepresent that all potential clients are

spinal cord injured and expensive. Not all, are visibly disabled.

Many have hidden disabilities, like heart or kidney problems, learning

disabilities, and mental disabilities. In fact, in/these depressed

economic times, counselors are seeing more and more persons who have/

psychological problems. Agencies like Mental Health refer their

clients to Vocational Rehabilitation.Mental Health provides the

therapies while Vocational Rehabilitation provides counseling, guid-

ance, and other services toward vocational planning and placement. I

believe the majority of disabled individuals who come to us have

483

477

nowhere else to go. Our counselors see folks who have run through

their money; whose marriages have broken up; and who are feeling

beaten. The decreased job market makes for greater competition be-

tween able-bodied and able-disabled people,

What this boils down to is the vocational rehabilitation coun-

selor has decreased resources to meet the needs of disabled clients.

I suspect this is true in /Your states.

Our administrator has trimmed the Vocational Rehabilitation

Program in Nevada to absorb the impact of feder-1 funding cuts. We

now have only 28 counselors to provide services in the state. We have

closed several offices and reduced staff. This is not all negative.

Agencies are 'joining forces to make more efficient use of available

funds. For example,/ our agency has negotiated with two school dis-

tricts who have opened alternative schools in our Reno and Las Vegas.

District Offices. /Counselors have become even more creative in find-

ing jobs and meeting service needs. Nevertheless, funds are becoming

scarce as every agency looks for alternative resources.

Block Grant: funding in a minimum allotment state will be devas-

tating to disabled individuals. It will mean further decreases in

case,service money. Our state is experiencing revenue shortfalls.

Legislators are meeting now to resolve that problem. Under Block

Grant funding, the state would notl be required to match the federal

dollar. The state could move up to ten per cent of funds between

Block Grants. The recommendationito switch from a categorical 'grant

484

478

program to Block Grant funding is hard for me to understand. If

switched, the distribution of funds may be along political partylines

rather than according to the needs of disabied Nevadans. The cate-

gorical grant funding protects" and directs a valuable program through

the Vocational Rehabilitation Act. Lt seems to me that Legislators

would not want to change a presently cost-effective and income-produc-

ing program.

There are other advantages to the categorical grant program under

the Vocaticnal Rehabilitation Act. As a national, not local, program

with consistent eligibility criteria, the Oregon counselor who called

me last month to see whether there was a mining job in Tonopah for his

client could transfer the case and assure the client that his services

would continue from Oregon to Nevada. I think disabled people think

of the Vocational Rehabilitation Program as a national program. I

would hate to see each state changing eligibility criteria and program

goals based on their Block Grant and Legislative focus.' I think the

Vocational Rehabilitation Act assures equal services to all disabil-

ities. I would urge you to continue the national scope of the Voca-

tional Rehabilitation Program under the Vocational Rehabilitation Act,

and I hope you will continue to support the funding of the categorical

grant program with sensitivity to us in minimum allotment states.

Thank you.

479

Statement of

RADM David M., Cooney, USN (Ret).

President and Chief Executive Officer

GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF AMERICA, INC.

on the

a

Reauthorization of the Rehabilitation

Act of 1973, as Amended

\ 486

480

Goodwill Industries of America welcomes the opportunity to

comment on the proposed reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Act.'

Continued authorization of the Act is of vital concern and importance

to disabled citizens and to the purposes and operations of Goodwill

Industries. Goodwill Industries'is a nonprofit membership orgahization

of 177 rehabilitation facilities in North America with 44 affiliates

in 31 countries outside of North America. As such, we are the largest

network of privately operated, vocational rehabilitation workshops

in the world. Currently, Goodwill Industries provides rehabilittion

services to 67,700 disabled people and employs almost 33,000 disabled

clients iq our production facilities, retail outlets and industrial

contract.programs. Goodwill Industries provide a wide variety ofi

rehabilitation services, including vocational evaluation, job training,

employment, adjustment services, job seeking skills, and placement.

Thus; we feel particularly involved and qualified to comment on proposed

c:, 4

changes to the Act.

Sin.ce its enactment in 1973, the Act has been successful in

serving the needs of disabled citizens and the Rehabilitation Services

Administration has administered various provisions of the current law

effectively. We believe that reauthorization of the Act, for a

minimum of three years, is of primary and fundamental importance and

we wholeheartedly support that action. The rehabilitation program

has been a successful partnership between the federal government, state

agencies, and the non profit rehabilitation community. It should be

extended to give both the states and rehabilitation agencies an

insurance of continuity and the time to plan ahead.

8?

481

Of the previous testimony submitted by various organizations

involved with the Act, we would like to state for the record, that

we basically concur with and support the opinions and positions

expressed by the National Association of Rehabilitation Facilities.

Additionally, we support the recommendations offered by the Consortium

for Citizens With Developmental Disabilities, especially as they

relate to proposed authorization levels and implementation of various

provisions of the Act. Because of this support, we do not intend to

burden the record by reiterating the various points raised by both

these organizations.

What we do not support are certain positions, as we understand

them, by the Department of Education before the Senate Subcommittee

on the Handicapped and the House Subcomittee on Select Education.

First, we strongly oppose the proposal to finance the

Rehabilitation Services program in a block grant to the states. It

is our view, clearly stated in the past that block grants have no

role in addressing the problems of America's handicapped population.

Under the Administration's proposal for a New Federalism block grant,

there would be no requirement that the states spend any money on

rehabilitation services after five years. We believe that only a

national program administered to meet national needs will ensure'

that uniform standards and an equitable distribution of resources are

enforced in each state.

It is a fact of life that the allocation of block grant funds

within a state will be strongly influenced by local political

pressures. In most cases that is proper in a democracy. Nevertheless,

488

482

although America's handicapped citizens constitute its largest

social minority, they are not now organized as a political action

group nor because of current social attitudes have they been

encouraged to so organize, nor because of their handicaps are they

able to organize and speak for themsel es on many issues. It is

thus fitting and proper that their interests be addressed by an

knowledgeable and prestigious body in the federal establishment

and that their viewpoints be received and considered by Congressional

committees like this one in order to provide reasonably attainable

national standards of rehabilitation. The proper role of the federal'

government is to make the tough choices and exercise oversight.

Without that national role for rehabilitation services, the quality

and availability of these services would vary too widely between

the states, to the detriment of handicapped individuals and the general

population. Therefore, we recommend that the proposal for block-

granting be immediately disregarded as counter-productive.

The full intent of the Department of Education becomes clear

when block grant funding of the rehabilitation program is combined

with Section 5 of their proposed bill, which removes many of the

State plan provisions and eliminates the requirements for certain

minimum services. These two proposals in combination reveal a long

term Intent to abolish a federal rehabilitation services program.

We find this totally unacceptable and detrimental to all citizens.

Secondly, the Administration's proposal to establish a system

of rewards to those states who have been able to achieve higher levels

. 6 ,

483

of rehabilitation similarly disregards the needs of disabled individuals

and penalizes states for circumstances over which they may have no

control. For example, such a system would penalize those states with

high unemployment rates regardless of their success in rehabilitating

severely disabled individuals. As a case in point, -in the State of

'Michigan, unemployment in some communities has been as high as 20%.

Despite that fact, rehabilitation agencies in the state have continued

active vocational rehabilitation programs and have been successful

in equipping individuals to enter the job market when the economy improves.

The fact that they did not become immediately employed is not an

indication of any ineffectiveness of the Michigan State Director of

Vocational Rehabilitation or of the management of local rehabilitation

facilities. It is rather an indication of the fact that there is

unemployment in the State of Michigan and that unemployment impacts

on handicapped people as well as the able bodied. To punish thetState

of Michigan, already in serious economic difficulty, for a situation

not of their creation, is poor economics and poor social practice.

There are other states and regions with similar problems familiar to

the committee, Michigan is merely a clear example.

Unemployment is not the only potential cause of such anomalies.

Social structure of communities, the impact of weather, the onset

of pregnancy, seasonable variables in employment rates are but a few

of the economic and social variables which make the proposal unworkable

and probably counter-productive. Additionally, to be fair, the

system proposed by the Administration would require a standardized

system of measurement applied universally by an agency other than the

state itself. The requirement for the creation of such a bureacracy

490

484

would consume resources needlessly.

Thirdly, we oppose the Adminestration's proposals to include

programs under Title III of the Act in a single authorization and

to delete authorizations for currently unfunded authorities.

Specifically, we feel there should be reauthorization and funding

for Innovation and Expansion Grants and for Facility Construction

Grants.

While opposing the Department of Education's proposals, Goodwill

Industries finds itself hindered in making affirmative, substantative

recommendations for what we believe are necessary changes in the current

law because of an overriding problem with the Act. The Act as presently

written and implemented does not provide for meaningful feedback

concerning the effectiveness of delivery of rehabilitation services.

There is a paucity of any reliable, standardized data on which to

evaluate the effectiveness of the Act over the past ten years. We

question the figures that the Rehabilitation Services Administration

has set forth in its testimony, since our inquires to RSA have only

gained responses based on data as much as three years old. There is

no information available concerning the utilization rate or cost

savings realized from the use of private non profit facilities for the

delivery of rehabilitation services. Requestslor data concerning

the number of clients processed and the cost for delivery of services

to these clients have been unsuccessful. Additfonally, the state

directors of vocational rehabilitation have either been reluctant or

unable to provide such information to private organiiations, such as

Goodwill even when our purposes parallel their own.

4,9.E

485

We do know from our own in-house audits that certain trends

are developing which are of concern. The number of clients being

referred to non pr-fit facilities is declining and the states'

share of costs of servicing the clients has also been reduced. In

some states, sponsored clients have virtually disappeared and in

others,Goodwills no longer seek state sponsored clients because of

unrealistic compensation levels for work performed or extensive

bureaucratic burdens. In some cases, the Goodwill accepts total

responsibility for the client as a less expensive and more efficient

technique of meeting community needs than becoming involved with the

state program.

Our experience with the various states on how they are

administering their programs has also varied widely. In some states,

the state bureaucracy's have grown without any seeming increase in

service to clients, while in other states they have been able to

reduce their administrative overhead and increase service by

referring more clients to private facilities. Moreover, there

has been no uniformity or consistency on how the states determine

their cost .of services and fees. This experience of the past

severallNars'causes Goodwill Industries to make certain recommendations

for changes in the Act. Clearly these recommendations are in need

of further refinement. However, we believe that it is not in the

best interest of the disabled citizens simply to reauthorize the Act,

without the inclusion of these measures.

First, there needs to be more specific inclusion in the Act for

more detailed data collection, especially as it relates to administea-

tive costs. Provisions need to be made to mandate that RSA collect

049200.

486

data on the utilization of all service providers, including private

nonprofit facilities, and their effectiveness in delivering services

to clients. The Secretary's annual report and evaluation of the

Act's program, required by Sections 13 and 14 of the Act, should

specify that such reports and evaluations include comparisons between

public and private facilities. Similar requirements should be

included in the state's recordkeeping requirements and studies and

reviews, specified by Sections 101 (a)(10), (15) and (16) of the Act.

Only in this way will it be possible to evaluate fully the effective-

ness of the states in delivering rehabilitation services to handicapped

individuals. The review of expenditures to rehabilitation outcomes

would be the basis for determining how future rehabilitation dollars

are effectively and efficiently spent.

Secondly, more emphasis needs to be placed on providing funding,

under Title I of the Act, for the provision of direct services to

clients. This could be accomplished by amending the Act to mandate that

a set percentage of Basic State Grants to be spent on direct rehabili-

tative services and that a concurrent limitation be set on allowable

administrative costs. Such a provision would increase the accountability

of state agencies and provide a reasonable measure of uniformity in the

distribution of rehabilitation services between states.

The limited and dated information, Currently available, reveals.

wide variations between the states on administrative expenses. A

limited in-house Goodwill Industries survey that one state's expendi-

ture of funds for administrative purposed was as low as 9% whereas

another state's administrative expenditures was_59%. A study conducted

487

by the National Association of Rehabilitation Facilities, based

on 1978 data, shows that states averaged 44% of their administrative

expenditures on administration and counseling as opposed to case

services. In one of the states, the administrative expenses were as

high as 70%. Clearly, these inadequate statistics standing alone

may be meaningless, for the raw figures do not reveal what items are

included in administrative expenses nor do they necessarily indicate

how effective a state is in delivering services to clients. However,

what they do reveal is that there is currently no adequate way to

measure whether funds are properly being administered to provide

direct services to clients.

Before a limit could be set on the amount that states could

expend for administrative purposes, it would be necessary to define

exactly what constitutes administrative expenses. Once such a

definition is developed, a statutory limitation on administrative

expenditures would provide an uniform means for measuring states'

effectiveness in delivering services and help guarantee that the

basic purposes of the Act are being fulfilled.

Thirdly, Goodwill Industries believes that more disabled clients

can be served, at less cost to the government, if the Act is amended

to encourage greater utilization by ,the states of private nonprofit

facilities. Goodwill's experience demonstrates that private facilities

can be highly successful in providing rehabilitative services at limited

cost to the government. Currently, on a national average basis, for

every dollar expended by Goodwill facilities on rehabilitation services,

$.83 is earned from sources, other than the states' fees.

494

488

This actually means that Goodwill subsidizes state and Federal

programs. In 1982 Goodwill's contribution to the national

rehabilitation effort was approximately $225 million.1 This figure

represents income and services provided to or for diabled individuals.

Of this amount, $187 million was earned from sources other than State

VR fees for services. Thus, Goodwill's contribution equals"

approximately 25% of the total federal expenditures' in the Basic

State Grants program in 1982. This. sort of investment entitles

us to a partner's voice in establishing program objectives and costs.

Greater utilization of community -based private organizations

would not only keep costs down through reasonable competition, but

would provide an incentive to create private nonprofit facilities

where no rehabilitation facilities presently exist. The result

would be broader-based care that would not require handicapped

individuals to travel significant distances to 'receive that care.

In conjunction with this recommendation, we urge that any

consideration of the Administration's proposal to allow grants to

for-profit organizations be modified to provide that such grants be

given to for-profit organizations only when state or nonprofit

\agencies are not available and where the purpose is to provide

geographical coverage where none is available. Such d modification

is not contradictory with the philosophy of encouraging private

sector utilization. Where nonprofit agencies exist they can keep

costs down, but to do so they need broad-based community support.

If that support is decreased by federal grants or subsidies to

for-profit agencies, which then perform work previously accomplished

by the nonprofit agency, unit costs will increase in the nonprofit

k

49

489

agency and overhead will become burdensome. This could have an

overall negative effect on the costs of service delivery, dictating

a reduction in client loads.

We urge that Sections 101 (a)(5) (12) of the current Act

should be amended to require that states place a'priority on utilizing,

to the maximum extent possible, private facilities for rehabilitation

services when they are reasonably available at competitive costs.

Funding for the states should be contingent on satisfactory demonstration

to the Commissioner that they adhere to these provisions. This type

of provision, in conjunction with the above. recommendation concerning

data collection on utilization on private sector facilities, would

provide the basis for long term evaluation on the effectiveness of

delivery syste:Is.

In summary, Goodwill urges the Congress to reauthorize the

Rehabilitation Act with the inclusion of the three recommendations

stated above and the positions taken by the National Association of

Rehabilitation Facilities and the Consortium for Citizens With

Developmental Disabilities. Such action would ensure that the

Rehabilitation Act becomes an even more effective vehicle for serving

the needs of disabled Americans. We appreciate the opportunity to

submit this statement and look forward to working with the Committee

on imPlementing_necessary changes. For the Committee's consideration,

we are attaching to this statement a copy of a res6lution passed by

the Board of Directors of Goodwill Industries of America, Inc., which

sets forth our basic recommendations.

496

21-97-1 0-83---32

490

GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF AMERICA, INC.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

March 19, 1983

It was moved, seconded and carried that the Board adopt the followingresolution:

WHEREAS, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, ispending reauthorization before the 98th Congress,and

WHEREAS, the Rehabilitation Act ha's proven its effectivenessin assisting people with disabilities and thereauthorization provides an opportunity to recommendcertain structural changes to the Act that willresult in the provision of more efficient and directservices to disabled individuals, and

WHEREAS, insufficient data is currently available to provideeffective oversight, implementation, and enforcementof the program authorized by the Act,

THEREFORE, BE. IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of GoodwillIndustries of America, Inc., to support thereauthorization of the Act with changes that willset a limitation on administrative expenses, increasethe utilization of private rehabilitation facilitieswhen available, and increase the reporting of databy the Rehabilitation Services Administration.'

497

491

United States

USSAStudentAssociation

The Merger of the U.S., National Student Association and the National Student Lobby

The United States Student Associatihn (USSA), a national'organization

representing students at postsecondary institutions across the nation is

pleased to submit this statement to the Senate Subcommittee on the

Handicapped for the Reauthorization of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act

of 1973 and to express our opposition to President Reagan's reauthorization

proposal: for the Rehabilitation Act.

USSA is deeply committed to full access to higher education for

all students with disabilities. We feel that this can be accomplished

through enforcement of Section 504 and the strengthening of existing

Vocational Rehabilitation programs on college campuses.

We have been working to preserve and to increase funding levels

for student financial assistance programs for all students and to

increase the availability of information for students on the entire student

financial aid delivery process. It is from this perspective and comoitment

that we are presenting our suggestions to improve the coordination between

Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) programs and Title IV Student Financial

Assistance programs. This coordination and closer linking of services

is necessary to better utilize the Title IV student aid services that

are often not considered in the formation of,a student's Individualized

Written Rehabilitation Plan and to maximize the use of available programs

at a time of shrinking resources for both.

498

492

oit+ ihput from disabled students,

disabled student service providers, and riea,o% cf liio frijher education

comim,nity. First, in Section 103, fa: 3 of Title : of the Act which deals

with Inc. ncope of Jecational rehdUilltoLlve particular vocational

counseling and other services, we propane that thn sention be amended so that

no training servisps in higher education institutions shall be paid for with

tiv

funds undOr this title unless maximum efforts have Peen made to secure

grant assistance under the Title IV student financial assistance programs;

Pell Grants, Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (SCOW, State

Student incentive Grants (5SI6), and College Work Study. We are aware of

a policy agreement developed in 1979 between the Rehabilitation Services

Administration (RSA) and the Office of Student Financial Assistance at the

Department of Education concerning the coordination of Vocational Rehabilitation

programs and Title IV student financial assistance. We urge Congress to

reaffirm the intent and benefits of this agreement enabling disabled students

to maximize tne benefits of both Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services

and Title IV programs..

Second, we urge that pcotsecondary institutions establish a priority,

for using college work study funds for students to be employed as readers,

notetakers, and program aides for students with disabilities. In addition;

Vocational Rehabilitation students should be included in the CWS program

to gain access to financial resources while gaining valuable work experience.

Third, to ensure that students with disabilities have access to employ-

ment and training opportunities through the Col legT Work Study (CWS) program,

we propose that money earned through a 'CWS job be exempt from consideration

when calculating Supplemental Sectirity Income (SST) benefits. This would.

work in a similar way iaithe waiver that was granted by the Social Security

Administration to enable disabled persons to work for ACTION and VISTA without

... 4 9 a

493

having their SSI herrefit., aflet.ted. In addition, the actual murk experience

gained by a disabled student in the CWS program he excluded from the foirmla

used by the Socill Security Administration in computing the substantial

gainful activity (SGA) requirement.

President Reagan's proposals for the Reauthorization of the Rehabilitation

Act call for an elimination of key provisiors, rather than a strengthening

of existing requirements which have proven successful in the ...implementation.

and delivery of rehabilitation services. We propose that the Vocational

Rehabilitation state plans incorporate a policy focussing on the identification

of severely disabled students and to prioritize rehabilitation services to

those students. The development of a plan with a stronger emphasis on

severely disabled students would better link secondary schools to the

Vocational Rehabilitation programs and capitalize on the resources invested

in the severely disabled student at all levels of education.

In conclusion, USSA urges the Subcommittee to seriously consider

these proposals which we feel would enhance,the Vocational Rehabilitation

Act of 1973 in improving the coordination of existing services for disabled

students on college campuses. We appreciate this opportunity to express

our concerns on this issue and hope Ahat we may be of further assistance

to the Subcommittee in formulating the final reauthorization plan of the

Vocational. Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

494

STATEMENT

RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT'T'ED TO THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED

OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON

LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES

ON

THE

EXTENSION OF THE REHABILITATION ACT

ON BEHALF OF

UNITED CEREBRAL PALSY ASSOCIATIONS, INC.

THE CHESTER ARTHUR BUILDING

425 "EYE" STREET, N.W., SUITE 141

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20001

Prepared by Kathleen M. Roy, Policy AssociateWith Contributions by Dr. E. Clarke Ross, Director

March 22, 1983

U.C.P.A. Governmental Actmtles Office Washington, D.0

495

United Cerebral Paley Anunelations, Inc.. is pleased to mubmit written testimonyto the Senate Subcommittee on the Handicapped concerning the reauthorization of the" Rehabilitation Act of 1171" as amended. Wu cotwnend the Subcommittee for givingconsideration to the program:tie needs of our nation's disabled citizens as theRehabilitation Act is reauthorized. At the outset. lICPA, Inc., would like, to endorsethe commento submitted to the NUL:committed try the COnsortium for Citizens WithDevelopmental Disabilities 'NIA Force on Training and Employment. Thin statementis the result of thoughtful deliberations of severalnational agencies who representpersons with Hever° disabilities who regaire d UOntinUUM of rehabilitation servicesin order to reach their full human potential. UCPA le an active member of the TaskForce and we feel that this atatement will give the Subcommittee significant directionin d number of programmatic areas including the hasio state Grant program, IndependentLiving, Projects with Industry, Client Aasis6inco, NIHR, and other programs whichServe persbne with disabilities.

In recent yaars, UCPA has become increasingly concerned about improvingemployment opportunities for persona with severe disabilities. While many clientsare served by the vocational rehabilitation system, all too often these serviceseither do not lead to employment opportunities for disabled individuals or result inemployment which may not fully utilize the clients employment skills. We point thisout not to be critical of any one segment of the rehabilitation community. Rather, Webelieve that this in a problem that those concerned about rehabilitation, especiallytaw members of the Subcommittee, should give further consideration. Therefore, ourtestimony will Focus on one solution to this problem: Improving rehabilitationemineering as it relates to employment. UCPA firmly believes that if we improveour ability to adapt the work place, many parsons heretofore thought to be "unemploy-able" Will be able to take their rightful place in the working world. Further, ourstatement will outline some of the problems encountered in the production of adaptiveequipment and the response being made by the National Institute of Handicapped Researchto this problem. Finally, we will consider how the Independent Living Program servespersons with cerebral palsy.

The Cooperative Agreement

In April 1991, UCPA entered into a Cooperative Agreement with the RehabilitationServices Administration, the National Institute on Handicapped Research and the Councilof State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation. The purpose of the Agredmentis to improve rehabilitation services and thus, employment opportunities for personswith cerebral palsy. As the Agreement states:

"While many advances have been made in vocational rehabilitationin the last several decades, the vast majority of persons disabledby cerebral palsy have not been served....

Another critical area fcr intervention involves increasing employ-ability and employment options. Unfortunately many persons withcerebral palsy are labeled as unemployable, inappropriately placedin sheltered workshops or limited to few employment options. Also,

many persons with cerebral palsy have been underser ed by theeducational system and this factor has further limic.ed theiremployment options."

502

490

Th0 Aql 1.1.1114.14. cmf, 1 114, A. 1' 11 1, .1 1,10 / wl ll 101.1i.$1k4 411 1,4 Co WV( tovit

employmoht °ppm tont' 1 II 1 1.1L4,1 $1. 111040 include

fullewtligl kiwi 14 6' 1 O ' l l / 1 1 , 1 1 , 1 . 1 1 1 1 4 I 11 /4 I I 11.1 I 4 4 011 I Will

elun,i1 Ln:, 0.01 4,611 1..1 I 1HW I I 1.1111CW and .4 (WAIN 01

r1/1011,ititdti4n and Indmiondonf 11V1111 4.41414, Thrqughout the Agreement theImp,dtninAl of imptevleg rohablittation 011n1ncol inn as It relales to employment

has 14 1,0011 ut 41 14.11hi.

p k,,., LILT, the 1nni,nal j V 41 iv/1 i-.111611 11,11..i I 01..,11 11(11/10Wh.lt

u1uwu4 111311 1/UL ..111011,;7 11,1.1 11)1 11'1 I 1Y ./114 1.'1 4,1 1`,4. llowovor, 1111.1, poet, tall wo

1411ed .4 full-time rehabt.1 II 01 011 ).it. ".411,11.11 In 1111 1411.044111 ufl Ice to work on lhemt'l41aol.LaLaon at the ?Vet nomunt. '1'1111 ow 1 lig example:I III ucp illn4.4 a,;(tv 11 jun

indicate that the adtaiosoIO VI 1 I ult. 1'1101'1y load to

ut th inturo for poison." with cerebral palsy!

Perhaps the best oxilvlo of cooperation between (CIA and the vocationalrehabilitation systv'n can ha noon by the efforts of OCP of Now York City.

Title affiliate In ill'AJWUd in placing prosena who ate currently inentolturod workshop program' into competitive employment. UCP of NYC also

provided post employment servloon which may be needt,i1 by those clients.Two yearn ago, thin program had ken so successful that Lila Now YorkOffice of Vocational Rehabilitation has signed a contract with UCP ofNYC to provide thane sorvicos to other severely dinabled persons.'

Una 0! Indiana ha, hired a full-limo tchahilltation engineer to 'mproveemplevment oins'.ntiolittia for dovolopsonlally disabled persons who aro

currently working lh '01'11ured workshops. This individual serves 06.4rascarce imtnon technology is commercially avallablo to the

omployer. .11e also offers recommendationraon how to adapt a worksito for

a particular disahloi individual. When ouch worksite modifications arerecommended, the rehabilitation engineer focuses not on a single job,

but two or three jol's which the retinal may be able to perform, 'Atlas

increasing that port_ion's employment potential.

UCP of the North 51o11e has undertaken u direct tralning/en-the-jobtraining trlram for novoiely disabled adults. There are currently nine,

onrollees inthe proqzm. UCP has mat, with the Massachusetts RehabilitationCommission cdncerning possible funding for thin program. It appears thatthe Massachus'etts'Rch%bilitation Commission will entot into a "purchase-of-

service" agreement' some time in the future. IL is hoped that such an

agreemutit will foster other eodperative ventures,

As a result of the Cooperative Agreement, UCT of Wisconsin has unterodinto joint agitement with the Wisconsin Department of Rehabilitation.

UCP of Wisconsin is working with rehabilitation counselors tomake them aware of the, services which can be provided through the use of, anoccupational therapist and/or rehabilitation engineer in adapting the workite

for severely disabled persons. UCP of wisconsio is using the work done bythe Job Development laboratory at George Washington University as a modal.

UCP of Alameda-Contra costa Counties has been working wi,h RSA Region IX to

improve services for lersons with cerebral palsy. The affiliate and the

regional office have had extensive information sharing including statisticsconcerning .the number of persons with cerebral palsy served in the state of

497

tall lrnula, Al 1 it 1. tut, IscP ot Al smna.t r,ml1.1 1,k,ot I toillt Mk I tt

workind WIth IAN? 1.1.1. '/idol' in ion the 1.Ip 1tainir. nil it i,1111

novels disabilities,

p,na'aui Who as. in vo vt-fl will, I .,f this titrVitt y t.11,1.1qt1111.11.111y .111.1o0 I lilt Ion oh I lkoOt 111,1 I lot. .1.1.10 41 loll,o4/10Itt.1.11 to '11111 11,1 l; li.11 I botlo rot "1,1,1 I oil, loymioa oneophdhilstalloh id.dosaWhal but 11 thi, way,

po1.g.1 lot coot rIbiii ,1 oltah lechhology towal .1 t

o m p l y a b i l i t y of pornons w 1 1 , ela a l pal sy I nMy Along,' lu that ',Al: 00.11 ul turluuoluyy tut ,11 ilk1,1,101 hut t1,0 difficulty lot. in applying tt 10 !loft thdIVidualt:011141111kor .41 .1 CO/it which rah he lOtnu, At the present tlln.. It

appease snit only a very umall negmesit of consumers have hadthe op' ert ono p to benefit front rehab P11,0,11,01' UM for paspones

elni,loyrOtit My thought, I. that tinlioal the rehab technologyIs In o during this opniniono 1.0,10/1 of oducation/traillitel,this L'Il wi ill matching this technololy to a Joh In deereass,d.What, , a uonitlfrier needs (in) thn 1111.11t and equipment. ,ithl I 1,11,1l1Ihruuglk rehabilitation engineering toolatiques eat ly in liraLWMOU If not, they provably will not to "tracked forinsidoymont."

Volhops move impost,int is the f..wt,that a ,pivernment study hanrescinAl similar cowl 4, Inuit . Thu Perkely Planning Asnee int on, inconiunct lui with 11.11.dd Fussell Associates, has recently completed a

study concerning the ac,...)mmodationn made on behalf of handicapped worketuby federal eonta aet,rti. This study for the Departmont of labor 'noughtto provide a better lass for implementing auction 50l of this RohabilitationAct of 1071..." Tho 20-month study sgsvoyed 2,000 federal contractornconcerning the hatury and extent of the a.,onmuniatiolos made for disabledemployees but only 167 responded. In 85 teleplPhe ihterviewsWere conducted to ohtoin MOte detailed information concerning the typesof accommodations made. A survey Of disabled workers was also taken to"learn about any ,wceimnodatiohs that may have been made for th en." Finally,Case studies were done of ton f trine who wore identified as havind "ixemplaryaccommodation practices."

The study made the following conclulions which may iht,irent rhoSubcommittee:

An overall conclusion of the analysis is that for firms which havemade'efforts to hire the handicapped, accommodation Is "no hiq deal",...only 0% of the accommodations cost more than $2,000.

"Accommodation efforts are generally perceived as successful in

allowing the worker to be effective on the job."

504

49$

e "Moommeamia t 1.0,o (III 1nd1V1dn,1I woi kur take' 10.0IY tcrrrnsI

aduding moth LiltYkliniffialltil and Incat14114 of the loh; Itdrdintfig

or eulootivoly plaetrol the' workerm in ptbo 114414411411 nu 4llii,W04411H11

Providing transportatiOn, siectol ishilPeorit or aidem, redesigningthe worker's jobs and ro.orionting or providing mpeciol training to

enporvieorm and ogworkero. No particular typo of aecommOdatIondominates, P4,n wukora rocolvod Morel 111,111 ant) kiwi of qvcoelleA4ttP4,4

The study draws a number of cohcloutoom, hut the' f(Ail owing may le or mpocial

intorust to the Subcaomnittmo. They rociammormi the gueotnmonti

...Provide toohnical omirielonoe 4nd possibly onst,giharing 1441 accomsodation,

This MaY particularly le noedad with the email huainoss scoter, whichis bOth tho source if o diproportIonato idlers of now john boing oreatodby the economy, 'and oleo the eactor, toast likely to hire' and acoossimmlate

the handicapped duo to limited pereonneL gyatmil, diversity ofoccupations, mot inoxperioncm with accommodations tOvorneantmfundcOrehabilitejon ongijasorlagjlatere are tang ppoeiblo eourve ;7241TIAI!*0,

plit,j1493219SARt "Bahia MOUrcui era nO040d1.14!4111.14.0r0Mill

" krogra" for seig91.1" )Emphasis maw)

It should be pOinted out that of lho firma surveyed 20% roortini having

no handicapped workers, An additional 17 have made' no accommoOation. 010.Y

55% have made sou* form of accommodation. Thus, while this study domonstratosthe value of adipting the workuito to dimahlod individuals, it also ',pinto outthe ne'e'd to incrootio our focus in this area.

Efforts of Vocational Rohabilitation

As we have already illuetrated through some example of the' ways in which

our Cooperative Agreement Le bofng implemented, sovoral vocational rehabilitation

agencies have become involvod in rohabilitation onginvorina as it relates to

employment. The following are some examples of efforts being made by vocationalrehabilitation agencies either on their own or in conjunction with other agencies

or institutions. By using those illustrations, we do not wish to infer that

those are the only efforts vocational rehabilitation is making in this area.Rather, these examples are meant to offer the Subcommittee ideas of howrehabilitation engineering can be used by vocational rehabilitation agencies.

The 10w4 Department of Rehabilitation was funded as a ComprehensiveRehabilitation Contor during FY 80 and 81. Drawing on the work dono

by Dr. Kali Matlik at the Job Development Laboratory at GeorgeWashington University, the Iowa DVR developed a unique method to'increase employment opportunities for severely disabled persons.A team of professionals composed of a rehabilitation counselor,a professional in job training and development, and an individualknowledgeable in adaptive equipment work together to solve theunique problems faced by severely disabled client.. This team looks

at problems encountered at the worksite and other onvironsantalfactors including the individual's living arrangements. While this

project is no longer funded as a Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center,at this point they have been able to maintain this valuable service.

In New York, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute was awarded a Researchand Training grant from NINA to work with the New York Office of

Vocational Rehabilitation. Through this grant, students from

Rennselear were used to assist placement staff with job analysis

r.

5.06

999

gnd %tot oi tu 0..1111,40 tone 141 144 0 IMIOU airy i1.4y11011, Ppi,41 0110 F pp

Fur twrsvSS WWI 404s10 dioglgiittuo, 'file nowt', imighlOhugFltl4tI41141143 VIII 1,1191/140 plocemont atel rooneeling etaftwith firottoglgn4 information on the effactivo otos of lunabilitatienenginoering tvAniquos 144 MAKIMIAV Blunt omployahllity,

s Thu lepartment of Vocational nahahilitation in Michigan oak opptiolliShahIll14111 ollqIIM0-110.1 IS 4 11411414 ur sorem, Filet, ineogveretien with michigan 1.4410 onIveteity, DVS of Michigan mull4ledtwo Ol4,1011iN,W110 era hoth muveioly hy ceiehral polity 411d aroSOAVVillsil,Wilh 4 UOMpaialIA04 epecch doyley, 40ViSO 41141445 1410sastodentinto *leak attd puresio work in sempotor programming, fAM ofMichigan In conlonotton with ihu University nt Michigan hap AlpodoVsloiwd 4 Mobile Lateiratory to devolop wurkeito tmelifloatione,

This Mohilo lahoratory visits the chant's workeito and makesr000mmondationa about any modifications the pliant might mod, OVNof Mloh-gall also work* directly with clients to PftTers WPM for thework importance and teach them how they might also malty their worksnmitonmonto ihemeel'ioo, OVA .,f Michkgan Nolo strongly that thema)orlty of modifirnitione Which need to be made for the disabledsumptuous often are similar, If not identical, to those modification'swhich private tnduettY makes in order to increase prodsotivity.

In Now Jormoy, the Department of Vocational Rehabilitation is workingwith the Methuenby School to improve rehabilitation engineeringsorviess,fur clients. The Mothoanoy School server *overfly disabledchildren end adolescents,' many of whom are multiply disabled. DVA istrying to develop a cadre of voluntoore who have 10,MO typo ofengineering skill and are willing to assist In Making lifieetionsfor thew* (Atonic OVA will pay fur any purchase of equipment ormaterials which may be needed in order to complete a 'Won modification.This technique matches the skills of the volunteer he needs of theindividual client and also strOtchos SCAMS service livery dollarsfurther. Since many of the students at the Mothoa chool'aradolescents who are either employed or preparing e world of work,this program will no doubt increase their employ.

These are a few examples of efforts I'virq made by vat is 1 departmentsof Vocational Rehabilitation. Tho professionals we survoyet ia. 0:eperiel theabove examples all agree on one important point' While some efforts are beingmade to incroOlio the utilisation of rehabilitation engineering, much more needsto be done. Many fool that the practical application of rehabilitationemploymontg(i.e., the modification of the worksite to most the functionalneeds of the client), is essential to placing severely persons in the work place.

NINA Initiatives

Currently, the National Institute of Handicapped Research funds 18 RehabilitationEngineering Centers (PEW. Of these only one, Center Industrio Corporation,(which is affiliated with MO of Kansas) is concerned primarily with employment.The Center Industries Corporation of Wichita, Kansas, aided by technical assistancefrom Wichita State University, is primarily a job shop operation providing supportfor local Wichita in the basil) f fabrication, matching, and assembly.It employs the physically handicapped alongside the able-bodied in a 754 handi-capped-25k able-bodied ratio. Diagnostic test procedures and testing hardware

506

500

have been designed to determine Lbo physical capabilities and job requirements. As

a result, severely disabled workers are generally meeting industrial norms. andreceiving unsubsidized wages, thus taking their new status as contributors to society.

Recently, Center Industries Corporation has begun to work with employers toprovide incentives foi-industry to hire severely disabled persons. They continueto believe that, while much progress has been made in recent years toward improvingworksite modifications for disabled workers, much more should be done. They also

believe that much knowledge exists which is not always shared throughout the

rehabilitation community. They point out that many exemplary programs could be

replicated if such information were disseminated. They hasten to point out thatmany people envision rehabilitation engineering as an expensive endeavor when infact the majority of worksite modifications can be made at a reasonable coat.

Beyond the problems of timely dissemination of this information, the problemarises of who will manufacture adaptive equipment at a cost disabled persons can

afford. The NIHR Long-Rang Plan, developed in--19(31, has this to say about the

manufacturing of adaptive equipment:

"Technological devices can be largely developed and distributedthrobgh the facilities, research capacity, staff, management,market expertise, and distribution networks of private industry.However, there are now several disincentives to private industry

investment in this'areas lack of adeqUate_information"about.market demand; obstacles caused by the patent-system, the third-patty payment system, and liability insurance requirements; andthe fact that some of those undertakings may be unprofitable becauseof high investment costs for a very limited market. NIHR's

immediate goals are to reduce these obstacles by (1) initiatinga program of demographic research, including market surveys of thehandicapped population; (2) deteimining the necessary incentives tooffset the low returns anticipated from investment:' and (3)studying and testing policy modifications to offset other specific

obstacles."

We are pleased to learn that HUM intends to award a grant this year to focus on theabove cited goals. In addition, this grant will look at performance standards andevaluation of adaptive equipment to assure the' quality of equipment produced for

use by disabled persons. UCPA intends to work with NIHR on this matter.

The Office of Technology Assessment of the Congress has also considered theunique problems in the production Of technology to meet the needs of handicapped

r individuals. In their report entitled Technology and Handicapped People'specifically

addresses the problems of production, marketing and diffusions of disability-relatedtechnologies.

"The production, marketing, and diffusion of technologies are stepsthat are most often appropriate private sector activities, and yeta number of factors work against, thqt sector's willingness and abilityto engage in those activities. Research and development (RsO) organi-

zAions have typically placed a low priority on production, marketing,

and diffusion activities. The National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration's (NASA's) activities in technology transfer illustrate

an exception. In general, however, the ultimate commercial productionand distribution of technologies being developed with Federal funds

have not been given -sufficient attention."

501

To address this problem the GOA report recommends the following:

"Congress could amend current legislation to create aconsistent and comprehensive set of fiscal and regulatoryincentives encouraging pri "ate industry to invest in theproduction and marketing of disability-related technolo-gies."

The report goes on to explain that:

...this option recognizes the current confusing and often

detrimental collection of competing incentives set upby such laws. it implicitly is based on several ideas:1) that a great many technologies, though certainly notall, could be serving far more people than currently;2) that some, perhaps many, technologies' developmentand subsequent distribution depends less on furtherresearch than on the willingness and ability of privateindustry to develop, produce, and market them; 3) thatpolicies of the Government greatly affect privateindustry's willingness and ability to produce and marketthese technologies; and 4) that current legislation andregulations do not create adequate positive incentives forthose firms to do so."

We believe that this and other OTA recommendations warrant further considerationby the Subcommittee. This is clearly a complex issue and there are no easy answers.However, production and dissemination of technology is essential to improving thequality of life for disabled persons. We have focused our attention in this statementon teChnology as it relate's to employment, but we readily acknowledge that technologycan improve thequality of a disabled person's life in other areas includingindependent living and increased mobility. NIHR has made some laudable first stepsin improving technology in general and rehabilitation engineering specifically. Butmuch remains to be done, especially in the area of dissemination of information andproduction of equipment.

Comprehensive Services For Independent Living

One of the most exciting federal initiatives of the last decade was the enactmentin 1978 of the Independent Living program. Part A of Title VII of the!RehabilitationAct envisioned a major statewide service delivery system. UCPA is very concerned thatboth the Congress and the Carter and Reagan Administrations have restricted the programto the federally administered Part B Centers for Independent Living, CILs.

The primary. concern of UCPA with the Independent Living prograr in 1983 is hOwto create a transition from a federally administered series of model and demonstrationcenters which have proved their value to a statewide service delivery system for theseverely disabled population. UCPA recommends the reauthorization of and fundingfor the Part A program.

Importance to Persons with Cerebral Palsy

Individuals disabled with cerebral palsy are a primary category of persons servedthrough the existing CILs. For example:

508

502

Of the 799 individuals uurvud by the five CILs in Wisconsin between

October 1, 1980 and March 31, 1982, 87 or 112 were disabled with

cerebral palsy.

Of 322 consumer respondents from 12 of the then 16 existing CILS in

California in 1978, 11.3% wore disabled by cerebral palsy. A comparison

group or quasi-control group was used in this California Department of

Rehabilitation study (June 1982). The comparison group was a random

selection of applicants who had been denied stato VR services andwore not being served by either DVR or the CILs. Only 4.2% of tho

286 comparison group were disabled with cerebral palsy.

Of 23 CILS in California serving 8,606 clients between October 1, 1981

and September 30, 1982, 639 (or 7.37%) were developmentally disabled.

Service Contributions of CILs

CILS provide an array of services generally not available from other government

programs or offered only to persons meeting means tested eligibility programs such as

sledicaid. For example:

Of the 4,131.7 monthly average number of clients served by California's 23

CILs between October 1, 1981 and September 30, 1982, the mon_hly average of

clients by service were

1) Peer Counseling, 087.02) Unique direct service, 844.23) Attendant Care, 742.44) Housing Assistance, 678.4-.5) Advocacy, 636.26) Transportation, 370.97) Communication, 341.98) Independent Living Skills, 246.1

9) Employment, 215.310) Equipment repair/loan, 148.8

With little variance from center to center, the most frequently needed services

in Wisconsin's five centers between October 1, 1980 and March 31, 1982 were the

following: Personal Care Assistance/Attendant Care, Information and Referral,

Independent Living Skills Assessment and Training, Peer Counseling, Housing

Assistance, and Transportation.

Of considerable significance in the five Wisconsin centers were changes in

the residential status during the course of service. As a Region V Rehabilitation

Services Administration report observes, The large increase in the 'own home'

category represents one of the major triumphs of the independent living program."

The residential status,change follows:

503

"14

503

Put cont PeruentStatus at Referral at Closure Difference

Hospitals/alcohol/ 10.5 4.9 - 5.6drug centers

Nursing hOMea 7.6 6.3 - 1.3

tCommunity residential 2.0 1.0 - 1.0

facility

Spacial arrangements ' .8 1.3 + .5

Parent/relative's 22.0 12.0 -10.0home

Own home 52.0 68.0 +16.0

Unreported 5.1 6.5

When clients are terminated from a Wisconsin center program, the counselor isasked to assess the overall independent living status of the individual as towhether his/her situation has improved, not improved, or can not be assessed.'For the 301 clients that were closed between October 1, 1980 and March 31, 1982,the following status changes were indicated:

Improved 201 (67%)Not Improved 80 (27%)Not possible to Assess/Not Indicated 20 (6%)

UCPA Recommendations

To live and work in the community is the goal of severely disabled Americans.We believe that this goal can be achieved through expanding the current IndependentLiving Program and through encouraging the development, dissemination and utilization,of rehabilitation engineering. We believe that rehabilitation engineering can beprovided inexpensively and can improve working conditions for most disabled personswho are or wish to be employed. The following are our specific recommendations as theCongress seeks to reauthorize the Rehabilitation Act:

Congress should support the CCDD Training and Employment Task FOrcerecommendation that the legislation extending the Rehabilitation Actcontain authorizations for Basic State Grants under Section 110 (b) (1)

of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, equal to $1,037.8 millionin Fiscal Year 1984: $1,141.1 million in Fiscal Year 19851 and $1,254million in Fiscal Year 1986. These authroizations would in part achievethe goal of restoring the purchasing power of the rehabilitation dollarto the 1979 federal spending level.

Congress should reauthorize Innovation and Expansion Grants which areauthorized through Section 120 of the Act. Historically these monieshave beAn used to servo unserved and underserved populations such aspersons with cerebral plasy. This program was last funded in FY 1980 ata level of $11.775 million. We recommend that Innovation and Expansion

504

Grants shonid be 1.1uthorlzed at I.he l'1110 levels at a minimum. Further

the Congress may wish to speciiicly direct a portion of these mottled to

be specificly directed to expanding employment opportunities through

rehabilitation engineering.

RSA should be directed to increase their efforts to improve dissemination

of information concerning rehabilitation engineering so that counselors

are aware of 1) the availability of such technology and how it can be

to improve employment opportunities for severely disabled

individuals and, 2) where to contact persons who have expertise in making

worksito modifications for parsons with disabilities.

UCPA recommends that both Part A and II of Title VII be reauthorized and that

the authorizing committees of the Congress instruct the appropriation§

committees to fund Part A. The Consortium for Citizens with Developmental

Disabilities (CCDD) Task Force on.Budget and Appropriations, cochaired by

UCPA, has recommended an appropriation of $45 million which would allow

$25 million to initiate Part A, $18 million to maintain Part B, and

$2 million to initiate Part C.

Through increased funding, NOR should be directed to fund other Rehabilitation

Engineering Centers which are specifically directed to employment.

The Congress should direct NIHR to improve their efforts to disseminate the

knowledge which they have already gained through existing RehabilitationEngineering Centers as well as other exemplary programs which provide

assistance in worksitc modification.

Congress should give further consideration on how to improve the incentives

to manufacturing adaptive equipment through drawing on knowledge gleaned

from current studies being done at NIHR as well an the work which has been

done by the Office of Technology Assessment.

We appreciate the opportunity to submit written testimony mncorning the

reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Act. We look forward to working with the

Subcommittee as the Act is extended.

Independent Living Citations

1) Hichle, Gene and Robins, Bridget. Programs for People: The California

Independent Living Centers. Sacramento, CA: State of California

Department of Rehabilitation, Juno 1982.

2) State of Wisconsin, Department of Health and Social Services, Department

of Vocational Rehabilitation. Centers for Independent Living. Madison, .

WI: State of Wisconsin Department of Vocational Rehabilitation,

September 15, 1982.

3) V.S. Department of Education, RehabilitationServices Administration, Region. V.

The Economic And Societal Benefits of Independent Living Services. Chicago, IL:

U.S. Rehabilitation Services Administration, Region V, December, 1982.

505

sTATumuNT Or MARTHA H. ZI GLER, COORDINATOR OF THE NATIONALNETWORK OF' PARENT COALITIONS, TO THE UNITED STATES SENATESUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED, ON PARENT TRAINING ANDINFORMATION CENTERS, P.L.94-142

March 22, 1983

The framers of PA.94-142 were careful to include language

In tatute itself insuring parent participation in several

key rules. The law provides an individual parental role in

planning and monitoring each child's educational program; it

also provides focparent participation in each state's planning

and implementation of special education policy. To perform

these roles mandated by the federal law, parents of children

needing special education must have highly specialized infor-

mation and skills. This need has prompted leaders in Congress

and in the U.S. Department of Education to support Parent

Training and Information Centers operated by groups of parents

whose children have a variety of disabilities. These groups,

coalitions of disability organizations, have emerged across the

country as'parents have identified thegeheric issues that

transcend particular categories of disability. The. Parent

Training and Information Centers are operated by parents

explicitly for the benefit of parents of handicapped children.

Each year, approximately 250,000 parents and other concerned

persons receive training and information at Parent'Training.

and Information Centers, funded through grants from the

Personnel Preparation program of the special education sectionMQ

of the U.S. Department of Education. These centers have

21-974 0-83---13

512

506

developed a; rulnttatrun lot t,hn high quality of theirtnaterials

and instructional methods, and for the accuracy of the infor-

mation they disseminate. This reputation has enabled the Parent

Trainin And Intormation Centers to foster strong partnerships

between parents of handicapped children and educators, health

care professionals, and ()thorn concerned with the welfare of

children with disabilities.

Currently, L4 centers provide, services for parents in

17 states and Lhe Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Parent coali-

tionS in additional states have recently applied for

,Personnel Preparation funds, and parents in 10 more states

are socking assistance fr,,m the National Network of Parent

Coalitions in order to offer similar services to parents in

their states. Parents in all 50 states and the territories

should have ac,cu.;:; to these benefits.

In the present fiscal year, services are being delivered

by the 14 Parent Training and Information Centers at a total

cost of 1.25 million dollars, and this total includes a

component for coordinating the work through the National Network

of Parent Coalitions. The National Network estimates that

the minimum amount needed to fund centers to serve parents in

all 50 states is 3.5 million dollars.

Each Parent Training and Information Center conducts

training workshops on the role of parents as members if the

IEP team, as mandated by P.L.94-142. The training workshops

also cover other relevant state and fedeal laws. In e.ddition,

the centers offer parents a variety of other services, including

507'

veseurce libraries, newsletters, and pamphlets on such spectalizod

topics an insurance, taxes, medical issues, respite care, and

planning for the future of their children With special needs.

Thu training conducted by the parent center's differs

from other parent. training programs hecauseof the assumptions

on which the coalitions operate. Underlying all the activities

is a philosophical base, that stresses the importance of parent

involvement at every level: parent,to child, parent to parent,

and parent to professional and policymaker. Therefore, the

Parent Training and Information Centers promote the active and

inforMed participation of parents in caring for and supporting

their children at home, at school, and in their neighborhoods

and communities in shaping, implementing, and evaluating

the public policy which affects them.

Although the focus of the activities conducted by the

Parent Training and Information Centers is not primarily on

the emotional ncedS of parents, one of the special character-

istics of parents helping parents is a built-in trust and

empathy which constitute a source of moral support and emotional

strength.

Only recently, a parent who had participated in one

center's training called the center to report that for the first

time she was able to achieve an appropriate educational program,

without a due process hearing; for her severely handicapped

youngster, and she owed it all to the parent center's training.

It was clear to the center's staff that this mother's excitement

stemmed not just from the successful program, but also from

the fact that she had finally acquired confidence as a mother,

514

508

an awareneas that. she Old Indeed hnvo the powor to help her

child.

At a parent center in another stato,a school administrator

recently wrote letter to the center extolling tho center's

training and praising the contor for its role in helping

parents make more effective contributions to tho education of

their children with disabilities within that particular school

System.

Finally, tho assumptions underlying tho poor training

conducted by parent coalitions have been confirmed by a report

issued last November, "Tho Study of Parental Involvement in

Four Federal Education Programs," conducted by System Devel-

opment Corporation under contract to the U.S. Department of

Education. The study, completed in 'February 1982, examined

parental involvement in four programs: Elementary and Secondary

Education Act (ESEA) Title I, ESEA Title VII Bilingual Program,

Follow Through Irogram, and Emergency School Aid Act. The

following two major conclusions of the study have particular

relevance for parental involvement in special education:

Projects that offered well-planned student services,that were well-organized, and that ran efficientlywere also the ones were parents were most involved,and had the wide-' range of activities at the high-est levels of participation.

At projects where parental involvement flourished,there were observabl.e benefits for students,parents and staff.

The study showed that effective parental involvement produced the

following benefits:

Improved student attitudes, conduct and attendance

515

509

hottor undurotsoding of utudunt noudu

Incroasud uolf-confidonco and poruonalsatisfaction for participating parontu.'

Parontu of childron with disabilitiou will continuo to

nood,thu roinforcomont of poor training in ordor to ovoroomo

the menu° of isolation, to legitimize paronts' viow of thoir

childron as significant, individual pooplo who happon to havo

a handicapping condition, and to oquip paronts to fulfill their

important role undor tho law.

Footnotos:

1System Development Corporation, The Study of ParentalInvolvomont in Four Federal Education Programs," November,1982, ExecutiVe sunnary, page 3..

2Ibid.

516

CHAPELHILLICIRI.AOM

rtt.11111Y ON WAAL(' 01 EARLY trirERVUITION

Submitted by:

Anne R. Sanford, DirectorChapel Hill Training-Outreach Project

Only the last dedade has provided evidence of hope for our nation'syoung disabled children. Prior to Congressional legislation whichled to the establishment of the Handicapped Children's EarlyEducation Program, the isolated developmental day care servicesavailable to the American preschool handicapped child offeredlittle more than a safe babysitting environment. ,Most of these

programs were established and run by frustrated parents who hadno other resource for their handicapped youngsters. This..absence

of even minimal services reinforced massive institutionalizationof disabled babies and toddlers.

Until the early seventies, developmental assessment, effectivecurricula, and comprehensi/e family involvement services were

non-existent. Furthermore, the typicall American public schoolmaintained a policy of refusal to enroll most mentally retardedchildren until the age of eight.

In 1968, the HCEEP First Chance Prograwstimulated the establishmentof twenty -four early childhood demonstration projects whose primarygoal was the development of innovative methods and materials forserving young handicapped children and their families.

The overwhelming response from the American community was a plea

for sharing by these demonstration programs. The exciting new

approaches to early intervention for the\handicapped were shakingthe traditional foundations of apathy toward young developmentallydisabled children.

In response to the nationwide requests for help, some demonstrationprojects moved into the outreach phase of the Handicapped Children'sEarly Education Program. ffilTer-outreach projects have stimulated

the creation of thousands of replication sites which have based their~services on the validated models.

A striking example of the efficacy of the demonstration-outreachapproach is-found in the Chapel Hill Project--one of the original

twenty-four programs.

51

511

In rvothinq 0,11 i i ,Lito, 1011,001, Iho notvp,ct,,, IIIChapel Hill Proaid l has stimuldied !he tc,toklish..eld it over Ihodocumented replI iIuci siii 1)11111001mi the thi te,t ,,11010 r (Awn t,' Of I thrl t y viii I Hy, hin I III.,,topwido nont41 Health Networl in WyePdng, have adulded the 111.11.01IIIII Prot 01 c, runlet of ..OrV ICC% Ili VOI100 h;111i1 It. 1111,011 1411 Itirtheir 111111 1 1111', '01110 (111t re.11 h hilo'dimplcmontod I hp ktnowi IV nodd 111. 't1.1 111 1111,

1).1111111 .11110,1 WhIl.h u111 1.'1, 1110 111,11,1,1 111111 1111.1,.$11.,

1,11 liver 10,01ili pro i hind I hodwilipodonmrpoor, 1.1014,1 pi,1,101, 1.1h'i It h 0n,1ive,1 hyJoin( Oissemination Heylew Panel, this ha', luipll Ledearly chi ldhood services throughout Amelllit',1:1',Idli:1,111:.11:1',11' in 1nsu,at the request of Igyrit's first lady, Madame Gina!' I I '0.10 , lhrCh0pel 11111 11100.4.10k were translited isle AI'rtIt and how 1 nrmhas of sery Ito to young h0nill«ipped ri1iWren hrinighou t the !Jill tedArab Republ lc.

As Public Law 94-142 continues in serve as 0 ca ta 1 y,t. f or increasedServices to the young child with special needs, public 'shoot andday care prey Iders, look to the Handicapped children's [:arty lducationProgram for technical guidance, effective materials, and innovativestrategies tO assure quillqu.iilty services. The significant breakthroughsin programning which hive been generated by these early interventionsystems provide only an inking of the potential progress which'liesahead.

No educational prograii) In this country has the research-basedevidence of efficacy which is enjoyed by early intervention.Furthermore, the cost-effectiveness of preschool programs for thehandicapped have been shown to save between nine and ten thousanddollars per child for the cost of education to due eighteen.

Yet, in spite of the clear evidence of the efficacy of early inter-vention, services for the nandicapped preschooler remain isolatedand fragmented. The years from birth to three (the most criticalfor the handicapped) have been the most neglected. Creative equip-ment, materials, and methods for multiply-handicapped Wants needfurther development and refinement.

The genius of the HCEEP plan is its focus on documented replicationby the Outreach Projects. Systematic dissemination of innovativestrategies has served to stimulate exciting new services for thedisabled preschooler. No Federal program has generated suchdocumented impact at such minimal cost. to the taxpayer.

Public Law 94-142 has ushered in a new world of opportunity for thehandicapped. Nowhere is this change more evident than in our publicschools. As early childhood educators grapple with the challenge ofserving young children with handicaps, they seek technical assistance

518

512

and training from the Kill, model, Thu effective collaboration betweenState Incentive (rant efforts and the HCULP projects has assured thepreschool personnel of an effective technology transfer support system.

In addition, the outreach support pays off in priceless dividends forthe regular teachers and non-handicapped peers. In one rural NorthCarolina Lummilty, the entire enrollment of the KO populationlearned to "sign" in order to communicate with a deaf five-year-oldschoolmate.

There are countless examples of how human compassion has beenchannelled into effective services for young handicapped children.nut this process requires field-tested materials, methods, andtraining- -such as those generated by the HCEEP model demonstration sites.

Early intervention requires a contnitment of resources, both humanand financial. It can make a differencein human and in financial terms.

We have barely scratched the sdrface of need. There must be noconsideration of reduction in funding of the Handicapped Children'sEarly Education Program. In fact, common sense dictates an increasedsupport for early intervention.

Ma

ThlTIMONY PHLATIVK TO P.L, 914)0, TITLE Vi 0N, floral Walloneteind Kent CtreetConcord, Hew Hampshire 0,101

I am the mother of an adult deaf/blind daughter, holly,

who has been deaf and blind since birth. I know first -hand how

complex it is for a deaf/blind child to be taught and to learn

communication skills- -upon which all other learning depends.There are epeeist methods of teaching a Child who is either deaf

gr blind, but these methods must be changed drastically to mootthe teaching/learning needs of the child who in both deaf inblind. This dual sensory deprivation excludes that child from

understanding his environment and his relationship to it. Hisability to interact with it requires teachers epecificallytrained to meet hie special needsi teachers able to help him tomaximize whatever residual sight or hearing he might have. ToooMn he has simply been classified as "too retarded to test,"and he has remained untaught. Not all deaf/blind children are

retarded. but without skilled teachers they will be,

Candy is a three-year -old girl in Massachusetts, At birthshe was diagnosed as deaf, blind, and severely retarded.Institutionalization was recommended. The young father promptlydisappeared. The mother could not deal with difficult realities

and gave the child up. Her grandparents accepted the challengeand adopted the baby. When 1 last saw her some six months agoshe was a joy to behold. She is a bright, active, happy child.Two hearing aids and thick little glasses maximize her defectivehearing and vision. Early intervention instruction has alreadygiven her some language skill. Who knows?.Sandy may becomeanother Helen Keller. It must be remembered, however, that

Helen Keller's great accomplishments required a gifted teacherwho accompanied her from childhood to and through Radcliffe.Without her special teacher, Helen Keller would have spent herlife untaught and untaaching. .1 have seen a documentary filmshowing several deaf/blind young people regularly employed inCalifornia at McDonald's. Another film showed a young deaf/blind

520

514

woman e-n.iloyed It' t. Itt I. i plrl or. These young beoole are sel 1-

SU o nor tins..Ii ..eg,iona I -n tern ',.hrotu! hot, t the country were

tabl i shed i.'r the r,duca ti 01 th, eapped [ct P.1.. 91-2130,

ii tie on ni ti a ly these .-..nters provided models

from which to .deve lop 1,afird ire! rd..(wrarn.!. I m1)1 eueel ta lion of

P.L. . 04-142 marker: a chance in focus for the-m Rep I onal f.len tern

which greatly eznanded thei r ro es, UI rice f'r, they hey, been

orovi te,:hni ca aqsi twice and in-bervi no trai ni.rw, to achool

0' icon' L corsuitati ons wi th teachers, therm ni cts, and aides:

family training and support sydtemn; development and d i ssemi na t i o n -

of rt, sow-cf. nIa tori iili to educati onal 11110! I and to fami It ,!s; and

numerous other servi ces to dear/Oil nd chi )(iron and their familiesthat are avail able nowhere else. WI thoo t cell currentlyor ov ded ev the :Jew England Regional Center (and other Regional

goiter) ,P'w lamtr'hi n. ( and the other states) will have no resourcesto deal wi th all the sreci al needs of the; r deaf/blind population.

Amow,, the most 'tumor tant and helpful services to parents,

insti to ted 11./ the :!:ngland Regional ';enter, were the, twice-yearlyweek-ends of fored to rani lien or deaf/o nil Chi .1 dren.

Our }folly was er, ,th teen, years old when :1 and we, rst incontact wi th one ano the,-. Until that time we had never met anotherpo rent who -hared our parti cular gri ef and need. h'Or the firsttime we began tinders land wha t wan "normal" behavior for a (leaf/bl i 11 chi Id--and I:11f, pa rent !II We 7r1.- l,nt of carentn of the 235

ropella a:cl were abl to ve and to get

needed moral -,dorort. cover,'' a vari ety of train)w,,areas that tet t.r equi or:eib ear,-ntr; tr. 1.:::fl.rqt.a,,,1 i chi Idreri

more fully; tc, 1:now relevant law more ;:ombletely; to- advocate more

:succe.ssfully; tc recoeni-Le the 110001 a I need of 11 blirws of .leaf/blind children; aril other su1, .ie.:1.: related to our often lonely and

strend-f ! led .:010)1 h,1 n could cGalo only t' con) those who were

weAl-v,!t I:. thy of !itl,?! r,orenen ted.

Air these servi can which nave be.,n reach 1 y available to

ral:ents, to an rs , and 00,,,cati0n aeenc: e:,; are in extreme ,jeo hardy.

,ducationa1 ervi cc need, of the deaf/hlind are completely unique

among all h..ndlcaboin,- cond:tion9. Yo Mute in any way the '

oval labi ii ty of the teachine exner ti se trait has peen developed willseriously hinder the fnt'u'"n of our i nr1 dren . There wi

always be a nee,: for nc,ro rty to medical advances.

r...lbc,1 la I not Om'' LimloPy t T. ;,(-i;..11iVel= deaf/blindness in

521

515

newrborn babies; and some of tnose wno aro either deaf or blind

may well become both deaf and blind, which would then necessitate

a whole different approach to their education.

The drastic changes that are being proposed will have serious

consequences or all states, particularly tnose with rural and

scattered populations. If the New England !;taces are joined with

New York and New Jersey, ready access to cervices now provided will

he sharply curtailed. If each Stacy is expected irceasingly to

assume costs of educating its own deaf/blind chileren, current

services will soon disintegrate-or disappear as

Populations are relegated to a position of low priority.

Inc uniquely severe handicap of deaf/blindness prompted the

oassai..-;e of P.L. 91-230, Title VI C. Sec. 622. Regional Centers

then instituted essential support services which were not mandated

t, P.L. 94-1421 but whicn made it possible for school districts

to comply with the mandates of tnat law.

The Helen Keller National Center for Deaf/Blind Youth and

Adults is making a bid to become one of the newly proposed

Program Assistance Centers when the Regional Centers die. Its --

main focus has been of teaching self-help skills and renaoilitation;

not on the education of children. 0.ther providers are gearing up forthe race. Replacing the Regional Centers will be a disaster. All

the expertise in programs. and services developed through years of

dedicated hard work will he swept awayr and the programs and

services themselves will he lost to those wno are dependent upon

them.

The New England Regional Center I have known in the past seven

' years has been sharply cognizant of the unique needs of deaf/blind

children and their ramilies in the New England Region._ Total effort

has been expended by a small and competent staff to dei.:ermine Pest

methods for meeting chose needs. There nas been fleiibility in

programming so that the Center has been aple to provide services

peculiar to the region and its clients, and not according to concrete

mandates coming from an office far removed from special circumstances

in question. Interrupting the continuity of present services, and

astically changing regional boundaries will destroy existing

orga.nizatiol to the people who have been effectively served

by the New England Regional Center. Short-changing, the educaional

522

516

opportunities for deaf/blind students will certainly and seriously

destroy their futures, destroy all possibility of independence, and

vastly increase future costs for their long-time care.

Children who are products of the epidemic of the 1960s are in

need of on-going adult services) -for region-wide advocacy at state

levels for help beyond age 22 (when P.L. 94-142 no longer mandates,.

them)! for vocational training! and for planning adult group homes

or community living when they grow up and require such specialized

programming and accommodations.

The Regional Centers are cost effective because there is no

need for state-by-state duplication of technical expertise. EachROFINOV

Center has in place programs and helpsAto meet its area's needs.

Dismantling or weakening them would be a colossal waste of

accumulated professional skill and resources.

Please retain the present Regions intact, And insure funding

for the Regional Centers so that they can remain the bulwark of

help to deaf/blind children that they have been since their

inception.

2'ei,ti -,drtea.

--60wid,72 osaO,

517

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REHABILITATION FACILITIESP.O. Box 17675, Washington, D.C. 20041 (703) 556-8848

James A Cox. Jr. Executive Dreclot

STATE1VENT OF

The National Association of Rehabilitation Facilities

for the

Subcommittee on the Handicapped

Committee on Labor and Human Resources

U. S. Senate

Washington, D. C.

March 23, 1983

524

518

NAR', pet erry notinal lwarwrship oigauivation of comiunity-based

,JCA!ICW: rehalalitatien facilities. Over 350 of these

dr vocaticually'-orient,d, providing a wide range of ser-

!-in ftio..:1,:anned persons. These ser-

vices include evaina; i s'n and lest IrN, (Is trainurJ, work adiustMent

trainirw, sheltered mployment and fair ylacemeut. One hundred and fifty

of NAkr's mothers are med,at facilities offering restorative and reha-

bilitation services.

The lJ.eha'.dlil'arion Act of 1973, as armided, has for corny years provided

the fow,dation for the provision of services to mentally and physically

disabled pe!sanl. the meclern federal rehabilitation program has its

roots Na k to the 1920s and pas served as a clear indication of the

federal (verrm,nt's re,ponsibilitv and commitment to provide meaningful

programs. for America's disabled citizens.

The vocational rehabilitation program has aluuys been a cooperative

arrangement be:weml the federal government , the states and the thousands

of prvate. non-profit comninity facilities providing services to dis-

abled persons. NARF is proud to represent the private, non-profit sector

of the rehabiiitation corm-unity.

Rehabilitation facilities are the basic corm-unity source of services for

disabled persons. Historically they have been the catalyst for the

developywnt of new and innovative rehabilitation programs. The Rehabil-

1 51.

519

tat i A:! with th.ii innovation nod Expansion

Grant section of, the Act he used to stimilate these CV and

treat ive approaches to rehahi It tat i on. Tit le lli of the Act authorized

ccnstructim and 10,1(1 fAcilttnes. Thee and other pro

groats, includinct th inteio,d to i l ac a

stirul us to r.sta',11,hino, the ,,a,ct ef f,ct ivr seivi,es. The Pt 's

1984 budget proposed that services to the severely di sabled he increased

to 64% of individual s served. !.tost of those individual s will he served

in comnini ty-based rehabi I i tat facilities.

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, is it for reauthor, zat ion in1..,83, 'the ,,e11,111 t on AC t '4:1C lost -irnetUle is 1919 then independent

Living, cormani ty services and several other provisions were added to

the Act. TI., Onnihus Reconciliation. Act of 1981 extended authorization

of the Act through fiscal year 1983. Specific authorization levels were

set for the hasiC state grants at that t iie, replacing a formula which

would have allowed the program to grow with inflation. Many program's'

authorizations were frozen at the .1 evel they received funding for in

fiscal year l981. These programs included research, training and indepen-dent living. The Reconciliation Act specified that certain other pro-grams were not authorized to receive appropriations in fiscal years 1982

or 1963. These programs include evaluation, innovation and expansion,

facility construction, vocational training services, comprehensive

centers, ratrain i ty seri' re e..nnl °MCP. t and conpreliensive independent

living services.

526

520

It has been five years pince any changes have been made in the

Rehabilitation Act. The NARF Board of Directors athvted a position that

major changes in the Rehabilitation Act are not warranted at this time.

There are, however, several modifications to the Act that NARF feels

would strengthen the Rehabilitation Act and enhance services to disabled

persons: If these recommendations are adopted, rehabilitation facilities

can continue to provide the services necessary for the continued im-

provement of services to disabled Americans. NARF supports reauthoriza-

tion cf the Rehabilitation Act through fiscal yeer 19P6.

1. Sufficient authorization levels should be set for basic state

grants and other parts of the Rehabilitation Act. Language should

be added to:make it clear that the authorization level for basic

state grants is an entitlement and is not subject to redution by

the appropriations cammittee if states are able to match the

federal share.

The authorization levels recommended by CSAVR of $1037.1 million

for fiscal year 1984, $1141.1 million for fiscal year 1985 and

$1254.8 million for fiscal year 1986 are supported by NARF. We

noted with interest that CSAVR, in its statement to the Senate

Subcommittee on. the Handicapped, said that a "well funded program

of direct services..." was essential to the rehabilitation:program.

The NARF Board adopted a position last month to support increased

621"

appropriations for direct services to disabled peisons. Funds appro-

priated under Title I of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 for basic

state grants should be maximized for direct case services to the

greatest extent possible and should not he diminished for

non-direct case service functions. This should be especially empha-

sized for funds appropriated above current funding levels.

Inflation has erroded much 'elf the purchasing power of increases to

the rehabilitation basic state grant program over the past several

years. Increased' costs at the state level have negated the

increased allocation from the federal level. These increased

costs, coupled with the added costs of working with a more

severely disabled' population, have resulted in a decrease in the

numbers of people served and rehabilitated. NARF urges thiM

Committee to monitor closely the allocation of rehabilitation

funds to the states and to limit future increases in funding to

direct services to disabled persons.

2. One percent of the amount appropriated for Title 1, Basic State

Grants, should be set aside in a discretionary fund for the

Commissioner of RSA to be used for new and creative approaches to

rehabilitation. Such a provision could act as a catalyst for new

ideas and provide an alternative for non-traditional approaches.

NARF thinks that the one percent amount would be both reasonable

and appropriate. The Director of the National Institute for Handi-

528

21-974 0-83--34

522

raped Research has ctriph.te diqrretion with 10 percent of the

funds available to !MIR each year. Ninety-one percent of the total

dollars appropriated to the Rehabilitation Services Administra't Ion

n ftw,rl veer 19N2 were nested 'n directly to the states. Most of

the remnining nine percent i+art of a catagorical di ,:reti unary

pr,:gtmn that gives the (NA Ccrunissioner little, if any, leeway.

The discretionary fund could serve as a source of setting national

priorities by funding a variety of experimental, demonstration or

valtia;.10,-, protects of national sign: fic,nce. While projects

the states under the Innovation and Expansion Program (Sec. 120)

could help implement sane of the more creative and innovative

appro.chrs, the discretionary fund should he viewed as a more open

process to explore new approaches to rehabilitation.

Funding a discretionary program for RSA wail(' not be difficult and

would not take money away from states' basic grant programs.

Almost every year. rehabilitation funds are returned tothe U.S.

Treasury because the funds were not expended before the end of the

federal fiscal year. Last year, 85.8 million was returned because

11 states and territories had not obligated the funds by September

30. In sane instances, these leftover funds were due to differ

ences in state and federal fiscal years. In other cases, antici

pated expenditures were not made.

Technical language should he added to the Rehabilitation Act

523

antlnntpin,t urirweiviod f ,dera I fields for basic state grants to be

carried into the next fiscal year by the Cmuosstoner of 16A to he

used to fund protects to further rehabilitation of handicapped

per!,1,, AdditIonoi funds should he authorized to he appropriated

to bring the Conmissioner's discretionary fund to no more than one

percent of the basic state grant appropriation for that fiscal

year.

!Wtion 120, Innovation and 1,,:xanston, should receive a separate

appropriation and should he administered on a natidial level to

recognize and encourage more effective programs.

Innovation and Expansion funding has been alloted to the states on

d formula basis to fund the cost of planning, preparing for and

initiating special programs to expand vocational rehabilitation

services. Special enphasis in the Innovationand Expansion program,

is placed on serving the most severely disabled and other handi-

capped populations with special needs. In the past, Innovation and

Expansion projects have brought the mentally retarded and cerebral

palsied into vocational rehabilitation programs when previously

they were thought to be too severely disabled to qualify for

rehabilitation services.

Innovation and Expansion projects have not been appropriated

separate funds since 1979 'Alen funding for them was combined with

524

basic state grants. In its last year of appropriation, $12 million

urns allocated to the states for Innovation and Expansion.

Innovation and Expansion funds are one of the few ways the

Rehabilitation Services Administration can identify and affect

national prio,ities for the rehabilitation of disabled persons.

Under provisions of Section 121, the Commissioner of RSA may

require the states to spend 50 percent of the Innovation and

Expansion allocation on projects approved by the.Comnissioner.

The Camnttee should use this opportunity to place renewed

emphasis on the Innovation and Expansion Program and to recommend

an appropriation of at least the amount appropriated in fiscal

year 1978.

4. Continued emphasis 31.ould be paced in training programs. Effphasis

should not be diminished on ti, -o of rehabilitation person-

nel, including facility manage.:, au,,.I.Istrators and allied

medical rehabilitation professionals. As disabled populations

become more severely disabled, more extensive and specialized

personnel are required to serve their needs. A recent study from

the University of Wisconsin-Stout predicts that facilities will

have to double their staff by 1990 to serve the need.

Training programs fund projects to help increase the number of

531iT

1525

personnel trained in providing vocational rehabilitation services

to disabled people. Grants are avarded in fields related to

vocational rehabilitation of the physically and mentally disabled,

such as rehabilitation counseling, rehabilitation medicine, phys-

ical and occupational therapy, prosthetic-orthotics, speech path-

ology, and audiology, and rehabilitation of the blind and deaf.

Rehabilitation personnel need more extensive and special training

as more and more severely disabled and mentally ill people seek

services. Prior to the 1973 and 1978 amendments, many of the

people seeking vocational rehabilitation services could be

employed and were considered easily rehabilitated, successfully

closed cases. The new population seeking services presents differ-

ent, more complex, longer term problems that place new and differ-

ent demands on the people helping them. Rehabilitation personnel

must be:prepared to respond to these changes and require training

in new skills;

5. Programs targeted to rehabilitation facilities in Title III of the

Rehabilitation Act ,should be autnortzed ttdr funding at specified

levels for documented needs. Section 301,"tenstructien of Facili-

ties, and Section 303, Loan Guarantees, are especially needed to

allow facilities to develop the physical plants and equipment

needed to compete in more sophisticated markets and to train

handicapped persons in marketable skills.

62t

The reauthorlmi ion should ditert It in inplment the loan guar-

antee The IAin gua ran t eo p rug t dM under 5 ee t i on 303 aIIowa

t ho "nor of II ,,A to guarantee the payment of principle and

interest cn loins awe to now profit renanilitatii facilities for

the construction and oplipping ol sum locilttl es. In addition to

guaranteeing the lom, PM will pay to the holder ol the loin

anwuntn sufficient to reduce the interest rat e on the loan by 2

percent. There are. safeguards in Section 303 to verify the

viability of the l(MHS sought to be guaranteed. There are al so

provisions in Section 303 to minimize the level of appropriation

needed to fund the Into guarantee.

Rehahl ;tat ON facilities have proven to he good credit risks. The

Nandi cappe;t Ass! .1 ant: e I,Aan program administered by the FsrnII

UUSiNCS AdmInist ratIon has the lowest default rate of any SPA

direct loan program. The Ean6icapptd Assistar.ce Loan pi.ogram mkes

loans up to $100,000 to rehabilitation facilities. The lain guar-

antee orov I s al is needed to mike larger loans needed for mnjor

capital improveeent projects available to rehabilitation facili-

ties at reasonable rates.

K6. Projects With Industry should he given a separate title within

Act and authorized at 525 million. Projects With Industry is not a

single program notel but a concept that placement into corVetitive

jobs should be the goal of vocational rehabilitation and that the

business ccgrunity should hove a strong role in the rehabilitation

Cm. 533

527

nroceso, develliment ,d lohalitlitaiwo program over the years

has placed rich needed euphosis on plentifialion of handicapping

cmAittois and evaluation of a handicapped pecum's capabilities.

11,11 pi,jruss has also been Pi00 In adapting training programs and

wecial opponent to the neols of handicapped persons, For !luny

years, howeVer, efforts to get these handicapped persona Into jobs

did not receive the same emphasis that evaluation and training

received, Projects Wtth Industry tuiphasizes closure of the reha-

bilttation process.

Projects With Industry has demonstrated that with concentrated

eftoos severely disabled persons can be placed into coopetittve

Jobs mach more quickly and at lower costs than had previously been

eAperienced. The key to the Projects With Industry concept has

been the involvement of the business ccnnunity. Among the several

Projects With Industry models that have been developed, all have

business playing a central role, In some cases, it is the actual

business concern that administers the progrM and places the

handicapped trainees. IBM and Control Data have had impressive

programs. In other instances, national trade associations have

taken the lead such as the National Restaurant Association. Most

Projects With Industry programs, however, are administered in

local ccenunities by local rehabilitation facilities. PrOjects

With Industry programs at the New Haven Easter Seal- Goedwill

Renabilitatton Center is one of the oldest programs and one of the

5'34

528

best exanples of what such a program can accomplish. In these

local programs, a business advicory council helps establish actual

job needs in the comm unity, sets standards for training and

placement and assists in the actual placement process. The

business community brings new measures of success to the rehabili

taticn process. These measuresexemplify productivity, cost effec

tiveness, accountability and bdt,tom line results. Social service

principles and values are still important but they should not be

an excuse for poot results.

Nationally, Projects' With Industry programs have placed over

50,000 disabled persons in competitive jobs. Ihe average salary

paid to these graduates has been over $9,000 per annum. Seventy

five percent of the disabled persons enrolled in Projects With

Industry were placed:- The cost to the federal government was less

than $1,000 per placement. The federal funds were supplanted by

other state and local funds, including vocational rehabilitation

funds. Over 11,000 businesses have participated in the Projects

Withf4ndustry program.

NARF has administered a national Projects With Industry program

since 1978. NARF works with five NARF state chapters and 20

rehabilitation facilities to develop programs which use transi

tional workslots in industry and training based on the recommenda

tions of local employers. Last year, the NARF project placed 493

529

handicapped persons through a combination of federal, state andlocal funds. Most of the clients were severely handicapped with

the vast majority being diagnosed as mentally ill and devel-

opmently disabled. The salary range for these persons placed was

between $6,432 and $19,200.

An independent survey undertaken by Portland State Universityfound that in fiscal 1981 the averagehourly range earned byProjects Industry clients was $4.75. The average cost perplacement was $737 in federal funding. In a survey of clientsplaced through Projects With Industry and other placement

programs, it was found that twice as many Projects With Industry

clients were likely to be promoted.

NARF believes that the proven success of PWI over the pa'§t:15

years clearly justifies expansion of the Projects With Industry

concept. Although Projects With Industry .has received increased

funding over the past several years, it is time that PrOjects With

Industry be given higher visibility. Congress should provide a

funding level which will encourage programs in all states and will

allow expanded programs in certain industries which hold the most

promise for jobs. NARF recommends an authorization level of atleast $25 million for .fiscal 1984. The current funding level is $8

million and an additional $5 million was added to the fiscal 1983

appropriation for Prolects With Industry in the Emergency Jobs

536

530

Bill, bringing the fiscal 1983 appropriation to $13 million. The

Reagan Administration has recommended $11 million for fiscal 1984.

It would take much more than $25.million to meet the needs of

handicapped persons who could be placed into competitive jobs.

NARF firmly believes that rehabilitation facilities and the

business community could meet that need given adequate resources.

NARF realizes that an increase of threefold to the appropriations

for Projects With Industry would not be easily obtained, therefore

this rncommendation is for an Nithorization level of $25 million

to emphasis the need to expand Projects With Industry. NARF feels

this figure is fully justified given the reduction in public

assistance costs and the increased tax revenues that would be

realized from the more than 18,000 handicapped persons that could

be.employed if the full authorization of S25 million was appropri-

ated.

PWI should be given a separate title in the Rehabilitation Act as

a concrete indication of Congress' commitment 'to providing mean-:

ingful employment opportunities to handicapped persons. The 1978

amendments also created a grant program for Business Opportunities

for Handicapped Individuals in Title VI along with, Projects With

Industry. NARF recognized the need for providing capital resources

and technical assistance to handicapped individuals to enable them

to establish and/or operate small businesses. NARF feels that the

Handicapped Assistance Loan program at the Small Business Adminis-

a

X31r,-

531

tration best fulfills that role. Therefore Title VI could become

the separate title for Projects With Industry.

Projects With Industry should continue as a discretionary national

program within the Rehabilitation Services Administration. The

flexibility of cooperative agreement between the RSA Commissioner,

the private business sector and the private non-profit sector

should continue. The flexibility afforded under the current

program has allO,ed and-encouraged many businesses to participate

in the program when they might not otherwise have been willing to

take the initiative to take part in these programs. This flexi-

bility has also allowed local rehabilitation agencies to tailor

Projects With Industry programs to meet local needs. If anything,

added emphasis should be placed on the, ooperative nature of the

program between tho business community and the local rehabili-

tation agencies that can assist business in training and placing

handicapped persons into meaningful jobs.

7. Section 12 of the Rehabilitation Act states that the Commissioner

of Rehabilitation Service Administration may provide "...cansulta-

live services and Technical Assistance to public or non-profit,

private agencies and organizations." This authority and an earlier

provision in Title III were traditionally used to provide teCh-

nical assistance to rehabilitation facilities in areas such as

contract procurement, high technology, cost accounting, marketing,

538

532

etc., to. help facilities inprove their performance in prolviding

J services to disabled persons. Technical Assistance, provided ender

Section 12, allowed facilities to be operated in a more business-

like manner and to become more self-sufficient and less dependent.

In the past, Technical Assistance had been funded at $250,000 per

year. Although a small amount when compared to other programs,

the appropriation was spread among many facilities since most

Techni:al Assis:ance provided WB5 of short chratioM and tha anrunt

of money needed for each consultation was relatively small.

The addition of Section 506 of the Act in 1978 caused confusion in

the Technical Assistance program since it provided for Technical

Assistance to "persons operating rehabilitation facilities" but

only for the purpose of removing architectural barriers. Funding

was shifted from Section 12 to Section 506 without the realization

that this would not allow funding traditional Technical Assistance

to rehabilitation facilities.

Two hundred and fifty thousand dollars should be appropriated in

fiscal year 1984 for Technical Assistance to rehabilitation facili-

ties under Section 12.

Rehabilitation facilities need access to experts to advise them on

issues relevant to providing employment and rehabilitation

53a

services to disabled persons. The low cost per consultation and

the improvement in services resulting from the consultations make

the small appropriations most worthwhile.

8. A Ccnnunity Service Employment Pilot Program was added to the Act

in 1978. Patterned after the Older Americans Act, it would have

promoted useful employment opportunities in public and nonprofit

agencies providing camunity services. In these times of high

unemployment, handicapped persons have a particularly difficult

time finding employment. The reauthorization should direct imple-

mentation of this program.

9. Research regarding the development and improvement of rehabili-

tative treatment methods and rehabilitation engineering methods

and devices is critical to an effective rehabilitation service

system. The National Institute of Handicapped Research is under

new leadership and its programs are being administered well. The

problem now is essentially one of inadequate financial resources.

In this fiscal year, only 50% of the applications recommended for

funding were funded. Nhjor funding increases are needed in fiscal

year 1984 and future years to support meritorious applications and

to initiate and expand new programs in research training and snail

investigator-initiated grants..

10. There is a real need for a strong advisory panel to the Connis-

534

stoner of RSA for rehabilitation services and other programs

affecting handicapped persons. The National Council of the Handi-

capped wns formed in 1978 to play both an advisory role and to set

policy for Rehabilitation Service Administration and to establish

research criteria for the National InsititutC for Handicapped

Research. Because of the dominant role of politics in the selec-

tion of National Council of the Handicapped members and a lack of

independent staff, it has not been as effective as it could be as

an advisor to Rehabilitation Service Administration and NIHR. The

President's Committee on Employment of the Handicapped has been in

existence for many years but has never provided the leadership or

independence needed to be effective. The National Council of the

Handicapped has a budget of less than $200,000 while PCEH has a

budget of close to $2 million. A more effective advisory panel

might result from consolidating PCEH and the National Council of

the Handicapped. The Sub.:ommittee should study the possibility of

this merger and hold hearings to determine whether this would be a

feasible approach. Legislative changes could be considered after

hearings and a thorough study.

11. Section 101 of the Rehabilitation Act should be amended to require

that states establish uniform rates of payment systems so that

facilities are adequately reimbursed for their services.

There is a direct federal interest in the rates of payment for

541

535

services utilized by st,te agencies which. relates to cost effec7,

tiveness. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973,'as amended, both in the

state plan requirements and special provisions for facilities in

Title III indicates that the Rehabilitation Services Adminis-

tration and state agencies have responsibilities which transcend

the immediate purchase of services for vocational rehabilitation

clients. There is a clear mandate .to'these units of government to

insure that the rehabilitation system as a whole, including facili-

ties,: be maintained with the capacity to render effective quality

service to vocational rehabilitation clients. The ability of facil-

ities and other providers to render services is a function of

their ah'ility to cover the cost of rendering of such services.

Virtually all support for facilities other than payment for

services has been excised from the federal budget. Facility

Improvement Grants, Innovatiai and Expansion funds, and the like

are no longer available. Accordingly, if rehabilitation facilities

are to retain the capacity to render services both in terms of

quantity and quality, it is essential that they both generate

revenues from operation at or above their costs.'

State agencies cannot fulfill their responsibilities for mainten-

ance of facilities and. utilization thereof while eroding the

capital base of facilities by paying less than the cost of

I.ervices rendered. It is suggested that the Act require only

payment of the actual cost of services provided. Such a provision

542

536

would be cost effective, as It will insure that the services

capacity of facilities does not deteriorate by virtue of rendering

services to clients under the state/federal program, The sugges-

tion that payment for services at rates less than cost is "cost

effective" is Inconsistent with the maintenance of a sound rehabil-

itation system. The federal government ,prescribes methods of pay-

ment to providers in such programs as Medicare and Medicaid. The

latter is analogous in legal structure and funding to the voca7

tiunal rehabilitation prx,ram as it involve! state administration

and matching of federal funds for provision of services to desig-

nated beneficiaries. Accordingly, there is precedent for such

action which Is presumably "appropriate."

12. Amend the requirements in the state planning process to require

greater public participation. Currently the Act does not require

public participation in the preparation of the state plan for

rehabilitation services. Specified times and methods of oppor-

tunity for public participation are needed to insure that all

persons affected by the rehabilitation program maY play an active

role in the process..

13. Require RSA to have an office, bureau or division devoted to

rehabilitation facilities. At least 30 percent of basic state

funds are spent in facilities and a much higher percentage of

severelyhandicapped persons are probably served in facilities,

543

537

yet only two persons are acsignefl to the facilities branch In RSA.

NARF urges the Subconmittee to consider the 13 points listed above when

they nark -up the bills reauthorizing the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

NARF's staff is willing to offer any assistance requested by Subcom-

mittee meirbers and their staffs that nny he of help.

NARF appreciates the hard work this Subcomnittee has performed on

behalf of disabled persons and Looks forward to working with the

Subcommittee and staff.

54421-974 0-83-----35

538

ADULT LEARNING SYSTEMS, INC99, Williamsbury Court No. Iol , Pontiac, MI 48054

(313) 681.7545

Testimony to the Subcommittee

on the Handicapped of the

Senate Committee on Labor and

Human Resources

54)

March 23, 1983

Testifiers:

Alice R. Roelofs,Executive Director

and

Jan L. Black,President

Adult Learning Systems, Inc.991 Williamsbury 0 101

Pontiac, Michigan 48054

It.

539

1164 d,p04itimi 19 submitted by Alice K. Roehols and Jan L, Illack.

Currently, we administer a private non-profil corporation in the state

of Michigan tittering comprehensive services to disadvantaged adults.

Previously,e' founded and developed 0 program al national significance--

the College For Living. Sited in 19111 in the annual report of the President's

Committee on Mental Retardation 414 a "service program that works", the

College For Living oilers continuing oducation courses for adults tabled

developmentally disabled.

The need for regional education programs in "institutions of higher

education, including junior and coummnity colleges, vocational, and technical

institutions, and other non-profit educational agencies for the development

and oper.it ion 4t specially designed or modified programs of vocational,

technical, postsecondary, or adult education for deaf or other handicapped

persons (tier, 625 (a))" is appropriate, legal, and a priority in educational

realms. The need for .appropriate services in the educational arena is

apparent. The thrust toward community placement in the residential realm

and the mainstreaming philosophy of elementaryand secondary schools posits

the challenge to postsecondary. educators: Mow do you meet the needs of

adults labled disabled in an age appropriate, normal environment?

Philosophically, Adult Learning Systems, Inc. promotes the position

that every adult has the right to an education to be a participating member

of his or her community. We try to move these rights into the reality of

daily living.

As persons labled disabled begin to enter the mainstream of society,

gaps in services become clear. Public school mandates provide for educational

opportunities for public school age students. Community Placement trends

have developed a variety of residential opportunities for both children

and adults.

546

540

Workshops and work site programs have been developed to enhance vocational

possibilities for adults. Rut as persons who are mentally retarded approach

their public school age limits, they look forward to bleak educational'

opportainit IVO.

What are the current educational offerings?

* Most of the educational programs on if post secondary level are

currently held in.inappropriate, non-normalizing environments

which promote dependence and some maladaptive behaviors from

being grouped homogeneously. Work Adtivities Centers and ARC's

often hold classes in isolated settings (church basements, elementary

schools and sheltered workshops are some examples.)

* Often, content- of courses offered within those settings arc not

age appropriate. Adults are labeled and treated like adolescents

or children or the curriculum is irrelevant to adult daily living.

k Programs modeled after the College For Living are located at 30

community colleges and universities around the nation. They provide

classes for over 3,300 adults with disabilities. College For Living

obtained funding from HEW/BEH to expand the original program at

Metropolitan State College, Denver, Colorado.

* Alice Roelofs developed over 20 curriculum guides that are used

- throughout the United States and in several other countries.

* Other continuing education programs are blossoming around the nation

as agencies cooperate to use a college campus or community education

site for more segments of the community. In Michigan, Macomb County

Community College and Schoolcraft Community College have opened

their doors.'

541

A Using the College For Living model, volunteer student interns are

being trained to offer services to adults with dimalittlties (3t)

students each term at Metropolitan State College In Denver, Colorado,

What are the needs tor further development in the educatton doMatn?

* intense programs with entry and exit criteria are needed at a pox/-

secondary level. The normal adult erincallon arena Is the best

vehicle for offering such services, inter-departmental cooperation

would lend itself to comprehensive service delivery to special

populations. Currently, Michigan is developing 'programs to meet

those needs. Eastern Michigan Unhiersity and Wahlitenaw Community

College are seeking funds for comprehensive progiams they have

developed.

A The numbers of persons that could benefit from post-secondary

educational programming are vast. In Denver 2,000 adults were

identified in Community Mental Health and Department of Mental

Health programs. 1n Washtenaw County 950 possible students wore

identified.

* A need for standardizing criteria to Move toward independence/

interdependence is ctearA Current residential settings vary services

from no choices and total dependency to experiential problem-solving

to totaPvnconcern for educational needs.

As approaching post-secondary education as a right of all citizens,

the community college and four year colleges seem the most logical institutions

to house intensive educational and/ training programs. The College For

Living programs opened the doors Of the higher education program. Now the

time is at hand to propose a natural and needed full-time program that colleges

and universities could promote'.

548

542

Why is the need lot eigiration so crucial and why at a college as

as opposed to a sheltered workshop or residentihl setting?

* Adults who are labeled mentally retarded are often times just

beginning massive growth spurts in the cognitive and affective

domains,

* Colleges and universitit;s are natural extensions 13( the educational

systems and they are age appropriate.

Colleges and universitie, the shaping ground of future pro

fessionals who will guide the course of developmentally disabled

people.

* Colleges and universities have facilities that would be invaluable

for training and education. 1

A A broader spectrum to the present day psiograms are needed to promote/

growth and independence.

We look forward to an exciting educational future for all adults within

the community including those!vith disabilitils. We know that our federal,

state and local communities will rise to the challenge.

Thanks for your interest in this crucial issue.

9goodwill

kptAbc/TA.

543

ENDUSTRIES

KAR ;%1

GOODWILLBUILDINGGOODWILL

commnarRr18.

.

24:2 PF/JtJS'el.yi,gA AVE140. WI;;CONSIt I 53104 6082413831

March 21, 1583

Senator Lowell Weicker. (UllmanSubcommittee on the ilnadlcappedSH 113Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator weicker:

We are concerned about the possible reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Actand Amendments, Public Law 95-602. We understand that' your subcommittee is sol-iciting testimony for the Record regarding authorized programs. The GoodwillRecreation Resource Center (RRC) is a current 'recipient of Section 316 projects,and therefore, we would like the opportunity to justify the need and demand for'recreation programs for people with disabilities in our community. Hopefully thefollowing information will help your efforts in sustaining necessary federal dollarsfor recreation programs serving the needs of our handicapped citizens:

(I) PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT: The Goodwill Recreation Resource Center (RRC) is acommunity-based recreation/leisure service agency for disabled adults in Dane County,Wisconsin. lhe purpose of the project is to educate RRC members in the positive useof their free time. The goal for all members is community integration,in terms oftheir independent recreational pursuits. The means to acheive this goal is aneducational approach in a contextual and experiential setting for the development ofrecreative life-skills.

Through the leisure education process and guided recreational experiences, our memberslearn skills and behaviors which directly affect other facets of their life. It isthe contention of this project that when members gain self-confidence and skills nec-essary to independently pursue their leisure-time interests, there will be a carry-over value in their community-living environment as well as vocational training/jobperformance.

(2) TYPES OF ACTIVITIES: The following is a list and detailed description of thisproject's services:

(a) Leisure Needs Assessment/Avocational Counselling - -This is a recent concept whichhas been developed to explore with Individuals how they would like to use theirleisure time in a meaningful and enjoyable manner. It provides the unique aspectof one -to -one contact with staff who assist in the exploration of leisure timeinterests. Once an assessment has been completed, the staff member will provideinformation and support in identifying and utilizing the desired program elementand/or community resource(s).

(b) Monthly Calendar- -Each month a calendar of activities is scheduled Tuesdaysthrough the weekend and is mailed to each RRC member. These activities areplanned with the help of RRC members, The various elements of eecreation

j

544

programming are Incotporated into thin calendar; i.e., aquatics, cultural; outdoor;special events, social, special Interests/hobbies; and sports, to insure thatthe varied needs and interests of RRC members are met, The purpose of theseactivities is to offer to members, who are not.yet ready for self-initiated in-volvement, an opportunity to experience community recreational pursuits in asupportive group.

(c) Community Awareness Croups - -These groups consist of 6-10 people and focus onfamiliarizing individuals with available community resources which relate tothe recreational experience.

(d) Special interest Groups- -These groups are formulated around a specific recreationinterest common to sever:111.2.pin and for which no appropriate group/organizatIonis currently available in the community. Some groups are developed on a trans-

itional basis prior to integration into community organizations.

(e) Drop -in -- During specified office'hours, members are welcome to come into theCenter to talk with staff, to obtain current recreation information from thebulletin board to offer suggestions for future activities, to seek support forcurr5stt--n15; toward independence, or to visit with each other.

(f) Vacation PlanningThis service provides the opportunity for individuals toplan their vacations. Special attention includes hodgeting,,means of transpor-tation, housing, personal needs, type of experience desired, as well as infor-mation on accessible facilities.

(g) VolunteerismFor people who have a specific Interest for enhancing their

(nudity of leisure through volunteerxperlence, the RRC has resources forreferring Mombern to agencies specializing in volunteer placement positionswhich correspond to individual interests and abilities.

(h) Follow-Along/Follow-UpThe RRC staff schedules periodic sessions with individualparticipants to review each person's objectives and to determine the need forfurther services, For those persons who are "graduates" of the program, aschedule is set-up for several. sessions over the year to offer support; encour-agemenf, and any advice fo aid in stabilizing the' individual's attempts :it

mainstreaming.

(i) Leisure Time Reference ServiceThis is a collection and dissemination of infor-mation .on leisure time activities in the Dane County area. This information is

available to individuals, families, and professionals seeking specific resourcesand activities relating to a handicapped person's recreational needs and interests.

(1) Recreation Consultation--This service provides professional expertise in develop-ing, implementing, and evaluating,effective recreation programs to groups or

agencies wishing to establish similar community-based programs.

(3) TARGET POPULATION: The criteria for receiving RRC services are any adult,18 years or older;reniding in Dane County, Wisconsin, who:

-is considered eligible for services under the State of Wisconsin Division of Voca-

tional Rehabilitation Services, and-has a primary diagnosis of,a developmental disability, sensory impairment, severelyphysically handicapped, or mental illness, and

-is in some phase of transition from a dependent to an independent life-style.

55i

545

:t r . :31 3 1, , oat IT of Hu s I di.. 0.1 nu ..,e1,111e .. , , L . , L i. , 1 7 . 1 1 . . 1 1 , i t Ii / .,.'' .1 'Cvii 1 7 1 . , 1 7 , 7 1 . , i 7 7 j , 7 1 11,11.1,1 11111s,

1 . , i t , i t : 7 1 , 1 1 . 1 1 I I 14.v1.1 Llt 13,0..11 r'ltictt,llori,t.: .rt Ivo behav lora I lel la 1: !tent ion .1 I ew

. h . 101,\31 II 1 1. \ U, 1; i'1.11:.:b: Af icr he t31.palls ION ti sory ices beeamtt I 14:. tb. 'Lilt t 0 .1 t ',tit; 1101.'41'1'k tWilt, ..re.1

'3 v, 3.3:33 il. .: I lent e 1 ig Il la to I ttl likt. hat, ;t t , 1 1 t t I , l t t , ill lilt 0 0 1 , 1 . ' 1 1 , 1 t . I I I Ow I r , 3 , 1 lent rehab I I tat ion

1

- ,-.I t 1 t lit it, Stilt a in in.: emphefensit at or lesut .3;os, ,,r !,..I.1 ci II,, tt.litt 01Et curg Iv re. vivito: 1:111

.1 'itt -, it, ii',' it. tI this 'lime nnniher I,,1 t,I the OIL membershipe r , 1: ,, t. ItTr, rot vt-ra , with a potent Jai dase load of over 200 . I huts who

her,. it tt.t, RR.. :-:try, 141'111 Tilt AIMS ti VOCAISIONA1, 11E11,11i II. ITArloN: The INC was

I'd, :1ri r I c, .tt .1.1rIt Itt it I r it lot tat'. t t hat till 1.1 let:t 's 'talv titw iiiI I. Ow biv slow 01 Vii in halal Rehab. I itat Ion's mission statement

"1. I hrt Ile ni the Dep.,: (melt '33 Inistittto the Division of Vocat. Iona'beh.,,WI.Iltat ion t o ind evaluate and prey i Uit sereicet, to disabledpt., ;,31, t hrough a planned and Individualized program to itetlp them secure

ld :a, int a Li, employment at 31 level consistent with their physicai andal apahi I 'Ales; and to ingre.14, the ability of severely disabled

a, 7 r1'. V.. oil Itine't. ion I tultpendent I y in t he community and do so in,,1,,, wit 3, other beam service 3i:3..4.c/03-I."

ONTRIlirr iwis To NOCIA1,12AT iON, Mob 11, ITT , AND/OR INDEPF.NDENT L iV INC

I ii' Poet, .3 re, Thsource Center Is batted Oti the therapeubic. model of a rehabilitationeam I ' , . : . , v , , a: ional counselors , independent 1 iv in g igenc lc,, area workshops .

tt1,41. manager4, allied health proles:dole; recrcat len therapists, etc.) to impact onat, lulls idea ' s soccessful and tot al ft:habil it at. ion plan. Through this hot isticapp,hati, La, need, ot cit 1Zells , a structured recreationpragra,31 ,..1, make an will I cunt r ibut ion to et leitt CtIally.C:t 111 attitudes and behaviorsot ittit ii.itc.l1':.iiipt'd atult

704. tIntji ,oil I y encour!tges -initiation, self -assertiveness, indepen-ion:. de, I s iin -making , oil .lpproprid t social bit sic tors when demonstrated by thewrit, ipant . fiecause of stir program services and innavat ive features members learn

1, t,1" 1cC i li,it 1011a I pUrti,it.S 110w CO geb there using the public tr anspor -t at ,1 how to plan and make decisions. The staff f consistently modelsip ropi" / 1 Itt, hay Iii 1- encourages member interaction wit It ()Liter IRS membersape,. it Lail: iii ill., tab! lc In ,:enera I , suggests appropriate conversational topics,

let, he, me ..1 planning atia ['lunar at Ion helps to budget money, and a I vacated thedevelopment ot akille for life -.ong leisure endeavors which will complement vocationalparsoit,.

of the project's goals was to serve a total of 150 individuals. As of lustmonth we have nerved 164 disabled individuals with a current waiting list of 25.

552

546

- -We have successfully met ,alr goal ol offering services by expanding the criteria

ut disability groups. (Until the grant was awarded, IOW served only those adults

with a primary diagnosis of developmentally disabled.) Now we, in addition, have

been serving the mentally 111, sensory impaired, and physically luindicapped. The

project goal was to serve the above disabilities with the following percentagehreakdown:' Developmental disabilities-40i; mentally ill--351; physically disabled- -

1'A; sensory impaired-10Z, r date, we are roughly complying to these percentages.

--Another goal is to target 8 conimunity recreation facilities to provide barrier-free

environments. We have successfully convinced 2 facilities thus far to take steps to

remove architectural barriers.

--Anecdotal data; There are I64 success stories for each of the RRC members as to

the impact this project has had on them. Here are a few we would like to share:

*one man with cerebral palsy has made personal public attustments on severaloccasions, speaking on behalf of the RRC, that due to his successful recreationalexperiences and staff support hu had the confidence to apply for a position at one of

the local banks. He Isis since been promoted oh his job mid is a "graduate" of the RRC.

*A woman with ameutaL illness diagnosis came to the RRC for leisure counselling

services. She was concerned that she would loot, her job because she had no friendsand was stuck in a leisure pattern of too much television and brooding on her problems.After a few sessions and some referrals to community-based recreation groups, she isceitent with her job performance and feels more secure dealing with major:changes in

her lob reasons lb II ities.

',Using lhe lherapisitic recreation approach of "progressive programming" approx-

imately 20 RRC members have developed sufficient skills to compete in mainstreamed.ity-league softball and volleyball teams.

*Due'to collaborative efforts between the RRC and the Madison School - CommunityRecreative Departmsit we have placed 10 members in an on-going community ceramics class.

In summary, we believe the cost of recreation programming is extremely cost-efficient.

.61ir own project's cost i4 $60,000 and we will be serving close to 200 individualshetore Lhe end of the grant period. The total amount appropriated for recreationalrograms is so miniscule in comparison to the Federal Budget., yet the withdrawal of

these funds will have a major and predictably negative impact on disabled citizenswho currently depend on special recreation programs. We are aware that one cannot

count the success of recreation programs in case closures and job placements. However,

the positive impact on the rehabilitation process seems to us to be clear and viable.

We do not envy the arduous task you and your Committee must face in the next few weeks.We would Mkt, to thank you not only for this opportunity to share our concerns, butalso for all the time and energy you will have invested on behalf of our-country's

recreation programs!

SIneetzly,

Sandra C. HallProject Director

Kristina T. MadisonProgram Coordinator

547

Statement of

THE AMERICAN SPEECH-LANGUAGE-HEARING ASSOCIATION

Regarding Reauthorization of

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended

Submitted to

SENATE COMMITTEE ON LABOR and HUMAN RESOURCESSUBCOMMITTEE on the HANDICAPPED

Roger P. Kingsley, Ph.D.

Director, Congressional Relations DivisionGovernmental Affairs Department

March 28, 1983

554

548

The anwiai,,,, Heating A,n,aation (,ASII.%) t..,1 es the

pyor tun 1 ty In present its views and recommendation, con, ern! 1,g, thabi ta,_ tun

programs nerving I:ens with hand I capni ng conditions, Physically. and

mentally hand ivapped persons compr I se a :ad's:. ant Lai art ion of the mit bun' s.

population - around million p.,p 1 e the most prevalent handicapping

conditions ire speech, language, and hearing impairments. Because t he ability,

to communicate of t I ve y is so fundamental to other life at t vi t I e; earn-

interperY,nal relatinships, and vocational pursuits - any loss or

lmltItIon of thla al Hit y can den hintal ur ind v idual human development

and per.Corr:lam,.

AA s lona: and !;c. i en t f 1 society represent INV, over 37 , 001)

st a and .odiul nat inns: ide , including m iny who

provide r,i,nhi!itition air s to hand icapped adults. Our members cork in

r hoar outpatient rehabilitation centers,

led rousing facilities, home agenc jou , head Start programs,

Veterans :1dnirr.stratIts and Dopartment 01 Defense Lois, public and

pr ivate school s , arid Independent practice,

The Reitihi1tration Act is widely judged to he one of the most signif leant

and succ e ssf ul statutes relating to human services and human rights. Broad in

'scope, this one Act provides America's handicapped citizens with the promise

of fulfilling their life's potential through basic rehabilitation services,

assistance from quality trained professionals, opportunities for independent

living, and guarantees 'of basic rights. We support each of these se",::'t ions of

the Act: the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grant Program, Rehabilitation

549

, iect h With

11!,1 ON. 11,1 ..0`411 I, hit it Iiiulin,: Tit e V, piirt nlar Iv a bir.ngly euforrnd

ins: L0,111 f 11 handicapped pc.rions

rth I 1 I it I.' lie Ili ltiiIil a-ish,talice.,!,a I. !I:: se. t lit mud will

, lii, 1- uI ii .:!:.t 1,11 3,r each n3 the major

i t a t i o n Act n t ' (t. L . 9.1- I 12 , ii amended d by t he

i,ah: iti,s Act ofti i ii. lu 1..,ri deo. t. ui 1.t41 as which we

t. Act It' emet and are in: anf 1 icel.t iv, retort: the "balanced" program

, e of and

ti.:, f.:;ect Inn 110

it,nah 1 i tt. ion St.if.e ;rant program has been a model of

Ic L ar effective federal state partnership - for sixty-twoIII the program Isis served bout 23 mill ion persons and has

1 ut .,1 thall six million of them. The cost-effectiveness of thec i t e ery 11:.41-, (a rat to of better than I to 10) and it is estimated that

till.' lull It to 14overlunents at all levels is about $280 million, including in

IOns and payrc.,11 taxes and funding saved as a result of decreased dependency

fare :lot innt it ut tonal care.1

556

550

Hire nt 1 1..o hand I, n pped Ina I v 14.1.0 !..r ved annually, although

the number has been declining fur the past six yearn since funding 1"Ifi not

kept pace with int lei ion and hecause a larger proportion of severely (and hard

to rehab 1 ie) persons are be :4; her ved . The number of persons successfully

rehab and the number of now ,,uses have al so been declining.

:his year have an opportunely to reverse these trends and to enable

-aor e tint Ica pped citizens to benefit from vocational reha bi 1 t a t fon services.

rtt, ri',...nloncis that Congress raise the ant hoc za t ion levels for

S1,t 7.r, mitt ion fur Fr' 198.; $1, 141.1 million f)r

19'',; and S1,2;4.(, for 1.'1' pito,

111;y: ):,,h,J!,;litnti,n ain hig ;Togram was established C.rm,;ress in 1954

,. th,. preparation and ma intenance of it qualified rehabilitation

force, The progr.II:1 wart; ,,,,11,1)Piti in 1973 to meet the demand for more

s personnel qualified to wor{, with persons silt fer lug from a variety

ot' .7:isan I it ions i:nd to in;.rove the skills of those already engaged in

rena'bLlitat1 r. of the handicapped. The program supports training in the broad

r established rehabilitation fields identified in the Rehabilitation

An: Including speech-language pathology, audiology, physical therapy, occupa-

. :tonal therapy, rehabilitation counseling, and interpreters for the deaf,

Despite the need for greater numbers of rehabilitation Profession'als to

serve the handicapped and despite serious shortages of adequately trained

professionals in many fields, federal' support for this program has been

50:f

551

ni, al wan ',us', We recommend that the antharizatIon level

for Rehabilitation Training he set at '110.5 million 10r fiscal years 19114

through 14H6.

We alt., favor amending Section 1114 to clarity the responsibility of RSA

In all.cating training funds. ILe term "balanced" program has no clear mean-

ing aid should either be del ined or eliminated. Litle way, Congress s)ould

require th). Commissioner to submit to Congress, along with the RSA budget

rroposal, a detailed explanation of how funds will be allocated amour; the

nenabilitat nix dis:iplines atod h.w these allocations are related to legitimate

I_,;tist;s pet-s: n,. t ni, r I ay 's

hut.. of Handicap 'd Rese.rch

one '.ati.nal Institute .f Handicapped Rsearch was.established by the

1974 teh .-.Iitation amendments (P, L. 95-602) "to promote and coordinate

research with res;..ect t1, handicapped individuals..." (Sec. 202(a)).

Accordiry to the SIHR, research funds in fiscal 1982 were provided to

ceiers conducting long-term studies and utilizing teams of medical, allied

health and technical health professionals. Core areas of research have

included comrrehensive rehabilitation, vocational rehabilitation, aging,

mental illness, deafness and hearing impairment, sensory and communicative

systems, and blindness. The Institute has provided support for important work

in the development of communication aids, and through its -grants has recog-

nized the importance of research into the special problems of the elderly

disabled population.

U30

rodon,.

iye o t, 141 I v. I ii ! I I v ,d 1 hp

r v ! O , I 1 i t a t t , o i prouom. Yk.t , f I tw F r dull his I o,,yt.1 fiI I,Vfq >i.irs.

Wo hr 1 f 100 by ab 1 i!..11,d mili n k$r

and ,1 11,0, vi I 1., ii

1 ht. IlvIll .11 t.!

it I t,,r. ! ,O oine I I

" i I ! ,r ill 0,', 1 p '11-

, ',, i ,v, with

f Ill, 1, Afl.'ndfA .

001 v HIll Iv iiii I i.e

v,. n 1,af':',"..r 0.!

, '1711 vi. 1: . 110, 11 11.1. 17'0,,(1,1,;' I.

.1: ff: V,!,,11., 1' 1010 1 -011 L.,111'.1'. 01 C.,' ,101: 101,5 .1141 ,11 011,1

:

Tra!11in: !Thhilan-ed

Reuents

iss IL any pro t,ss ional ,;et ar,a vocational l rehat,i1 i cation servies

are only is good as th, ;-orsr,,nne provide them. Personnel siecial ize

in the i.e ib II: ta i.. fon of han ,! lc ivy quality training

55'd

553

,1 . 1 1 ' 1... .1,1 1 .11, t ,.I ii Ii

,,1t ,1 ...1t ,' 11'1,11, H 11I1..11.1111,i1 ..11t.11111,111,.

,11: 1; 1.11I ii tI III11101 111

, I. 11 I1aril I I t tt pr ii

, ; 1, , ! ,11111. 10 olt11

1 1: 1,1 ,t1 I 1 , ! I1111 t11

1.,

t t. 1.1 ,,t tlua

. . ,

, :, .1:, .,11, 11, v .. , 171,1 ot ',or ;r,,,,,onol, ot :, ]-:.-.it o r, it 1, 11 vr. et

1,1', ;a 1, : 1 1' Ion

at. ; nry, 11,1-111,.11ra;"', ot, .110au! 3, r..,t ,..rost hot ,t ar,t.

,.,". , I.. 1i I 11.,".111 t 1..11,h1,11 ^1, .1,1 1t111:111,, - '111 411,,111i 11%,I1 1,! Iii Clip1,.1 111,1 iv

. ',11711: $ ' 1 1111: ..11!1 11: c

,;.; 7,! ' f 1 Pt,

tn . oa. t.ht

;oua:,1;. ^. r i I ' ' It,: r ion 1,a, "..o!,,"ont!y N: titur,l,ar of

r : 70,' 1:, .4r4,-,-?, .1 ! see App. ndix A).

ri coo.-,1. in, t't. 't;'o, expenditures of

$1, t31,011. Thr oe t,r, , 0-1.2 y 17 pratPct s wort. funded with

, :",t,, ret --a-ut, 1%.! ;,. ,,y. pin 1116,1 v to

r30

554

Part by the overall tedo thm lo Pelothilitatimt Training 'funds (f1 percent),

Similar reductions In training support are evident in other discipliner:, ouch

as physical and occupational therapy. ''fsee Appendix 10.

The statute dues nut explicitly define "balanced program," thus leaving

considerable discretion to RNA. Draining priotitien are often established

more on the basis of political and budgetary factors than the actual need fur

different kinds of rehabilitation services. Several yearn ago, a report con-

cerning the impact of rehahilitatiort training support on the service delivery

system b,11:111 that "RSA dues not Osm data on the characteristics of existing

rehab I II tat ion per sonnet for p Lenn l ng por poses The report concluded that

"there has been no way to systematically estimate the demand for rehabilita-

tion per,amtml to many of tie, et-Jablished disciplines other than by contacting

protesstomd -rgauPzattons." However, in recent years, kSA has shown no

interest Lr;1r.,...tving, or utilizing information on training needs from this

professional association.

Funding tor Rehabilitation Training this year is at the same level as in

FY 1982 - 119.2 zillion. Despite this, we have recently learned from RSA

officials that no new training grants will be awarded to speech-language

pathology and audiology programs this year. What was supposed to be a

-balanced- program of assistance for rehabilitation training has obviously

become seriously unbalanced.

Rehabilitation Service Needs: the Communicatively Handicapped

In its most recent Annual Report to the President and Congress, the

Rehabilitation Services Administration states that training grants are

aWlv011ea hy the

555

oihilitatbin At t of 19/.1, as wmueled, to ensure that

skilled personnel "are available to provide Oa. broad scope of votatiotial

rehabilitation services needed by severely handicapped individuals served by

vocational rehabilitation agencies arid rehabilitation facllities,"6 There are

several points to be made about this statement. lbe first is that although

the kehabititatlon, Comprehensive Services and Developmental Disabilities Act

if 197d (P,L. 95-602) placed greater emphasis on the rehabilltation of severe-

ly handicapped adults, it did not eliminate the less-severely handicapped from

inclusion :II the program.

The piw.r of this Act is to develop and implement, throughresearch, training, services, and the guarantee of equal oppor-tunity, comprehensive and coordinated programs of vocationalrehabilitation and independent living. (Section 2 of theRehab 1 tat ion Act of 1973, as amended)

And, the purl~ se of Ti tle III Supplementary Services and Fac I it Les

includes the authorizing of grants and contracts

to assist in the provision of vocational training services tohandicapped individuals. (Section 200(2))

As defined in the Act, the term "handicapped individual" means anv individual

who

(i) has a physical or mental disability which for such indiviudalconstitutes or results in a substantial handicap to employmentand (ii) can reasonably be expected to benefit in terms ofemployability from vocational rehabilitation services...(Section7(7)(A) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended)

This Association believes that it would be bad policy and a misinterpretation

of congressional intent to target rehabilitation Services exclusively to the

11P

562

. ;

556

:

At

. ;:.rrt:It pnl t 1011 , appr,_.iitateli,

I,

. .,,,n 0i

it '.1.t 5 I5 ! CI! t .Ad ;11 z s agt

t., d-gree ;:: hear in 1 . ann

in it 1:: .anning ara,:ng t r:. hearing bawl Icappal is e irda' at a...

Alt!! I er :10.11 d01.1.11. g.

r,; ion aft'. ,Inuerrepor :18 speech

impa:Tmt.nt s Li ti .t.; U . S . pu pul a t I i t enc:tf LileS, ai ,t; rdiz., Is 11

HOWeVer t`t, 1,. generally asurned that at least '1 A rril

including hilirer. and adults, ...utter trot; specLn and .ngua I cipa

.1 .

,111:1 nt. t,0

. nit {1.; .11 t- 1 y

, so does the

ho!:.}' ,t!v! .tud 1n1c i,t to serve

; ,11,1 r..pr to t.

: 51t lug

pi" !A lndi-

:it the use at

t i ,:y r out

,,,rder. !.u,:}; a high

designed an:: to serve

2Th 1 inc.! were rehanll 1-

des; -i6. the sitIni I !rant: 1.17ten-

,..,ns with h , 11i.4uage and

th Ind vid s

inc10.ing 7,700 deaf, 10, BUO hard-

lapg,:tge i!nivlirment '4.'3 Over ,le and

vent td Iron working as a result of communi-

,,d An-1,ng the estimated 16.5 pillion people with a partial

w,,rk ity are one mill Int, wtr. suffer from speecn, language and hearing

.7t,airments.`'

564

rsr,,c/4,4

A I trial 1.0 int het e is t hat common t Sou hap.' I rment b are if ten related to

severe handicapping. cordit ions like Par kinsuni s.r., cerebral palsy, and multiple

s. Ind l v dito I rehabilitation programs for persons with these near '-

logical 0,111H.LiOlIS frequently include t serv.I,. es of speech, langliage and

hear ing prof ens ional s. About one In tl v stroke Ic, t lent s have commun icat ion

probi erns and need spec ial eed rehabiihLation to order to regain the use of

Cue:T. speech and anguage mechanisms.

Tr a i nlni Need,: 1,00,1.'0 and Audiology.

In a 1979 re'irt prepared b!... Bureau of Health Manpower for

,en,. t. I t ee on Labor and ifaman ltetiuurcrs and t he House Committee on

ter s: at au..! :ommerce Enery and Commerce), ser ions. shortages

.r:,tlabilit y of speech-language pa tho is: s and aud iolo-

.41 st s A:.i.end1: I. and h). Using conservative est :mates of prevalence

of ,7orn ,,:at ion cl i so i'der s and dat.. :rm a Nat ional Institutes of Health

study, t he Bureau concluded that at least three or four t Imes more speech

pa ihologi sts are needed and appro: imate I y four times as many audiologists are

Ieeded to provide required sent ices ... it appears that the supply of speech

patho log ist S and audiologists is not adequate to meet either current or fut ure

demands and needs ."10

Although the extent and location of these shortages is not known, there

is clearly 00 contrary evidence that warrants RSA's disro?ving of future

train, .g funds in the field of s;eech-langauge pathology and audiology. Quite

the opposite - t he large and ever- increasing population of persons with pri-

many and secondary communication disorders requires the on-going training of

559

es o 444 11 he ,iv, il ah le to rend their eitah II it at ion needs. A

-baldned" program of assistance sold certainly seem to imply this, and ye

ask this Committee to I reemphasize the importance of an adequate supply of

quality trained prof es s Iona s in the '.ar ietts rehabilitation disc iplines and to

ree,..I re that. NSA base its al I oca t tun d training Lundy oil actual need

The leafiness and Commun icat Lye Disorders Program

hn..11v, A.lOA nr to Ole at tent ion of this Subcommittee a

tt le noticed tea !1i. ghly si };r hticatt report uneerninft the tedral role in

t'.. rehab G. itidt is 0 of t.'ults comilunicat ion handicaps.

tat Services administrat ion is the federal agency respon-

lea t ship and coorti inat ion of rehahtlttat ion programs for

kik; is resia.nsible for planning, developing,.,

ing and eva 1 ua !rig tat ior programs for congnun ively ha,a1 1-

Tne Z.ed fners and Conmun [Cat. Ivy i,i1:1,"Aerf: tIffice (DCDO) is the

tti the' tasks. li-etever , this of fice has histori-

cdI'ly lacked the authority and the restoIrc, n essary to provide adequate

rerresLintat ton of the rehabilitation needs of ove.' 20 million Amer icans with

s-,eerh, language and hearing .'isordern.

There are se.eral problems related to the weak record of DCDO. Unlike

administrative strut ores for the blind and visually impaired end the 'develop-

mentally disabled population, the program for the deaf and communicatively

iripa iced has rk,' legal base.. The for .er -ograns are situated in the Office of

Program operations KU., 1, located in ,tie 0`f ice of Adv,cacy and

566

560

.1i ,1 t. ,rr.,

p.rd

5f; 1

.1... i I.t U A t, t ,,,r .1 I I

i.

;.;

.,T o: .1 1.(,.,,11

,t t ,,t t, I ..t i I p!.,trt :.r tw. .1 C ht'

r " . I! I I .1' r tr

.tt II l I; I I I r k

568

562

1.et ioh 1 i At. hoi 1..1 .11.c 11, .,t !al t tIn itm1KO, I, I t .1; 1 ve t.. hi Ill Ihti.hlt .11.1 t ii iiiitt

n a t t t y t t i e , , R e l a t , o 1 ii the \ H l r i f I . . i 1 it the keh,i1.1 1 1 tat 1,,t1

if 1173 iv th,ended ( Fiscal Year 1991),

1,0,1 , An Assessment act if1,1 t i t,, attn Seler I -tAt, r, Academic and

;,,,I-A...teral, rr., in114.. !met ti. It fit if the ('nit 10(1;11e,h,.!,11 I t ,it 1011 v Irel Ivor y Etn.11 itt t.',I ti,

(1)er emher 1vun 1 1-

3. ..11.1, Int et tl.it 1,1,11 ; I .11 ten. An . ,' 11-7,

V.

Pehat,1 1 tAt Adminktrat ion, Fiscal Year 1991 Annual Report,19.

I c . n . 1 1 1 r , ! it in e .oh lee 1)1sor,..lerm Stroke,Belau .,f he P.t:11,1 lit rder, t., 13,, ,:at: loyal Advisory

1,, II ,.iiih,,t s i if !j, (711111'11. LV. beprirlune 1979.1.

011,0.

! . dyr t 1,,

.:. i ).

,! "r the 1977

, ., I tl,it it,, ii rya'. Y. ar 19P.1 Report

! It is: 1. Serve it (1977).

'4-41! , fin, nut Adri 101 r.trat Son,- A Rep,,,rt on(!;rve7.hr n.. X1,-5.

ive 1",. ions fir the.r t ,r the CoT...nisr;ioner if

:es.,,r11,-,er 1179), p. 4.

1... inter f..)r '3idtti St,tt in'.., 11,11th Interview S.irvy (1977).

13. ;A hi, For re Rep,. r t , Append lit

r

1

50

;,.,1 1'44.

I-

A-mer;can Speech-Languai,-Hearing Association

.Atfatrs :Jepart.cen:

1001 III ;11ol,c,14 pllo011,1lAr1101

1.11111 1.,1 ,00 I IN lift;

011,1111'01),,ii ,11

I, HI!, 4141111411111"

I lri 1

11rJ ILI lib 1 r.tri 1 1,04

61 lc 1 It 11,e A., 1 11,14,/

I rilnl Poi 1 11000

Ill!'.1(11 .11,1110

11111 r I 41.

1411 1.1

131,1111,11

no it/1111s. I oi Arro,

1H,

10, 01 el

11, I

11. It 111

111,4141,NA I ho

DI

',II. 11.1141

rt11,11 I 110 101+91

Ito It a, f u,lf i i o,fil#00i VIP 1141lUitil

I'a1111111(411

Il,lrlllf111 ,, 1, , 1,4 ,,It

41, 'NO

?hi It'll 11 111

,1101 / IIcl,lp1 ,1

1 11,"11v / .1111

(111011111011M fliAIN)Nd I (11K11111114 II 11111111/1 11AH

II 11111,.11

(411

1.1( vi

11 1111 l'rb, /11./10 to- 1 I 11,11 1.tri.

itr(1 111dh1I111111 ip In (N10114[011 1,, 14

101

1111

14

,111

;11

tf vor, thjorld ,),Intl

1'010111u

411141 1141 hil4k

I

II PI Yin

4111110I)0

I 111.111

1011111

1,11111,

ill

101111

,1,11'111

II III 111

1Y/A,FA N

'P11,11111 901,110

.',(011,(111 ;1,4)0AI

pll' 0,110 1,10)1!)(0

III/,IIIII '0.001

/ill'? (1;4) 11 ii .10 '1,1111 I ii:i .):Ii'il)i

,6,119i,,,,2 1111,014.1)111142).406)0

571,

rmyno

Vf 1111104

if' 0(

IIAr i914 :NAM('

11110,1411 $ 1606 I 7011)1110

litico) ,,}9,'516

l'4110 450, 47o Idrgyloo

1,151,0 OVA!_."/191116......_12.10)...11;i22111,12.. )11

;11,)110 10,19 11

1?,10 1 1;111+ 11111I ill h

65,11611 10,101

01,561 11111,10

imoo51 210i1( 1111) 11

1 193)1 1Y), 11 11

10118$4 6J1,551 Iii

21001? 215,M 12),56? 1

(16,1?o

15,orio ?h,?It 101

iiii?))1)))1111 Kil?);Iji!'"1/1 ;,1;fi

?,()A),fbo 70,0,11))

7,11(0,Dio

0,1111 1,4),AH

F.1 11510134 jDi

1411:24111ell 41j4IL111 it `111111)

116

ON I

ri,",111,;

11111,1Mi.,

1, 11,11111(1r hpNli, Illy d111lInllllil l,1 Coifyilml to Milltriwor , 3.1,1(1!i

110111114110 x114

11f011,

1111 llll Ifll 0;1 oil NIA 1111 .npo Ill) MI 1011 110 1111

irrollia 06011 111 111 116 111 111 161 111 111 1111 It 116 so; Rlrl

0114 0 11) Ill 1111 111 Ill , III 111 111 017 1111 011 1141 141 164

11,1141410011.11) 011 I990 1901 4116 44)( IV 1111 1116 11 19 1911 1111 1111 11111

ado ittrIOF qb4 II 111 19 11 111) 19I I 1901 1196 1111 1111 1111 1161 1111 1141 1116 11111

Shull lorlholf room' 1041 110 111/ 1111 II 1) I110 1111 1111 11101 1111 II11 11116 II19

Hi 11114103011 im101111 111 1 1111 101 1611 1/191 1114 1101 1111 1116 1911 11111 11111 1111

if ,1iip III joilililly

n«11

tO,

11161

WI

19019

941

19111

%

19111 19/61

IM

19146

%

19111

thS

191%

96

1911/

96

1901

16

1110

96

111011

%

1417

AIN 'W6ip 1111111,

trillirli1111 1111+1111101

thvi

11111 1161 1119 11111 1190 1106 1011 41111 1119 1111 111 1 61119 61111

0 (; pcolothi 11 11 II 16 91 91 10 101 101 111 111 111

111 II 01141,01.1 1

III

1

1111

1

451

9 9

III

1

111

10

141

III

169

11

191

II

611

11

611

I/

611

1 1

111111 I6t II/ Ill 1c41 01 1119 11/ /11 /11 111 11 I

IIillift 11 41 11 11 IN 61 61 69 11 14 19 11

hilti uivrly of 3114111111 1161 1190 ,11116 41111 1101 4111 1111 5191 141ili 114911 41911

NO nffll 0.110 I:111111'11 10111 141111 '11461 111111 1111111 14111 11194 14011 11611 1 11111 11101

(10111.(1): (lool'h P4 thololy ,v)( rt,...,lanpmffir. PpraIrc and Heeds. Washinqtop, 1)4 C, Governmemt Printing

lifIfenA'

572

11,1111! C11111(11 tilinpuwvr rity!le, for 'peetii 1111111010111i1h II) NI Iiipower 0(1011N:eel) Nil" PM

10400404p$11.1WI 11,1 MI 101 WI fill Oh

Sprtlhp11611 Iy

1ii'MW1111111 110 111 MI ill 111 111 111 ill III 111 110

11,411,111114 (I11116/41 1,))111, 001 AIM 6114 61116 611)1 14)111 11 01111 6111S1 6Is141

Ilohilikinoi "I 4041441111 1111 101 1111 1171 1111 1111 1111 1111 1616 144 111) 1/11

16111m1dOmotimpwil 411 MN 4111 Nil IN il$11 5119 1111 1161 1111 5114 1114 41111

lulal ort,1 1116/ 115111 111A 1101 11116 /11111 11111 /11111 /11111 POI 111111 1101 1011

N001060014040(101110110

kAlimillipm4040111r MN 111116 11;4 OW IOW MO HO MM IIII6 OM fliN OW 10111

1111 1110 )1111 All 1111 Pi 1/11 1161 11 1411 1111 1114

IbNI 1/111 111I POI 111 nq 1SIH Ali 11111 11111 11111 1181 I

II 16 11 I1 11 11 IN III I/ )1 11 11 61

101 1111 110 POI 1111 nn OH 15111 An 110 11151

171 4)1 IN 411 1114 III 161 1117411 1111

NA 111I1 1W Y /4? PM 161) 111111 11114 OM MW OW 1111M 11M

$1,04WM 40 OW 11111 11111 0511 WM MM PM MO ?1M Mil MM

Soc,r, Speech Nthology rand Audiology: !lanpower Piources old Needs, lilashfngton, ; Government Printing

. e

1111111 , I I I11I111I 11,0yomii. kir '11011111 1111111111011,111111.1'111',1

ko, 0111 11,+ 14441

.1,0 1116 r pl (ill

1111 1111 IIII PIA 1111 011

1,1(10 r 001 11 114 1111 111 III 111, ill III

1111161111000 .

. 14911 4111,9 lino 41191 611111 bow

11,1,11011m1 .1111I 11.11101 04011 1111 111 1111 MI 1111 11'11

11,16 if 41111 lif1111111 1111r111(11 11111 411 50111 1IW1 11111

101.11 ur rd 111111 115111 11101 114111 1156 111111

!qv' I1 011111mit

loilioffip lib proholopiiii111111 10111, 1111 111111 1411 /9101

nhe

11 110111101 1111 1151 15111 Illl 11011 19 11

11,011,110 1141 pin 1911 1111 11111

11, II 0.111111111 II IS

KA 11'11 NO IIMfI 1111 1111

10 111 III 41'1 in 5141 111

write ul iptrill 1E111111141+1$111116 11111 111111 1141 19101 1101

nit end 11111, 1010 own 11111 11111 40411

I

Ito 194 1111 IIll

A A.,

1411

III 111 111 111 111

61116 A111I 1111111 6I111 0911

1111 1191 11116 11,116 no

109 1111 1161 1111 110

11111 11/111 1100 10111 1111111

111111 111111 11111. 10119 111111

1119 1141 1111611119

1141 1611 11111 1911 11111

is 111 11 11 51

11111 1111 11111 101 1111

10 191 619 611 Ill

111111 111111 111111 415111 iniroi

11114 .1111N11 1111111 11150 110111

A

Sill WI

1119 51 OW

Ira 1101

Sill,

Ipr11

11111

11911

1001 5111111

1191 1911i

11119 014

11 /II

11119 /V

1111 111

1111111 191,1

11611 1191i0

cooll:e: Speech Pltholofly dnd Ippowpr PpcntIrcPs and Needs, lidsliin9ton, Goverment PHhiing

Appendix

574

568

'It at rnent

r I CA, Er II I.A!:;,'.1t;! -HEM+ I N(.

np Poduthorl zat Ion of

Aura!' tr,, el tt,e 9andi e,ipped Art

o,rt, (", Ic, ond

tvd

-Y:A7Y IARIN .1rol AMMAN PYsnrurrs

,riicoITTEE on the HANDICAtPED

Stan Duhlfnake, Ed,D,Director, State/Regulatory Policy DivisionGovernmental Affairs Department

March 29, 1953

575

the AnerLA,

510

Hr4TI tatlot, lepteheurtnp

nathal,e,t,ts ntithorwidp, 1t, pleased to

vnrnlr It" te,oxlmendatIons ,oneernIn,v reanthorIxatIon of the discretionary prn-

tnded tinder tie 1,docotIon of (I Ho11,11,alq.'d ASHA reCommendli

a of,

the

If f II., l d',11 it' of I 1,,,w1 wre, tindet rant n r, I), nn,l r

Art, W, pt,l,yOup only milpu chanve4 In the plograma fur thin vent',

htr It omeed the Committee initiate a thorouvh r.'view of all hroenuns In

ore!Airo!HT, 1,7 reaothArlIntioo next year.

e I ml.! ext.-nt .,t tut, .rt t ho .1,1 nr 1,,, the If Art over ti decade

10, We have seen tre-,d growth In hoth the quantity and nnalitv of cduca-

iioantle:4 pr,wfans And ,,ArvIcex much of this Improvement con he

'I it.- to fh., Activities initiated and completed under the d!scretion-

AtV t'at o :,Art ,0 the !-:docAti of the 9andicanned Act.

rx,1:,1.,. !TA-lode Ice. followInc:

ne,,,n4tration earls childhood and qevorelv handicapped.

These ;,T,ie,t provide materials and services to thousands of

chtldren, teachrs, t,,drentx and program administrators. Without

proieors such as these, there would have been little incentive to provide

urt.ed services to the pre-school and severely handicapped population.

As the need for quality special education was realized, there was an

increased demand for nualifled.special educators. FHA funds available for

Personnel development ensured that there would he a supply of qualified person-

nel available to implement FHA programs, .ortunately, the demand has always

exceeded the supply.

To ensure that thr Programs, materials, and technology used In special

education is up-to-date a d effective, EPA provides funds for innovation and

576f: 174 0 s:1

570

development. The projects encourage research to ensure that the mosCcost-

effective methods and materials are available for use with handicapped.

children.!

These few.examples show in a small way the importance; of EHA programs to

the live-6f handicapped children; their parents and teachers. 'Therefore, ASHA

believes it is important to continue the ERA discretionary programs found in

Parts C, D, and E and that authorized fundingbe placed at a level that will

. ensure continued growth and improvement of Education of the Handicapped Act

programs.

Following are ASHA's specific recommendations.-

Part C, Sec. 621, Regional Resource Centers (RRC)

In past years, the Regional Resource Centers served a useful function in

providing technical assistance and information to state and local education

agencies. During the initial stages of implementation of EHA and PA.-94-142,

. there was a great need for such assistance. However, as special education pro-

grams grew and state and local education agencies have become stronger in terms

of programs, staff and expertise available, the need for national/regional

technical assistance for State Education Agencies (SEA) has lessened.

ASHA recommends that the Regional Resource Centers be reauthorized for one.

year at a level of $9.8 million.' -

We sugge3t that the centers be charged with the responsibility of

determining how state and local education agencies can assume the activities

currently carried out by the RRCs. In addition to providing technical assis-

tance to SEAs, RRCs should be given the charge to provide technical assistance .

to other state and local agencies. providing services for handicapped children.

571

FY 83 FY 83 XSHAAuthorized Appropriation' Recommendation

* $9.8 $2.88 $9.8 -

*All figures in millions of dollars

Part.C, Sec. 622, Deaf -Blind Centers

The initial intent`of the model deaf-blind centers hasbeen met. The

centers have providEd programming support for those deaf-blind children identi7

fiedasa result of the rubella epidemi: of 1963-65. In the 14 years since .

funding for this program was initiated, we have seen the full implementation of

P.L. 94-142. Thus, many of the services provided under this program are

duplicative of what state and local education agencies:are to, provide under

P.L. 94-142.

ASHA recommends the model centers and services for deafLhlind children he

reauthorized for'one year at a level of 516.6 million.

We suggest that centers begin a transition from centers providing direct

services to centers that provide technical assistance and coordination activi-

ties in the area of deaf-blind and severely handicapped. In the future, con-

sideration should be given to determining how'such technical assistance and

coordination to state and local education agencies fits with the technical

assistance activities of the RRC. Possibly, all technical assistance functions

could be taken over by one program.

FY 83

Authorized

$16.0

FY 83

Appropriation

515.36

ASHARecommendation

$16.0

578

572

Part C, Sec. 623,, Early Childhood Education

Education c4\preschool handicapped children has proven to be one of the

most cost effective special education programs. The handicapped children's

early education program has provided service to thousands of young children

through outreach prOgrams and has provided state and local education agencies

. with models, methodi and materials that have facilitated the provision of cost

. effective services fOr preschool handicapped children nationwide.

ASHA recommends that the handicapped nhildren's early educatiOn program be

reauthorized at a level of S25 million.

Increased funding for this program is needed to encourage sates to pro

Nide programs and services for handicaPPod children, birth to age 5. ASHA

suzgests that part of the funds he used v, provide states with planning grants

to develop and implement a full service preschool program plan.

FY 83 FY 83 'ASHA

Authorized Appropriation Recommendation

S20 $16.8 S25

Part C, Sec. 624, Research, Innovation...in Connection With ModelCenters...for Handicapped'

This section has provided funding for model programs related to'the

severely handicapped. The projects have been funded. with monies appropriated

under Section 621. No separate authorization has been provided for severely

handicapped projects except for FY 82 and 83.

ASHA recommends that Section 624 be reauthorized at a level of S5 million.

573

ASHA suggests that funds under this part be used to provide projects that

relate to other handicapping. conditions as ell as the severely handicapped

usually the mentally retarded.

FY 83 FY 83Authorized Appropriation

S5.0 $2.88

ASHARecommendation

$5.0

Part C, Sec. 625, Regional Education Programs

Projects funded under this Section have focused primarily on the handi

capped adult pursuing higher education. Most of the funds have been used for

Projects related to the deaf. Section 625 is important in that it is, the only

section of EHA that deals directly with the handicapped adult's efforts to

obtain higher education.

ASHA recommends Section 625 be reauthorized at a level of $4.0 million.

ASHA suggests that projects funded under this section be expanded to

include other groups of handicapped adults in need of higher education and

vocational programs.

FY 83 . FY 83 ASHA

Appropriation RecommendationAuthorized '

S4.0. $2.832 S4.0

Part D, Sec. 631, 632, 634, Training Personnel forEducation of Handicapped

The Special Education PerOonnel Development Program (SEPDP) provides

support to institutions of higher education and state and local education agen

cies to ensure an adequate supply of qualified providers of special education

580

574

and related services. rands also have heen used to provide special education

training for regular educators and for development of Innovative training

models. Without properly trained, accessible, and sufficient personnel, it is

difficult to envision the successful accomplishment of the primary goal of

P.L.94-142. Study after study has'shown that the shortage of qualified special

education personnel is a critical national problem. For example, in February

19R3, 41 state education agencies indicated they had funded but unfilled vacan-

cies for speech-language pathologists. One state reported over 300 vacancies.

In an.effort to recruit individuals no matur what their qualifications, 10

states that currently require the waster's degree as the minimum /evel.of

education and training for employment as a speech-language pathologist are con-

sidering or ha,e reduced their certification.standards to the bachelor's level.

Such actions due to personnel shortages will reduce the quality of service

provided to handicapned children.

ASHA recommends that Part D, Sections 631, 632, and 634 be consolidated

into one authority related to preparation of special education and related

service neraonnel with an authorization level of S70 million.

ASHA suggests that priority for use of funds for preservice education be

given to those programs that have received accreditation from agencies recog-

nized by the Council on Postsecondary Accreditation (COPA) and/or the Depart-

-went of Education. This will target money for programs that have accepted

minimum national standards for quality education and training.

FY 83 'FY 83 ASHA

Authorized Appropriation Recommendation

S58.0 S49.3 , S'.0.0

575

Part bt Sec. 633, Recruitment and Information

This program prov4des funds to promote public awareness ahout the.needs of

the handicapped and to distribute information on the various handicaps ,, the

availability of services witt.in the states.

Projects funded under this.part provide a "one-stop" location where

parents, consumers; students and others can get a variety of information about

handicaps and special education.

ASHA recommends that Section 633 be reauthorized at a level of $1.0

ASHA suggests that some funds be used to increase recruiting efforts to

encourage. too students to pursue a career in special education.

FY 83

AuthorizedFY 83

AppropriationASHA

Recommendation

51.0 S480,000 S1.0

Part F, Innovation and Development

Part F provides research and development funds needed to develop new

rrod.cts, rrograms and services that will improve the Quality of education

rec%ived by the handicapped. Research projects funded typically have national

sirnificance and are funded based on national needs. If adequate and appropri-

ate services are going to be provided, now and in the future, it is necessary

to continue to research and disseminate innovative and cost-effecti,e products,

methods, and materials related to education of the handicappe%.

582.

576

ASRA recommends that Part E he reauthorized at a level of $25.0 million.

ASRA suggests that.soFe funds be used to conduct a national study on work

force supply and demand in special education and related services with the

intent of identifying ways to project workforce needs based on 'current program

and trend data.

FY 83Authorized

520.0

FY 83

Appropriation

ASHA

Recommendation

512.0 $25.0

Although PartBof the Education of the Handicapped Act ensures the pro

r'rision of free anzropriate public education, the other Parts of EHA (C, D, and

77):pro....ide the infastructure on which a strong Part R is built. Without

alecallte: funds to ensure continuing research and development, personnel devel

optment,deOnstration projects preschool through postsecondary, and dissemina

tion ofiinforrlation, the provision of quality appropriate education becomes4

difficult, if not impossible;

1

AS IA believes strongly that EHA discretionary programs need to he reau

thorized for one year during which an in depth study is conducted to determine

vherelmajor changes in program direction and focus need to take place.

We thank you for this opportunity to comment and for your consideration of

our recommendations. If you have questions regarding the ASHA suggestions,

please contact the ASHA Governmental Affairs Department.

58d

Of (KERSPresident

?OIL had S. ROlhft..iniLihnOuth

Vice PresidentSMer Mary C.1111,1, S P.I luhoke

ImmedimeNMPresiderflRobot SS G.,'IA vel4no1

treasurerWitham k Stmold,oi:

ClerkAlso I.

roklone

HOUSE OF DELEGATESChairmanFlown( e S%i.ltom.! spling,..111

We ChsernalItli114111lai fan".North SVtidiii

'Clerk(hoodoo. A M.11111111111111111', Inch

Enecor, DirectorRn hard A A'.

577

MassachusettsEaster SealSaciety

March 29, 1983

Senator Lowell Weicker, ChairmanSubcommittee on the HandicappedSH 113Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Weicker:

The Massachusetts Easter Seal Society strongly urges the re-authorization of the Rehabilitation Act and Amendment PublicLaw 95-602 and that it specifically includes continuationof Section 316 projects.

The Easter Seal Society supports the Congressionallintentthat funds be allocated to provide recreational opportunitiesfor persons with disabilities. 'We urge that funds for meeting

, this need be continued and not liverted to other areas.

We would like to offer testimony for the Record on the import-ance of Section 316 projects based on our experience witha Recreation Grant awarded to the Massachusetts Easter SealSociety.

We submit the following data for your information:

1. Purpose of our Project

- to initiate and/or facilitate recreational andleisure activities for adults with disabilities.

- to initiate participants into existing communityprograms whenever possible through program adapta-tion or 1-1 assistance.

- to promote personal growth in socialization, mobilityand independence through recreation..

2. Activities Available in our Project

- adapted skiing- adapted swimming- adapted raquetball- tennis- jazz'aerobics

- nautilus program- fencing

horticulture- drama- board and card games- field trips

584

578

- basketball team sport for deaf teenagers- social and informational gatherings- mainstream adult and/or community education courses

with assistance of a 1-1 aid on program facilitation

3. Population Served by our Project

- adults with disabilities who are able to form areasonable vocational goal

- included in our prOgramspersons who are vision impairedpersons who are deaf .

persona Who are severely physically disabled dueto multiple causes including stroke, C.P., polio,head injury, M.S., traumapersons who are high functioning mentally retarded

4. Access to our Project by Vocational Rehabilitation Clients

-`The Easter Seal Society has contracted all MRCactive clients in target areas by mail with follow -

up through counselors.

5. Relationship of ourProject to Goals of Vocational Rehabilitation

-Me share the aim of the Massachusetts RehabilitationCommission to mainstream and integrate persons withdisabilities into realistic community involvement.

6. Project Contributions to the Quality of Life,

- it encourages socialization, mobility and independent living

a. Socialization - holding all activities in a socialcontext preceding or ending all activities withtime and intention for socialization. Ex. - whenparticipating in programs where a lounge exists,using that setting as a final meeting area withtime for socialization.

b. mobility - encouraging and helping clients to real-.

istically assess transportation and mobility problems,developing a network or awareness of community trans-portation and helping clients experiment with arrangingtheir own transportation so that they can comfortablyassume that responsibility when it is possible.

c. Independent Living - encouraing the concept ofindependence and assisting clients with ideas on howto make their living arrangements work in relationto their recreational pursuits.

579

7. Project Impact on Individuals Served.

Provides a challenge in that our programs have helpedsome adults experience activities they previously feltthat they would never be able to experience, thereforegiving them a greater sense of self. J

- Renewal of spirit and coneidence. The programs havehelped renew old inter is that individuals felt wereno longer possible for.lthem. Individuals have takenpart in mainstream activities that they were hesitantto pursue without assistance,'but will now be confidentto continue independently.

- Community Awareness - good publicity has created greatercommunity awareness of abilities of persons with disabilities.These clients participated in programs thought -to be onlyfor the able bodied: Community instructors and volunteershave experienced a great awareness of the uniqueness of allindividuals.

We hope that our comments are useful to your committee. We know the positive,results derived from projects such as ours And urge that funds for recreationfor the disabled be continued as a necessary component for improving thequality Of life for individuals with disabilities.

Sincerely,

Mary Ann BarbeeDeputy Director for ProgramsMassachusetts Easter Seal Society

MAFB/taj

rf, J80

qi?)

vrx nationaleasier seal society

60 YEARS OF SERVICE TO HANDICAPPED PEOPLE

Office of Governmental Affairs

'March 30, 1983

The Honorable Lowell Weicker, Jr.ChairmanSenate Subcommittee

on the HandicappedRoom 113, Hart SenateOffice Building

Washington, D. C. 20510

Dear Mr. Chairannt

The National Easter Seal Society appreciates the opportunity to contributeto the evaluation and improvement ofthe programs under the Rehabilitation Act.As the nation's oldest and largest voluntary health agency, Easter Seals has ac-tively participated in the growth and development of the rehabilitation movement.The National Society believes that the reauthorization process provides an excel-lent opportunity to assess once again the effectiveness of Rehabilitation Act

programs and services. in addition, it provides an occasion for the many federal,state, local and private rehabilitation agencies to reaffirm their commdtment toproviding quality services to persons with disabilities.

Historically, Easter Seal involvement in the provision of rehabilitation'services to the public predates the federal role in this area. Easter Seals was

founded in Ohio in 1919, in order to provide rehabilitation services to children

with,disabilities. A year later, the federal government established its firstnon-military rehabilitation program under theNationalCivilian Vocational Rehabili-litat ion Act (also known as the Smith-Fess Act).

In the more than sixty years that have elapsed, the Easter seal Society hasexpanded in size and scope of services. The National Easter Sett Society current-

ly represents 827 state and local societies. These societies o fer'a wide range

of rehabilitation, health care and related services to both chi dren and adults.In 1982, Easter Seals served over 759,000 individuals. Many of these people

were served under programs authorized by the Rehabilitation Act. It is through

this level of involvement and through our role as an advocate r persons with

disabilities that the National Society has developed the views expressed in

this statement.

As written, the Rehabilitation Act embodies one of the go t comprehensive

and effective systems of providing human services. The Natio 1 Society wholly

supports the Rehabilitation Act and urges Congress to extend 4thorizatlon fora period of five years, It is our belief that the programs authorized under the

58;

581

Rehabilitation Act represent a broad and balanced approach to meeting the rehab7ilitation needs of persons with disabilities. We encourage Congress to retainall of the programs provided for under the Act, regardless of their funding status.Each of these programs and the services they provide representsaunique and vitalaspect of the overall rehabilitation process.

Easter Seal Proposals

This statement reflects the concerns of the National Society and the organiza-tions it represents relative to programs under the Rehabilitation Act. For themost part, these concerns focus- on the ability of nonprofit rehabilitation centersto participate effectively in the vocational and related rehabilitation programsin the Act. These programs represent one of the largest, most comprehensive sourcesof rehabilitation services available to people with disabilities. We believe, there-fore, that every effort should be made to improve the Rehabilitatioh Act as writtenand as administered.

The National Society has identified several provisions in the ct which re-quire either amendment, report language or simply the attention of ngress. Theseinclude the "wOrk center" definition, support services for rehabili ation facilities,the federal role relative to Rehabilitation Act programs and the :lc for recrea-tion services. The National Society urges Congress to examine the areas duringreauthorization and, in so doing, consider Easter Seals' recommenda ions. We alsoask that Congress consider the testimony prepared by the ConsortiuM for Citizenswith Developnvntal Disabilities, whichvatsEmbmitted on behalf of Easter Seals andthirteen other organizations.

The kw "Work Center" Terminology

The National Society proposes that the Rehabilitation Act be melded to in-clude the definition of the term "work center". This term describes hose voca-tional rehabilitation facilities formerly referred to as "sheltered wo kShoPs".It is our belief that the old, familiar "workshop" label no longer pro ects anacceptable, and in some cases, accurate Image of today's vocational rehabilitationfacilities. This amendment, therefore, is intended to establish the "work center"term in the Act to more clearly dofine the positive and productive nature of thesevocational rehabilitation facilities.

In an effort to reflect the positive development of vocational rehabilitationfacilities in the Rehabilitation Act, the National Society proposes that the "workcenter" term be added. This can be accomplished by adding the "work center" defi-nition as Section 7(16), which would read us follows:

etittp 'The term "work center" means a rehabilitation facility, or thatpart of a. rehabilitation facility, engaged in production or serviceoperation for the primary purpose of providing Employment as an in-terim step in the rehabilitation process or as an extended work op-portunity for those invididuals who cannot be readily absorbed inthe competitive labor market.

The National Society propoS6 that the term "work center" be substituted for theterm "workshop" wherever it is used in the Act. The adoption of the term "workcenter" provides needed recognition for the substantial changes that have occurredin vocational rehabilitation facilities. During the past several years, such faci-lities have initiated new and innovative work programs. These programs havegreatly expanded the vocational rehabilitation process and, as a result, have in-

583

582

creased the oportunitie.s awl lade to OnliV Idnals with disabilities. In addi-

tion, may typS of personnel have been iMployol by these facilities to achieve a

range of skills no. we ctotparable to those found in cumpetitive ontiloyment The new

"murk center" 1,17111Itology sends a signul to the commtnity that a definite and posi-tive lAwlsiti,m ha, taken place within those facilities knoum as "sheltered work-

shops".

A major billet it. of the,''//ork water" amAulment is the incentive which the new

terminology provides to vocational rehabil itation facilities to reassess their roles

in the commality. Consideration of the "work center" concept by facilities will

bring alxtut a review of orgimizat tonal goals and structure. For many facilities,

the adoption of the "mirk centtg.". identity will be accompanied by a revised sense

of mission and an imam/0d vocational rehabilitation program.

In this'ioord, the adoption of the "work center" designation by a facility

represents an bportant step in its organizational evolution. The transition of

a "uorkshop" to a "musk center" demonstrates to the ccuraynity an effort on the part

of the facility to redefine its purposo. This transition can be viewed as a means

by which the facility signals its intention to becone more businesslike. In ef-

fect, the new =tie upgrades the imam' of the facility to a more productive, uork-

orientaxl center for rehabilitation. This new bmage can be used to pinnate greater

lniol Veffit .n t of employers mid . consequently, will lead to an increase in the numberof contracts and improved placement of persons with disabilities in the competitive

lab:' market.. The National Society bel ieves that adoption of the "work center"identity represeidsmult mire than a superficial substitution of terms. It represents

a t natty and significant opportunity in the development of vocational rehabilitation

facilities.

Support for Rehab i I it at ion Facia lties

Rehabilitation facilities are it critical component in the provision of services

to individuals with disabilities. Al though these facilities vary in size, range of

services and sophistication, they are all devoted to providing high quality, cost -

effective rehabilitation services. For many persons with disabilities, the localrehabiliation facility represents much more than a service provider. The facility

and its staff represent a vital source of assistance through which personal fulfill-

molt , independence and vocational goals can be achieved.

Ttre Rehabilitation Act has placed considerable emphasis on the utilization of

rehabilitation facilities. Under Title I, rehabilitation facilities provide thenouns for evaluating, treating and training persons with disabilities. In fact,

a significmit percentage of the funds expended by state vocational rehabilitation

agencies each year is spent on services to individuals in rehabilitation facilities.In 1979, rehabilitation facilities provided services to 185,000 or 20% of all state

vocational reha.bilitation clients. That year, the services provided by rehabilita-tion facilities to vocational rehabilitation clients represented 33.9% of the total

state agency budget.

.Although some rehabilitation facilities are operated by state and local gov-

ernments, the mijority are operated by voluntary agencies. Approximately 30% of the

vocational rehabilitation services financed visually by state agencies are delivered

in nonprofit rehabilitation facilities. In addition, these facilities are often

the site of a vast array of support services, including recreation, transportationand independent living.

583

Given the substantial role of nonprof I t rehabi I 1 1:0 Ion facilities In theprovision of vocational and related rehabi Rat lon services, the National Societybelieves that the federal government has it strong interest in the contained suc-cess of these facilities. In terms of the quantity and qua I ity of services pro-vided by nonprofit. nimbi] Ito t ion facilities, the federal stake is considerable.For this reason, the Nat lona! Society proposes that fxhtal svpixirt. for nonprofitrettabil itat ion facilities und,o the Rehabilitation Act lie proportionare to thelevel of services provided by these facilities under the Act..

Currently, there are a molter of provisions contained' in the Retiabi I i tat ionAct (funded and unfunded) which provide support for nonprofit rehabilitation foci I i-t les. These include progrwa; for fad I ty construct ion, loan guarantees and ledera IImprovement grants, rehabilitation t raining and rehabilitation research. ;fileNat lona] Soc lay be] I eves that federal financial assistance for foci I i ty construc-t ion and improvement is :t cost-effective means of assuring the future presence ofnonprofit facilities in the national rehabilitation effort. Similarly, the levelof investment in facility-oriented rehabilitation training and research has a'direct impact on the itersonnel and ttelitiology avnilable to rehabilitation facilties. F'urthertaie, provisions e :Sint under the Act to provide technical assistanceto nonprofit rehabilitation facilities. 'Illese provisions must be 'SI 11111.111'0d ill:order to restore the level of itssistance to nonprofit rehabi I i tat ion fari I It iesoriginally intended by Congress.

As written, the Rehabilitation Act provides ample evidence of a federal com-mitment to the construct ion and iter iodic. improvement of nonprofit rehabilitationfacilities. Under Title 111, Sect ions 301, 302 and 303 of the Act, provisions won.'established which avJuld mike funding available to build, equip and stafftat ion facilities, assist in the financing of facilities through federal loanguarantees, and assess and improve facility services and staff. Unfortunately,the provision rivarding loan guarantees has never limn funded and tilt' constructionand improvement grant programs have ni)t. received Dimling in recent years. it shouldbe noted, however, that when such arm's were available, these prigram, proved veryeffect ice.

The lack of federal finanical support at this time Is especially dunaging.Many rehabilitation facilities are in critical need of repair-and modernization.Built decades ago, tl,.se facilities need tut infusion of funds in order .to retaintheir effectiveness as competent providers of rehabilitation services. In addition,population shifts have created a strong demand for rehabilitation services in armyareas of the south and southwest. Many coomunities are ill-equipped to Meet theseneeds. Similarly, the emphasis on deinstitut ionalization has greatly increasedthe dcmind for outpatient rehabilitation services. The combined effect of thesetrends and the aging of exist ing rehabilitation facilities mikes the need forfederal Support clear.

The National Society urges Congress to recognize the need for a strong federalrole in the construction and improvement of nonprofit rehabilitation facilities.Despite an authority to spend as much as ten percent of their rehabilitation budget,on construction, states have not dennnstrated a willingness to acknowledge thisarea of need. Furthermore, present economic conditions mike it mulch wore difficultfor nonprofit facilities to raise independently the needed monies. Unless Congressrout f f nu; an interest in these programs, the share of rehabilitation services pro-Merl by nonprofit facilities could stn be jeopardized.

584

A similar challenge has developed in the fields of rehabilitation training

,----:indrehabilitation research. Under the Act, the Rehabilitation Training program

'\ was established to ensure that skilled rehabilitation professionals would be

available to meet the needs of persons with disabilities. Similarly, the National

_,InStitute of Handicapped Research was created in order to precote'research and

---- technological advancement in areas of importance to people with disabilities. Un-

fortunately, as these progrwas have evolved, the resources devotedto facility-

oriented fields diminished. This has occurred despite language within the Act

which specifically addresses the needs of nonprofit rehabilitation facilities.

As an advocate for individuals with disabilities and a major provider of re-

habilitation services, Easter Seals believes that facility-related training andresearch projects should be established in each efthese national programs. Again,

the large-scale involvement of nonprofit, facilities in the field of rehabilitation

dtmands that greater emphasis be placed on facility needs within training and

research. Easter Seal facilities are often forced to operate with reduced staff,

due to the shortage of trained rehabilitation personnel. The need for pre-service

and in-service training for nonprofit facility staff is glaring. Furthermore, the

National Society and many other nonprofit agencies support valuable research ac-

tivities .in the area of rehabilitation. However, a commitment is required at the

national level to see that the unique aspects of the facility environment are con-

sidered. The National Society urges Congress to restate the importance of facility-

oriented training and research activities under the Act. /The amount of resourcesdevoted to rehabilitation training and, to a lesser degree, research might well belinked to the level of rehabilitation services provided by facilities. This would

guarantee that facility-specific needs are given adequate attention and, as a result,

provide a reliable source of skilled personnel and the benefits of research.

Another important concern of rehabilitation facility administrator is the need

for technical assistance under the Rehabilitation Act. Nonprofit rehabilitation

facilities are continually searching for new ideas and alternative's t66 enhance the

quality and delivery of services. In the past, federal technical assistance proved .

invaluable to nonprofit facilities. Under the Act, RSA coordinated the matching

of consultants to the needs of specific rehabilitation facilities. These expert

consultants provided technical assistance on a wide range of topics, includingaccounting, contract procurement, safety, work evaluation, engineering and program.services. In addition to the benefits realized by facilities in implementing theconsultantS. recommendations, the use of "internal" experts provided a substantialcost-savings with respect to purchasing censultatiOn services. At an estimated

average cost of $500 per' consultation, this federally-sponsored assistance cost

considerably less than comparable assistance purchased in themarketplace.

Unfotunately,'the provision which enabled this technical assistance for non-profit rehabilitation facilities mus'greatly weakened as a result of the 1978

amendments. In 1973, technical assistance. was extended to nonprofit organizationsother than rehabilitation facilities, but only for advice on the elimination of

architectural and transportation barriers. In:an effort to expand-this provision,

the authority regarding technical assistance was revised to make rehabilitationfacilities and other nonprofit agencies eligible for full federal technical assis-

tance. However, this change led to a condensation of the language in the Act. As

a result, the Office ofGeneral Counsel interpreted the new wording to mean that

technical assistance was available only for barrier removal both for facilities .

and other nonprofit agencies. Authority for the provision was moved from Title

III, Section 304(e)(1) to Title V, Section 506, of the Act. Following this change,

585

technical assistance to rehabilitation facilities continued throw)) 1081 underSection 12 of the Act. No general assistance or assislatnx, regarding barrierremoval has been provided to rehabilitation or other nonprofit agencies underSection 506 since the authority was revised.

The National Society IxAieves that federal technical assist:two Is criticalto the successful operation of nonprofit rehabilitation facilities. Consequently,the National Skx:dety proposes that the authority for technical ass istande IA non-profit rehabilitation facilities and other organizations lae restored to Title IIIof the Act, Thls can betteccmplishod by revairding Section 501(1) of Title V toread: 'The Secretary shall provide by contract with experts or consultants orgroups ther(x,f, technical assistance --

A) to rehabilitation facilities; and

6) to any public or nonptiofit agency, institution,organization, or facility."

The language In Sections 506(2) and (4) need not he changed. The revised provision,comprisecl of Sections (1), (2) and (4), should lxt moved to Part A under Title III.

The National Easter Seal Society believes that this amendment will effectivelyrestore the authority for facility-directed technical assistance. In addition tothe direct benefits, such as better fiscal miumgement and Improved marketing andprogram services, the consultations introduce a diverSe group of technical special-ists to the rehabilitation environment. It is our belief%that the revitalizationof federal technical assistance to nonprofit rehabilitation facilities is,a necessaryand cost-efficient means of helping such facilities effeCtively meet the needs ofpersons with disabilities.

At the same time, the intent of the 1078 amendments should not be lost. Al-

though assistance regarding.the rtmoval of architectural, transportation and ccm-mitutications barriers has never materialized under Section 506, a definite need forsuch targeted assistance exists. Nonprofit rehabilitation facilities and otheragencies have demonstrated an eagerness to ranove barriers confronting personswith disabilities. Bouvier, the funding allocated to the Architectural and Trans-portation Barriers Compliance Board to provide technical assistance in this areaseverely limits the amount of assistance available. The National Society urgesCongress to adopt report language during reauthorization which strengthens theBoard's role in providing technical assistance to nonprofit rehabilitationlacili-ties. Such language should also instruct the Board to cooperate with facilityrepresentatives and Rehabilitation Services Administration personnel to identify

the specific needs of facilities relative to the removal of harriers. Moreover,.

report language, should expand these efforts to include facility-oriented barrierresearch and technological development.

Lastly, the formula of reimbursement for services provided to vocationalrehabilitation clients by nonprofit rehabilitation agencies is a point of contention.The National Society uould like to go on record in opposition to the use of chari-table contributions as an offset to reimbursement for services provided by rehabili-tation facilities. As noted earlier, the state vocational rehabilitation agenciesrely heavily on nonprofit facilities to provide a broad range of rehabilitationservices. What wasn't noted, however, was the degree of control exercised by stateagencies over such facilities through determination of reimbursement amounts.Reimbursement is generally made through the payment of fees which are negotiatedwith nonprofit facilities. The fees ordinarily reflect salaries, depreciation of

592

21-874 0-837-38

586

the building and ixatipment, supplies, utllitles and other operating expenses.Unfortunately, certain state agencies have, in the past, elected to consider theunrestricted charitable donations of a facility as an off!,ot to reduce the re-

habursiment amount. This practice acts,as a disincentive to fuck/files to raisefunds within their communities. Such dentitions are extremlly important to rainyfacilities ;usl contribute significantly to the scope and quality of the services

they provide. 'Nkmx)ver, contributed income often mapensates the facility forrehabilitation services that are not reinburseable or are provided to personsunable to pay! for them. At a time when the Administration is advocating themaxinarn use of private sector resources, the offset of charitable contributionsby state agencies is conspicuously inconsistent.

The National Society urges Congress to wend the Act to prohibit the offSetof charitable contributions in the formula used to determine reimbursement forrehabilitation facility services. These facilities are entitled to adequatepaynYnit for the rehabilitation services they provide. We believe that guidelinesto this effect, at the federal level, will ensure that rehabilitation facilitiesacross the nation receive reimbursement ccmensurate with costs.

The Federal Role

As an advocate for people with disabilities, the National Society is veryconcerned about the role of the federal government relative to programs underthe Rehabilitation Act. Traditionally, federal involvement in service programsrs by states has been meant to ensure that the intent of Congress ismet, that the piogram is administered uniformly across states, and that innovativeprojects are funded in order to demonstrate new methods, services and technologies.The National Society believes that this active federal role is advantageous andappropriate for the effective provision of quality rehabilitation services.

Recently, however, there has boon a noticeable decline in the level offederal participation in Rehabilitation Act programs. For this reason, theNational Society proposes that Congress use the reauthorization process to re-view the federal role regarding program under the Act. Our statement focuseson several issued relevant to federal involvement; including the collection andanalysis of program data and the use of resulting statistics to evaluate programeffectiveness.

For the past sixty-three years, state and federal agencies, rehabilitationfacilities and others have cooperated in the provision of vocational and relatedrehabilitation services. Under Title I, the vocational rehabilitation programhas clearly demonstrated the success of the state- federal partnership in pro-viding needed services to persons with disabilities. In an effort to maintainan ongoing aggessnent of the success and substance of these services, theRehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) collects a wide range of program in-formation. This information is analyzed and delivered to Congress on an annualbasis. The Congress uses this information in its oversight activities. In addition,

RSA disseminates the results of these assessments to all state vocational rehabili-tation agencies. State administrators rely _on the statistics prepared by RSA tocompare individual program performance to that of other states. Through comparison,

state agencies can identify programs in need of improvement and take steps:to bringthem in line with similar programs in other states. Furthermore, RSA uses thesestatistics to regulate the delivery of vocational rehabilitation services andadminister efficiently this substantial human service program.

587

The Nal Waal Sc.! iel y lad 'eves ilnit current laid ma:unite statistics are fun-i halm t I to every facet or proginun adman 1st :it L ion . Rel iab1e sin L 1st 1 es con t ilbute

nmeh Lo the skillful administration and delivery of vocational rehabilitationservices. Unfortunately, the collection and analysis of-program data has btkni signnlf icantly rednoml in recent. years. In the interest of lessening the burden ofrechulll paixlvork riquirinanits, RSA has been instructed to limit its data proces-sing activities. Much of the data that was previously collected and analy! Awith respect. to the WIT d'11VI!rttil under Title I, Is no longer being gathered

by )18,

The National Society recognizes the Intent of the regulatory reform efforts,hul uo belitve that accurate progriun statistics are invaluable to the effectiveadministration of the vocational rehabilitation program. IL is our understandingthat the familiar reporting form R-300 has been replaced by a shorter form, the911. Under the 911, data regarding the client's family IWK1 Lhe amount of publicmniles received at application to the program and at closure will no longer berequired. This represents a loss of 'infoliatt ion that has traditionally provideda better itadersLanding of the client's' background and a measure of the program'simpact wiLh respect to the client's reliance on public assistance. In addition,state agencies haVe Ixcn given the option of reix]rting 911 data on a sample 'basis.Fortunately, few states are expected to exercise this option, as essentially allof the Information required by the 911 is collected by states for their own use.Although considerably abridged, the National Society- believes that the 911 formis an effective data collection instrument. However, we also believe that it rep-resents the absolute minimum amount of information that should be collected in theevaluation of the vocational rehabilitation program.

National Society certainly supports efforts directed at reducing theburden of papwork required by the federal government. However, the limitationon RSA to collect ffi..eded program information does not seem to be. in the best in-terest of Lhe program. Tile statistics formerly collected by RSA are, for thenest part,. still collected by stale vocational rehabilitation agencies. Thesestatistics are basic to the administration of the vocational rehabilitationprogram at the state level. It would follow that they are of equal importanceat the federal level.

In addition, the revision of reporting forms to lessen paperwork requirementshas, in some cases, meant that simple procedures to insure accuracy have been elim-

For example, RSA has been directed by the Office of Management and Budget.(OMB) to refraih from collecting certain derivative data. What this means is that,on some forms, States are not required to provide totals for columns of figuresreported to RSA. Asa result, RSA staf f 'are often required to seek verificationfor much of the data, so as to avoid the use of figures which may have been in-correctly recorded on the form. Consequently, a quick and simple calculationat the state level has been traded for the expense of follow-up calls and thegreater risk Lhat inaccurate program information will go undetected.

Under the Act, the Secretary is directed to report annually to Congress onthe effectiveness of the vocational rehabilitation program. It would be extreme-.ly unfortunate if the efforts aimed at deregulation were to erode the data base,available to Congress for meaningful oversight. The-National Society urges Congressto consider carefully the information currently available regarding the programsunder Title I of the Rehabilitation Act. A detailed review of the data collectedand analyzed relative to the provision of vocational rehabilitation services should

594

588

be conducted, KO that 'the statistics needed by Comress are readily available.In addition, the National Society urges Congress to Include in its review an eval-uation of the'role of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in the operation

of Title I program. During the past few years, OMB has actively pursued the de-regulation of these programs. In particular, OMB has targeted tho infommitioncolloctedbv BSA from state agencies in its efforts to reduce burdensone papermurk.The National Society lauds these activities In that they elbninate tho reportingrtqUirements no longer of benefit to the rehabilitation process. However, it isour belief that the extent of the burden can best be detennined by the statevocational ichabilitation agencies themselves, Once program participants haveidentified data reporting elemmts that are no longer of value, It mould seemappnopriate to involve) OMB In the OrOCOHH of revising forms and data' collectionprocedures.

'Rabe National Society proposes that the Act be amended to include a provisionwhich directs that the RSA-SSA Data Link be maintained. The RSA-SSA Data Linkis a uieful tool for the assessment of the inquiet of vocational rehabilitation onthe li es of persons with disabilities, In November, 1982, RSA released a report

stuantiq ,hag the Data Link study results. The report, entitled ''the bang TermImpact f Vocational Rehabilitation, By Severity of Disability", revealed that!

1) The post-closure earnings and employment experience of disabledpersons rehabilitated in the State-Federal program of vocational rehab-ilitation was found to be superior to that of persons who could not berehabtlitated. The study appliesto the period ranging from the yearbefore referral, 1973 on the average, to the third year after caseclosure, 1977.

2) The failure to be rehabilitated had a nmchharsherenconomicimpact on severely disabled persons than on those who were not severe-ly disabled in terms of employment and earnings in the three years

alter case closure,

The smne'report provided the earnings per dollar of expenditure and an earningssumntry record for severely disabled and non-severely disabled individuals.

The information obtained .11e.11 this cooperative effort between RSA ancintheSocial Security Administration provides a valuable measure of the impact of rehabi-litation on the employment and earnings of persons with disabilities. Unfortunately,

no Data Link data beyond calendar year 1977 are available.; The National Societybelieves that the RSA-SSA Data Link should be established on a long-term basis, sothat similar reports can be periodically. produced'. We propose that the Rehabili-tation Act be amended to require that, at a anbann,anrissesment of the employmentand earnings. status of the 1975 cohort be tcmpleted every three years. Moreover,

it is our belief that new groupS should be established every five years and moni-tored at three year intervals thereafter. The infornation supplied by this inter-agency study represents'One Of the few sources of post-closure feedback on theimpact of vocational rehabilitation. The National Society urges Congress to amend'the Act to require that the RSA-SSA.Data Link be continued and that the funds andpersonnel needed for this unique and valuable study be provided under tho ACt.

The justification for the collection and data analySis activities under TitleI is equally applicable to all other Rehabilitation At programs. Each year, mil-lions of dollars are dispersed under. the Act for the provision of rehabilitationand related services to persons with disabilities. In order to insure that thedecisions regarding those programs are made in an informed manner, the ongoing

59u

589

(4)1100.1141 and dodly!;1,, nl progiquu loioregitIoo IN Olvded.

bollov(N that accurate! 1111(1 up-to-chute statist hs at the nomo level am) hprorAlutslte to effective prigran administild hal. POI' this mItron, Congrss 1Hurged to develop report lintgunge which emphasizes the value of evaluation to thesuccess of the relmbilitatiott movonent. Under Section 14 of the Act, Ust!SOC141taVy18 directed to evaluate all Rehabil Indio) Act programs. The National L,41(!ty sup-ports the conpm4amsive evaluatkut efforts auttutriluml under Section Fl. Ne en-courage Congress to include reisn't huguago which st ligthens the nonpoliticalrole of theme evaluation efforts.

Lastly, within the context or the federal ode, the National Society mildlike to call attention to a concern that has biAm raised relative to the'of rehabilitation agencies within state govertwonts. During the pint year, EasterSeal staff has intervIcla1 it wide range of rehabilitation probssionalS. One ofthe concerns expressed by iviadallitation counselors and others in the vocationalrehabilitation systam uas the potential for the erosion of program effeCtiveness(ha) to it loss or direct control over program 11_,110111TOS. It was retorted thatstate agercles lo6nUNI in large 'Unbrollau departments of the state bureaucracywere often more sulkh.,ct to extol-ma fiscal and otx)rational constraints. The remwas expreed that agencies ca, situated were t.xxnetimes required to allocate fundsfor overhead costs and other Indirect, expenses not necessarily related to the pro-vision of vocational rehabilifationserviccs. Similar constraints were also saidto affect the im

ul

agrnent of personnel within the state

11!

, Nationa, Society is not in a position to thoroughly evaluate these con-rev,. . ilowever,I It semis in the best interest of the program that asinuch res-ponsibility as tkissible remain with the state vocational rehabilitation agency,:vgardiag the allocation of financial and personnel resources. Under the Act,states are provided with detailed instructions as to the organizational respon-sibility, level:and status of vocational rehabilitation agencies. Moreover, theintent of this Atatutory lantnatge has been tested and validated on severalioecasions,as In the U. S.. District Court of the Northern District of Florida ruling. TheNational Society believes that state vocational rehabilitation agencies shouldhave organizational unit status within the hierarchy of state goverment and urgesCongress to evaluate this issue during reauthorizatidn.

'

..

Recreation SerPices,

/

,

Cme of tle'more important aspects of federal. involvement in programs underthe Rehabilitation Act is tha.support.provided for innovative projects and.ser-vices that might not otherwise be established. This function is particularlytrue of the federal role relative to the provision of recreation services to in-dividuals with disabilities. Ea4ter Seals has taken an active interest in thedevelopment of recreation programs to serve children and adults with disabilities.

,In,fact, during 1982, Easter Seal societies provided recreational, services to over40,000 individuals in a variety of settings, including resident camps, day campsand structured recreation'prograMs. Our direct experience with the provision ofrecreation services has served to reinforce our commitment to this important,,butoften overlooked aspect of the. rehabilitation process. ','

-Under Title III, Section 316 of.the Act, grants are made to states and otherpublic and nonprofit agencies to pay part or all of the cost of establishing rec-reation programs to aid in the arability and socialization of persons with disabilities. The role of recreation in rehabilitation is an important one. Recreation

.1.J9 0

590

and rehahi I lint len professionals me 'Wain Ihat there IN II tilOrlIp011t hr VillOO toparticiplit Ion II recreation programs and that recreat tonal tut ivities are tillesnentbll element or a hithuicoet It restyle, Program" estabi tithed under Sect Ion3113 encoinpass It broad range of ndl.ivItIts, including 'spirts, music, dative, artsand crafts curd camping, Provisions 11111110' the Act specify that existing resourcesIll' used Wilmeyer pr,rslble, thereby discourwing the developmfit of new racil it losand encoUrag the integral Ion or liorsono.with disaid 1 it les into established com-munity recreat ion prograari.

'rho Nat ional Sec to develop report. language whi'c'h Identi-fies the provision or ivelvitrion sorvicoN 11 Il priority under the Act. In orderto bring about the balance ()I' services under the Act. as intended, it lit necessaryto emphasize the lid I comp! talent of rehabil I tat ion servic(ys, Including recreation.The National Society bellevoH that 010 recreation programs established under Sec-t. ion 31(1 represent the quickest. and mist cost - efficient way to mike recreationalopportunit.ies available to persons with disabi 1 tiles.

New Federal 1 111

'Fhe Nat tonal Easter Seal Society multi I Ike to go on record as opposed to thoAdm.in Istria ion's proposal to turn the vocational rehabilitation program back tothe states. This proposal. 'Amid include the vocational rehabilitation programliming the thirty-four progriuns slated to be "turned back" to tho states duringthe period of 198.1 through 11)85, It Is our belief that this action is not in theIP,st interest of the vocational rehabilitation program or the people it is meantto serve.

The intent of the turnback proposal is to give states greater flexibility inthe mtrainist rat ion of the vocational rehabilitation program. Eyperience has shown,however, that this Hlat e- recto ra 1 partnership has traditionally allowd states agroat deal of discretion In providing rehabilitation services. The National Societybel hives that there is a definite need to unintain a strong federal presence in thovocat tonal rehabilitation program, At a minimum, the federal governmorit is respon-sible for Overseeing the use of the mill ions of dollars it invests each year in theprogram. More importantly, the federal role is intrinsic to effective' program ad-ministration and the assurance that qual ity vocational rehabilitation services areavailable to persons with disabilities. For these reasons, the National Societyurges Congress to resist any efforts to further..transfer the responsibility for thevocational rehabi I itat ion progruun to the state level.

The National Easter Seal Society appreciates this opportunity. to cement onprogram; under the Rohabi 1 tuition Act during reauthorization. We hope that theSubconmittee will find our recommendations useful.

RLR:cg

Sincerely,

59 7

ph D. Romerirector of Governmental Affairs

AocosairRandall L. Rutt aLegislative Analyst

591

AMERICAN FOUNPATION fall THE IMO, INC,

IN O L BMW, NWW.VIINDION, DO TOWS

101 407 WO

STATEMENT OF IRVIN P. SCHLOSS, DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS,AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR THE BLIND, TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDI-CAPPED, COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES, UNITED STATES SENATE,ON PROPOSALS TO EXTEND AND IMPROVE THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 197)

March 30, 1907

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased to

have this opportunity to present the views of the American Foundati:1

for the Blind, the national voluntary research and consultant agency

in the field of services to blind persons of all ages, on proposals.

to extend and improve the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

The American Foundation for the Blind endorses enactment of the

following recommendations designed to strengthen the Rehabilitation

Act of 1973:

1. Permanent extension of the program of basic state

grants and extension of all other programs under the

Act through September 30, 1986, with increases in the

authorizations of appropriations.

2. Modification of the program of Independent Living Services

for Older Blind Individuals under Section 721 of the Act,

692

so that it will have Ltd 0Wh authorizations of appropri-

ations,

3. Establishment of an independent client advocacy pro.

iuCt in each state with separate authorizntione of

appropriation' and advocacy responsilitlity for n11

Federally financed activities useful to handicapped

persons.

4, Establishment of the Helen Keller National Center for

Death-Blind Youths and Adults as a special institution.

5. Accreditation of local voluntary agencies serving handi-

capped parsons as a prerequisite for grants or contracts

by state rehabilitation agencies.

Extension of the Rehabilitation Act of 1971

The American Foundation for the Blind recommends extending

the authorizations ofappropriations for basic state grants on a

permanent basin and extension.of other programs under the Act through

September 30, 1986, For implementation of the basic vocational

rehabilitation program under Section 110 of the Act, we'recommend

authorizations of appropriations of 51.040 billion for FY 1984,

$1.145 billion for FY 1985, 51.255 billion for FY 1986, 51.380 billion

for FY 1987, and increases in subsequent fiscal years based on

increases in the Consumer Price Index. As a result of high inflation

rates and virtually level funding for basic grants in recent years,

fewer handicapped persons have been rehabilitated for gainful em-

ployment, thereby. increasing their dependence on the Supplemental

Security Income (SSI) program under title XVI of the Social Security

59

598

Aut. by increasing aelhorisatiehe for basic state grants and by

aubeoquent indexing in accordance with increneem in the Uoneumer

Price Wax, reduction in eaaential rohabilltation sorvicea to

handlOapped individuals would bo prevontod.

Rehabilitation Services for Oldor Mind Pore=

Ono of the major gaps in eurvicee to blind persona in the United

Seaton continuos to bo lack of provision of adequato rehabilitation

services for middle -agod and older blind persons. According to the

National Society for the Prevention of Eilindnons, throe-fourths of

the legally blind population is 40 yoars of age and older; and throo-

fourths of all now blindness occurs in the soma age group. Thu

National Center for Health Statistics of the U.S. Public Health Ser-

vice reports that 1,185,000 of the estimated 1.4 million people in

this country with Hover° visual impairment are 45 and older.

Rehabilitation programs tend to concentrate on blind and visually

impaired individuals of optimum employable ago and serve very few

middle-aged and older blind persona. Yet with appropriate training

in mobility and other techniques of doing things without sight, middle-

aged and older individuals can frequently be assisted to retain their

jobs--jobs in which they have had many years of experience. Others

may require vocational retraining as well and can take advantage

of old skills and extensive work experience to train for a new job,

given the proper vocational rehabilitation assistance. The important

thing is that age should not be regarded as a barrier to vocational

rehabilitation of blind and visually handicapped persons.

600

594

Prior to tho 1411,0011W1044 04 tho Aot, 4 umall program of

004"ig1 Proloets In the rehabilitation of older blind persons

W4t1 Implemented in 4 few states.

A nehabilitation Pervices Administration r.'pnrt on one of those

projects statue "...Two of the more important but frightening find.

inqn of this project arm II) oVerwhalming noad for the special men.

%flame provided under this type program demonstrated by the number of

referrals mode to thn project during its initial three year period,

and which continues to bo demonstrated during the fourth year; and

(2) prior to the start of the project, no p4blic or private agency

existed that prOvided the manpower or funds to doliVet these special

services nor to oven identify and locate this spacial target popu-

lation..."

For the projects in operation during fiscal year 1977, some 1,850

individuals wore referred for services, 1,650 received services; and

400 were cloned from the projects as rehabilitated.

The 1978 amendments added Independent Living services for Older

Blind Individuals as Part C of Title VII of the Act, with the author-

izations of appropriations limited to 10 percent of the funds appro-

priatod for Part A of that title. Since Part A, which provides

for grants to the states for comprehensive independent living services,

has not been funded through the appropriations process, the program

of services for older blind persons has not received any funding. In

view of the success of the special projects for older blind persons

in effect prior to the 1978 amendments in providing both independent

living and vocational rehabilitation services, we strongly urge a

separate authorization of appropriations to implement Part C of

Title VII.

595

a,tvecaol5

At protoint, oliont 44444tAnco proleCt4 Under OuP ion 111 of the

Act 4ro in offect in 10 status et 4n ostimeitod cost of 11.7 million

ter tiooal year 1941. We holiove that this program should ho ox.

pandod the next throo years to eovor 411 sietos and Uit. tho

Program should hays A spocitio enthorioetion or oppropeiat10114.

A4 4 result or the i0Puoi of doction 514 And the provisiOn4

prohibiting discrimination Against heindicappod person. in the Otrito

And Local Fiscal Ausietanco Amendments of 1976, there is 4 groat mod

for technical assistance on matters affoeting the civil right* of

the disablod. Thu expanded client assistance program we recommend

could PLAY An important role in integrating the handicapped into

socioty. This mho should not he limited to advocacy of client rights,

ender programs Authorized by the Rehabilitation Act of 1977. It

lhould 4140 ,nvor redoral ausiutinco programs which may ,,arorially

hiroiolm.4 individuals, such 44 higher education, ia,ciel service*,

health war, n4 income maintonanco.

To reflect the expanded role or the client assista. orolects,

we recommend that they tea renamed "client advocacy pro with

specific authorizations of appropriations of $3.5 , 'n

fiscal year 1954, $4 million for thu fiscal year 1985, and $5

million for fiscal year 1956. This will allow for orderly expansion

in a program which is demonstrating that It is of substantial help to

handicapped persons and their families. This expanded progran

should be administered through the state vocational rehabilitation

agencies with assurances of maximum independence for the client

advocates.

596

Helen Keller National Center

The Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and

Adults and its affiliated network provide services to individuals

with one of the most severe forms of disability. These services

are designed to help deaf-blind persons become "self-sufficient,

independent and employable."

The authorization for the services of the Center to deaf-blind

persons, as well as training of highly specialized personnel and

research and demonstration project, is currently provided under

Section 313 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The American

Foundation for the Blind believes that adequate funding for the

increasing number of deaf-blind persons now reaching adulthood as

well as older blind persons who also lose hearing would best be

accomplished by authorizing the Secretary of Education to include

the Helen Keller National Center as a special institution in the

annual budget of the Department of Education. Therefore, we recommend

repeal of Section 313 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and enactment

in its place of the provisions of the attached bill.

Accreditation of Local Voluntary Agencies

The American Foundation for the Blind firmly believes that the

key to effective rehabilitation services for handicapped persons

is assurance of high standards through an accreditation mechanism.

Therefore, we urge amendments to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to

require state vocational rehabilitation agencies and state agencies

serving blind persons to contract for rehabilitation services to

clients with local voluntary acmicies and rehabilitation facilities

603

597

accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the Department

of Education. For example, the National Accreditation Council for

Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped (NAC) is recognized

by the Eligibility and Agency Evaluation Section of the Department

of Education as a standard-setting and accrediting body for the field

of special schools for the blind and visually handicapped. NAC has

also developed standards and accredited various agencies serving

blind persons, including those which operate rehabilitation facilities.

We recommend that the role of the Eligibility and Agency Evaluation

Section be expanded to include recognition of accrediting bodies for

rehabilitation services.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, the American Foundation. for the

,Blind endorses permanent extension of the program of basic state

grants under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as well as extension

of the other prpgrams under the Act through September 30,.1986. In

addition, we urge that the target program of Independent Living

for Older Blind Individuals under Part C of Title VII c,f the Act'

be given Its own authorization of appropriations., We also urge creation

of an extensive and meaningful client advocacy program; accreditation

of voluntary agencies with which state agencies contract for services

to handicapped persons; and establishment of the Helen Keller National

Center for Deaf-Blind Youth and Adults as a special institution in

the Department of Education.

We believe that our recommendations will greatly improve services

to handicapped persons under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and urge

your favorable consideration.

604

598

SPECIALIZED TRAINING PROGRAMCenter on Human DevelopmentUniversity of Oregon1590 Willamette StreetEugene, Oregon 97401(503) 686-5311

April 20, 1983

Honorable Lowell Weicker, Jr., ChairmanSubcommittee on the"HandicappedUnited States SenateWashington, D. C. 20510

Dear Senator Weicker:

This letter provides responses to the questions posed in your letter ofApril 4, 1983, concerning my testimony in hearings on the reauthorizationof the Education of the Handicapped Act. I welcome the opportunity to

elaborate on the testimony.

(1) THE TRANSITION FROM SCHOOL TO THE WORLD OF WORK, POST SECONDARYEDUCATION, AND THE COMMUNITY IS A WELL-KNOWN PROBLEM FOR HANDICAPPED

YOUTH. IN YOUR OPINION, WHAT ARE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL RESPONSES TO

THIS PROBLEM?,

The problems faced by handicapped youth during the later years of school

and initial adult years represent nationwide difficulties. While the

pressures and responsibilities of transition fall first upon'the family,

local schools, and state governments, strong federal leadership could avoidcostly duplication of program development efforts, painful failures assolutions are sought, and serious inequities in service availability.

As I outlined in the written testimony, the needed federal involvement isfor a range of activities that will result in improved local services:applied research to develop effective educational procedures;demonstrations that local services can be designed that solve transitionproblems; systematic and widespread dissemination of program approachesthat do work; and follow-up evaluations of special education graduates toprovide guidance in the development of needed adult services.

A particular area of need is for research, training, and demonstration in

the transition problems faced by students with more severe disabilities.

The first generation of these students who entered public schools after PL

94-142 are now reaching adolescence. For them, transition from school to

599

work and adult life will require new curricula and procedures in the\ school, more extensive transition supports, and currently unavailable adult\ services that provide for participation in both work and community life\while giving ongoing support. Clearly, the need crosses ti'aditional\federal boundaries between Special Education, Vocational Rehabilitation andDevelopmental Disabilities. This is, however, an issue that requirescoordinated attention if a useable guide is to be provided for localschools and adult services.

(2) ',HOW SERIOUS ARE THE CONSEQUENCE, BOTH FOR SOCIETY IN GENERAL, ANDDISABLED PERSONS IN PARTICULAR IF WE DO NOT MEET THE SECONDARY ANDPOST-SECONDARY EDUCATIONAL NEEDS OF OUR NATION'S HANDICAPPED YOUTH?

Our greatest risk is that, in leaving the task' of special education undone,we may lose both the societal and individual benefits of investment ineducation of younger handicapped children. The implied promise of Americanpublic eduction has always been employment and an improved lifestyle inadulthood. 'failure to invest in secondary and post-secondary educationwill rob the handicapped youth of this future,.with enormous personal andsocietal loss.\

An equally disi4ying result of lack of federal leadership is that neededservice innovatiOns will not occur, with the results that (1) individualswith more severe disabilities will continue to be excluded from jobpreparation in vocational education and vocational rehabilitation; and (2)that existing nodels \which have achieved only lted success with disabledpersons will be perpetuated.

(3) WHICH POPULATIONS DF HANDICAPPED YOUTH, OTHER THAN THOSE CURRENTLYBEING SERVED, :OUL0,BENEFIT FROM POST-SECONDARY PROGRAMS?,

For a great many people in our society, post-secondary programs provide abridge into the work force that enhances both employability and jobmobility. I believe handicapped individuals with all disability labelscould benefit from post-secondary opportunities. For example, appropriatepost-secondary services could make the difference between life long care inday activity programs and suppor\ted work for many severely and multiplyimpaired persons; between competitive employment and life long service insheltered workshops for many considered moderately disabled; and betweenentry level and more technical occupations for a number of people with lesssignificant disabilities.

(4) WHAT TYPES OF POST-SECONDARY PROGRAMS?

I believe that the greatest benefit wili\be gained by targeting federalresources on those post-secondary programs that emphasize job skill

\\ 608

600

development and provide assistance indeveloping social behaviors needed in

employment. Programs that offer specialized courses for individuals with

disabilities are needed, as well as those that offer support needed by

disabled persons to attend regular vocational training programs.

Vocational-technical schools; community colleges, and some colleges and

universities provide an important context for development of such programs.

Please let me know if i can supply further information or elaborations on

the testimony. Thank you again for the opportunity to present my views.

Sincerely,

7/...4

G. Thomas.Bellamy, Ph.D.birector

-GTB:mz

60;

1704 1111, Street, N.W.NON NIWeshIngtoor D.C. IWO%

MUCUS ANU 7414111110B OARD 01 0111100115

Pima Pim

Inn 1051hrit lire Pr emfrol

lirrheir NMI)irronit 51ir

Pn P0o.11,41

Srt I Pine

lotrph C 1.15,1Tte.utre

I. M. R.111!

BM Boll;

A Chappell, Ir

Ann. I.,

Eunice /wino

Can Irvin

Joyce Wilson

Duroyrd Mc Dynlel

Dom/ W. Mews

T.1 O'Rourke

(7071 71117103

715.4141111V)

601

AmericanCoalition ofCitizens withDisabilitieslane Rozeghi, Acting

Executive DirectorTESTIMONY

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, my name is Jane

Rozeghi and I. represent the American Coalition of Citizens with

Disabilities.

The ACCD was formed In 1975 by disabled persons to work for dis-

abled persons. Currently, the ACM includes 126 member organizations

from across the United States which to turn represent malions d disabled

persons. As,such the ACCD is the largest membership organization of

and for disabled citizens In the United States today.

The ACCD is here today to testify on the reauthorization of the

Rehabilitation Act and in no doing would like to direct our comments

in two distinct areas . . the Act as it is presently constructed

and what that can'ur should mean for millions of disabled Americans,

and . . the direction that rehabilitation and other vital programs

should take for the 1980's and beyond.

During the course of these oversight hearings you have heard

testimony from a variety of sources on the importance and value of

the present array of Rehabilitation programs. We agree, these programs

are indeed vital and necessary to the lives of hundreds of thousands.

of disabled individuals. Specifically; we want to voice our strong

support in particular for the Independent Living Program, the Client

Assistance Program and Projects with Industry which we believe are,

or could be, successful programs which would form the core for a new

Rehabilitation Act.

21-974 0--83----39

608

602

The dual objective's of rehahllitation are to maximize a persons

independence in activities of daily living and his or her opportunity

for productivity. While the basic State - Federal program is successful

with regard to rehabilitating Individuals, It must be viewed and in-

herently judged in a comparative spectrum; Rehabilitations in and of

themselves have become all too often valuable only in the abstract.

The problems which face disabled Americans are infinitely more com-

prehensive and complex. They include problems of and for employment,

education, housing, transportation, disencentives to work and training

built .into medical and income transfer programs, and the as yet unsolved

issues surrounding discrimination against disabled individuals.

The Independent Living programs under the present Act's Title VII

is illustrative'of how an innovative program can make traditional re-

habilitation goals obtainable: By dealing with an individual's total

set of needs, their vocational potential and ability to live independently,

'an environment is created which is hospitable to the individual solving

of individual problems.

Likewise the Client Assistance program is or could be an important

ingredient in the comprehensive restoration of a person to the mainstream

of society. The problem with these programs, however, is that all too

often the integrity of the programs have been compromised by the State

agency.' You have heard testimony to this effect. We believe these pro-

grams can work and are needed more than ever. We recommend that they

are accorded the same status as Protection and Advocacy Programs on the

State level which will assure them of an ability to pur'sue their mission

and objectives in an independent fashion.

60j

603

Nothing In our opinion has been more potentially successful,

creative or exciting than the Projects with Industry program, In

this milieu individuals are trained in a "State of the Art" environ-

ment in,industries with solid potentials for employing them, This

program has realistically addressed the problem of training individuals

on obsolete equipment, using obsolete techniques for jobs that won't i

or don't exist. It is truly a successful example of a "public/private

partnership" and one must wonder why this Administration with it's

objectives etched so painfully clear regarding the sharing of publi

responsibilities does not increase this portion of the rehab budge

and thus put "meat" behind it's message.

With regard to the Council on the Handicapped and NIHR, ACCD/

supports the'continuation of these institutions but would fervoretittly

wish that the National Council would drop all Its priorities to con-

:

centrate on the shap'ng of a comprehensive policy on disabled Amdricans.

Nothing in our estimation could be more valuable or give rise quicker

to a long needed National debate on what America wants to do with and

for its disabled citizenry.

NIHRin our opinion needs to focus on issues involving the in-

. tegration of disabled persons into our society. In this capacity it

needs to assume a lead role with other R and D programs in areas like

housing and transportation. Only in this way do we feel that the re-

search dollars which are now scarce can be put to maximally effective

I

use. In addition, this kind of coordination will assist in the formul-

ation of the National policy we spoke of previously.

610

604

Before c Los lug our comment!' we won Id 1 ike to 1;( on record with

one last recommondat ion. Ult imate ly we be I. Levu that No01)11411 poi Icy

must bc, transmitted through One has Lc entity which either has grant

or cunt ract authority for a variety of programs or has lead agency

responsLbLllty for the coordination of other programs. This entity

which we would call The Adniin int ra t Lon on Handicapped Ind Lviduain

would comprehensively address the diverse issues and needs of dis-

abled Americans. Something that today is simply not being done.

In closing, the American Coalition of Citizens with

Disabilities would like to bring to your attention the

matters of Title V, Sections 501, 502, 503, and 504.

Though we are particularly interested in the retention of

these sections in future legislation,.we believe that the

Congress should examine their current implementation with

a view to strengthening their enforcement. But recently

we have learned of the position of the Administration in

which it stated that it would.not issue revised regulations

for Section 504. We applaud the Administration for its

decision. On the surface this decision can be considered a

victory for the efforts of the disabled constituency in the

atea of civil rights. However, other indications lead us

to believe that Section 504 is being watered down byre) limited

enforcement, b) reorganizing technical assistance to the

affected class, c) severely reduced, if not eliminated com-

pliance reviews, and d) an unwritten policy to delay the

61,1

605

procenuing of complaintn.

ACC!) alwayn ntandn roady to work with the Congronn in

itn effortn to enable the dinabled people of thin Nation

to become full participating citizenn with equal opportunity

to live in freedom and dignity. We thank you for accepting

our tentimony.

V1404(1:4;1Jano Rozcghi

612

006

TESTIMONY HY THE NAVAJO TkIhE FORAMERICAN INDIAN NEHAItILITATION SEPVICER

Until the recent pant, services to rehabilitate disabled peoplewere administered totally by the stator and the Federal Government

with little or no regard for the npeclal :weds of handicapped

Native Americans. The experiences of disabled American Indians

with those services have demonstrated the inadequacy of staterehabilitation nerVicen to meet their needs. Disabled Navajoclients have been closed out for "failure to. cooperate", "no

contacts" or "unsuccessful" for when they had not renpondud to

written communication because they could not read, had not

returned calls because they had no telephones, they had no trans-

portation to attend appointments, etc. Rehabilitation is anumbers game and in order to claim successful closures among

Navajos, state vocational rehabilitation (V.R.) counselors wouldclose them out an "successful" sheepherders.

In the mid-1960s the Navajo people "themselves took the initiative

to intervene on behalf of their disabled clansmen. They

challenged the inefficient, unfair, and unrealistic practices of

State Vk Programs. These deficiences included:

1. tack of adequate and p_ppropriate counselor orients -

tici the CTure and heritage of vava32 clients ,6:aceproviding statewide VP soriiices were, for the

most part located in largo metropolitan areas within

the state. Counselors in these'cities were familiaronly with the circumstances of clients who had ready

access to such conveniences as telephone, publictransportation systems, timely delivery of mail, in-

dustries and support services. Navajo clientsliving in remote areas, hundreds of miles away from

from these counselors and many miles away from pavedroads were expected to respond and comply with the

same system being implemented in the cities. Thosestate counselors made infrequent visits to the homesof Navajo clients and were heavily dependent upon

written communication. Many Navajo VR clients,however, could not read or write. In the event of ahome visit, counselors could not communicate effec-tively with clients because of the language barrier.Interpreters were often of minimal help and, somecases, created greater problems through misinter-

pretations. Delivery of mail to Navajo familieswas, and in some instances still is sporadic,untimely, undependable and communal (i.e. it's de-

livered to the trading post and families pick it upwhen they come in for supplies). Telephones, wereand are few and far between and clients have had noaccess to local public transportation.

2. Limited Services - State UR Programs had no pro-

el. 3

007

Visions, or avtiVe plans to recruit Counselor whowere familiar with the Navajo people and theirlanguage, life styles and locale. As ranted beforeMote vR offices were not located In proximity toNavajo clients. In ruidiTion, State VP eflunnelorawere often nelective in the clientele they wouldnerve. Severely disabled Navajo Clients were oftenplaced an low priority. 'Moir cases were too oftendisminned with the explantiont "ton severely disabled","unwilling to relocate", "failure to cooperate", etc...Slate VP Services will primarily focused in cities andborder towns.

3. Irrelevant Coals - Coals and objectives which worenet NIateVP programs often took into consider-ation only urban nettinga with their conveniencesand industrialization. No consideration was givento rural isolated Indian communities, their culture,or their economy.

4. lack of cross-governmental coordination - The NavajoreservatTa and its populirtICITViiiirarnto threestates (Arizona, Now Mexico, Utah) and three federalregions (VII, VIII, IX). Fach governmental unitclaimed jurisdiction and responsibility over only aportion of the reservation. There was little, ifany, interstate and interregion coordination. TheNavajo people were impelled to contend with threedifferent state programs, as well as their owntribal government and the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

5. Native Healing Services - State VR Programs had noprwairOns to incorporate the use of Native healing.services into the rehabilitation process of disabledNavajos. Tho use of such services by Navajos is anessential aspect of their lives and plays a vital

1, role in their treatment of disabilities. Disallow-of the use of Native Healing Services by traditionalrehabilitation systems represented disrespect toNavajo people and Navajo clients and actuallyimpeded the rehabilitation process in many cases.

This situation changed in 1978. In that year an amendment to theRehabilitation Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-112) added section 130.Section 130 specifically addresses the rehabilitation of AmericanIndians. It contains provisions for earmarking fulds of up to 1%of the overall rehabilitation allotment to support the IndianTribal vocational rehabilitation programs. Funds were not avail-able under this provision until fiscal year 1981.

In the immediate years preceding receipt of federal vocational re-habilitation dollars by the Navajo Tribe, The Tribe undertook thecoordination and consolidation of VR services for the Navajopeople. This was the beginning of cross-governmental coordination

614

6014

for 1hP 1141v141110 111 RP1,1441d1e VP notvicon to disabled Navajoclients. The Navajo Vocational PoloollitdIton PrnWam has "onthe sore 1441143ot funded under finction 110 of P. 1 1A-6(q. ft 111'10

had an dontidl aopropriation minimally of t4,50,000' an amount whichImpacts only A portion of the (weds. Thirt project, administeredby Navajos with A ntott which Is over get Navajo, has Mademeasurable progress towards the delivery of appropriate VP ser-vices to Its clientele. 'the program setves over five hundred(hen) disabled Navajos annually, Navajo eller-its have foundemployment in welding, clerical work. PaStot. Computer operator,oleo" The Progtam now bah trdoth ir a,ii t..lon workers who arcfamiliar with lho local conomyo the language, the culture andhabitat or the people, The program is making the local goVernmentaware of the employment needs and desires of disabled Navajos,local employers are becoming nennitiited to the potential of thiswork toren,

The NtiVajo Vocational Pehahilitation htogtom WAR established in

1g7S. It hate boon in operation for eight years, The program Ilangrown much Outing this time'

7.

1W(ORRIRO AR n Mate VP sub-office, it nowopetaten An an autonomous program,

neuinnin9 with a »hitt of five, the program isnow started by nineteen dedicated And qualifiedindividuals.

3. Reginning as a small seemingly insigniticant sub-component program within the Navajo bivision ofPducArion it has now attained branch status withinthe Nvision with a total statt of over thirty in

tour handicapped service related programs.

4. heginning with a caseload of less than 75 the pro-gram now maintains a caseload of over 400 activefiles.

Viewing these accomplishments, the Navajo Tribe feels that it hasproven its capability for administering a VP erogram to serve itsdisahled citizens. The Navajo Tribe feels that the Navajo Vo-cational Pohabilitation Program shoulo receive recognition commen-surate to its proven abilitied and be granted secure funding,comparable to state and trust territory programs. Such fundingcan he justified based upon area served, population served,program uniqueness, governmental status, and teocral resronsi-hility to Indian Tribes. The Navajo Tribe seeks your support inattaining status comparable to a state or trust territory underTitle I of the Pehabilitation Act. There are trust territories ofthe United States of America which are afforded this status. someof these trust territories have a population less than that of theNavajo Nation (160,000), occupy a gcograrhical area less than thatof the Navajo Nation (25,000 square miles), and yet receive agreater funding allocation.

609

In 0;1011100, we 010 ',1,,1 iOu Itfth 1110414§ 114 CifOt't to toOkti thPtwolihu 111 4i1'.1114 httYttok 114 t,1,4.114 14'100 40,44 tti,jt:kittOt

1,4104,4 41'41 $4414 Wt, h0ve t4'1ttli44'0 00000ity oultito 0hiocial 1,11,At1°b.4-ioett 01004.tiot1441 In ptoqrom undor tioptiotitint II io4h hhAvt,tahOloq ot the havalo 'h 1$441 trom tOlulifttiycl!ol, 110 lloi Iri,lit ot t1i14,101 01111014 ID thP Ik.41Vd10

V4't'0114,041 I-11,111101ton ti,ndowf 4.4,444 b VOhefvt*to+ to thc tov,440 tAtt thowv twCwict4i 0110

(1441444. 11.1 iI.44,1 4I t'uttOti 44,4 thi10 nalA Vogt, ttivintl4ot41 Vb 11,11ht-ibIitty to the hioo vocalionol Fehohilitatioj4,)1014 11,i, 11,110 ,0,01, 'Ow 1,1014,h havn fol),weil thia vroCe*Ooto in 0,44,4' Ihavaqnownt, loll not In IIncol lhav arts4,4111 14ACIVIhq tot0414 0116tAtIollw 14t4,40 non the whihiono of

4114'thie11 44$'441,41 $4414, Iwc Fitt, n1111 111.4,1vanti "

$1441.4 4" wlth t444444I449 tooter otton 1304 dnawith tho wItholawAl 44$ 41, otviccti by htotoh, tbo N4Y0,104'.44 1444,41 tolot,tittailoo 1.f4lfa44 tcalti lor tho lock la 10144.10Ipt

4101;144h,', 1,1 114 ,:i-tvie, to NitV,I its 14'01'1P, Ni Aro till' i-A t thq.,olbort ot hhhcomoitton tor tho tontthwanuo and btahilliotinoid 140:0111,4 lot thy havapt vooattomat Iwbahtlitallon Provratatht,.ugh 0141,1,1104v i0000tion.

thr twvo 4 t 4 inh for awlqoiettionA under hnetion 1.14, 01 Pd.44,.1,11 e'illiott innovative Initiattovh for the i.roviriMon ofa114Hr1a44' ono il.11'vont VP vervicen to Aaerivan Indiana. hhould44.4, 1,, . 44,10 V11,4'01114101 P-4104'41itOt44414 14ttql-0m 00

!;1011f, ,t,Ilo rt,1t,4N 1,4,1 144Avive tavolohly &Jinn, tinny 144 dl

nceil to 14,114 ,'',1 IWI010,1 .111 141fidt10414. hmlot byction 130 tO Moottho 4,444 .411444 ot tho N,Ivo)0 vocational toAahflitolinn Ptogrant-AYwell as thu oevuloiqont It VO VtOUIONti ;mom.; other Indian1r14$,4. ('allure to increaro, 414,to41r1otto44. under tivettort 130 willrusolt In Ititcww toNlvtititto 111411,411 ,jtoupk tor mtnimal alln-cottons ono/or tcduc vertiitcfi ..144 more 1,r4vam4$ art added.

lhvt0 11, an 0414111 (4 tat nee0 to ahvinry and uharantoe continualti5cal $ 4.141 t 41 .uveu,,mtul vk i.rogliamn for American Indiana.Pony 11,A4, 4'', 4 >, 0to .h,vt,feti annually to t4'cklutn9 op4't44,rtittt000

unOot !,t,ction tin. lhit, timo co,old ho.hilttot *+ont 4orYin4 ourtso 4,4114 you will tit. in lochtitoy the lotjtmlation

ticcvaty to ttivi. otit lAoqtot. tho 14,(,),1I ,,olvtott and financial441 t 11 1,4,4; to COO

lhonk ',out

616

610

FACT SMEET FOR NAVAJO TRIBE'S TESTIMONY

CURRENT CASE STATUSAugust 1982 - March 1983

AGENCY/ g 03 02 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 70 22 74 76 78 30

ChInl 97 3 70 16

7

27

/5

5

0

1

0

5

4

1 4 1 1 5 0 7 6

Cr MrP3Int 46 3 140 1 0 0 1 0 0 1

Ft. Oef lance 38 7 38 3 35 0 0 7 0 6 1 3 0 : 6 0

Shiprock 72 6 14 7 Ifl 1 0 5 0 4 0 2 0' 7 7 I)

had City 89 11 23 2 6 0 4 1 14 1 3 3 II 4 7

Blind Clients 37 a 13 2 12 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 439 33 137 37 106 6 6 70 2 .30 3 9 9 15 70. 9

371 S ly Disabled

aa.sic Severely Disabled

SUCCESSFUL REHABILITATION CLOSURES IN SEVEN MONTH PERIODaugust 1982 - March 191171

)08 I tag1

Sheltered employment Pastor

Stock Boy Dishwasher

Orafting AssistanceTruck Operalor

Fiberglass Moduler Clerk Typist

Computer OperatorConstruction Carpenter Alde

Maintenance ManResidential Aide

Alcoholism Guidance Counselor Welder

Cashier ClerkAssistant Manager

Para-Legal Advocate

Number of clients awaiting VP services: Sixty-three (63)

61i

E. NAVAJO NATION STATUS SYSNIM:

Navajo Vocational Rehabilitation Program Status. Provision for native healing

services include as authorize by Public Law 95-602, Title I, Part D, Section

130, 1362.45 "Projects for Mexican Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services."

Status 00. REFERRAL This is the date client is first brought to the attention

of Vocational Rehabilitation.

STATUS 02. APPLICANT A referred individual becunes an applicant when theapplickstien &cement requesting vocational rehabilitation services is

signed. Native healing service diagnostic provision.

STATUS 06. D.TOILETI EVALUATIC24 An applicant is placed in extended evaluation

ir, tense or,certi its: the presence of a handicap to employment, andinability'temehe 'deleeirudnaticcwthar services height benefit the

client unless there is an extended evaluation to determine rehabilitation

potential. A case way remain in status 06 no linger than 18 months.

Native healing service provision.

STATUS 08. CASE CLOSED F1i14 REFERAAL, APPLICANT OR ExrEmEo EVALUATIMIcase is closed in status -OW Tf cltenc oes not meet tfieFisiFililibilityrequirements to be accepted into status 10.

STATUS 10. 110, LEVELOPMNT After establishing the presence of an employuenthaEZicap and the reasonable expectation services will benefit the clientin terns of employability, a case is placed in status 10 while case studyand diagnostic are coupleted to prOvide.thebasis of a rehabilitation

program.

STATUS 12.IIRP READY Fovilipm,amialcw A case is placed in status 12 when

cne program is written and apprOved and until such time as

at least one servicelhas been initiated.

STATUS 14. ccagsalm AND GUIDANCE ONLY Under a rehabilitation program,

counseling and guicance by the Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor and

placement are the only services sdtich may be provided in this status.

STATUS 16. F1NSICAL P140 MENTAL RESTORATICN A case is placed in status 16 at

tire cum restoration services areFiiiirlated. Training uay be providedsiuultaneously with restoration in states 16 if the restoration serviceis expected tortes for the longer period of time. Native healing service

provision.

srAns 18. TRAINING The case is placed in status 18 when training services

are initiated. Restoration services ray be provided simultaneously withtraining in status 18 if the training is'expected to run for the longer

period of time.

STATUS 20. READ? FOR El7LOYMEIT The case is placed in status 20 when therenabilitatron program Eas been completed or terrdnated and client is

ready to accept mployment.

STATUS 22. DI DIPLOVENT Tne case is placed in status 22 then client

actually begins employment.'

STATUS 24.SERVICE INTERRUPTED The case is placed in status 24 when services

are iotern.ped in statuses 14. 16, 18, 20 or 22. Tne case remains in

status 24 intil client returns to one of these statuses or case is closed.

STATUS 26. CLOSED RUMBILITATED Case is closed status 26 'hen client has

Peen provicad all appropriate services, the rehabilitation program has

.been.completeel insofar aspossflsle,..and client has been suitably Toyed

STATUS 28. CIMED htIT PEAAAILITATED AFTER PROGRAM INITIATED A case is closed

status 26 if at least one service was provided (status 14, 16 or 18) but

client is unable to continue the program.

S7ATLEI 30, CIOSED tEll RD-MILITATED BEFORE PMCGRAH INITIATED A case is closed

status is client.uas accepted-for services (status 10 or 12) but was

unable to actually begin a rehabilitation program.

618

612

WRITTEN TESTIMONY SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

OF COUNTIES (NACO)* TO THE SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED

AND THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SELECT_EDUCATION IN REGARD TO AUTHORI-

ZATION OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973.

THE NATIONAL, ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU

FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE OUR VIEWS AND CONCERNS REGARDING RE-

AUTHORIZATION OF THE VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973.:

NACo CONTINUES TO SUPPORT EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR HANDICAPPED

AMERICANS IN ALL ASPECTS OF AMERICAN IFE, INCLUDING EMPLOYMENT,

PROGRAMS, ACTIVITIES, EDUCATION AND SE VICES: WE FEEL THAT THE

PROGRAMS FUNDED THROUGH THE VOCATIONAL EHABILITATION ACT HAVE

PROVIDED A GOOD BEGINNING TOWARD THE PR MOTION OF SELF-SUPPORT AND

SELF-RELIANCE OF DISABLED PERSONS.

ALTHOUGH VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION PROGRAMS ARE, FOR THE MOST

PART, FUNDED AND ADMINISTERED THROUGH THE STATE LEVEL, THESE PRO-

GRAMS HAVE HAD A SIGNIFICANT AND BENEFICIAL IMPACT ON COUNTY

GOVERNMENTS AND CONSTITUENTS. MOST COUNTIES NOW\DIRECTLY REFER

DISABLED PERSONS WHO NEED INFORMATION ORASSISTANCE\WITH TRANSPORTA-.

TION'OR EMPLOYMENT CONCERNS TO VOCATIONAL' REHABILITATION AGENCIES.

IN MANY STATES, THERE ARE VIRTUALLY NO .OTHER SERVICES SPECIFICALLY

GEARED TOMEET,THE NEEDS OF DISABLED PERSONS AVAILABLE. FOR ADDITIONAL

'VAC° Is THE ONLY NATIONAL ORGANIZATION REPRESENTING COONTY GOVERNMENT IN

AMERICA. ITS MEMBERSHIP INCLUDES URBAN, SUBURBAN, AND RURAL COUNTIES JOINED TO-

GETHER FOR THE COWAN PURPOSE OF STRENGTHENINGCOUNTY GOVERNMENT TO MEET THE NEEDS

OF ALL AMERICANS, BY VIRTUE OF A COUNTY'S MEMBERSHIP, ALL ITS ELECTED AND APPOINTED

OFFICIALS BECOME PARTICIPANTS IN AN ORGANIZATION DEDICATED TO THE FOLLOWING GOALS;

IMPROVING COUNTY GOVERNMENT, SERVING AS THE NATIONAL SPOKESMAN FOR COUNTY GOVERNMENT)

ACTING AS A LIAISON BETWEEN THE NATION'S COUNTIES AND OTHER LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT,

AND ACHIEVING PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF THE ROLE OF COUNTIES IN THE FEDERAL SYSTEM.

61

613

REFERRALS OF THIS KIND, VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION OFFICIALS OFTEN.

PARTICIPATE IN VARIOUS COMMUNITY RELATIONS ACTIVITIES SUCH AS INTER-

AGENCY COMMITTEES fkIlD BOARDS WITH COUNTY OFFICIALS, VOCATIONAL

REHABILITATION OFFICIALS OFTEN SERVE ON PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCILS

AND LOCAL CHAMBERS. OF COMMERCE, THESE KINDS OF FORMAL INTERAGENCY

LINKAGES ASSIST COUNTIES TO EFFECTIVELY SERVE DISABLED CONSTITUENTS

BY PROVIDING PERSONS WITH EXPERTISE IN HANDICAP EMPLOYMENT ISSUES,

NOCATIONAL REHABILITATION STAFF ASSIST COUNTIES WITH CONSULTATION

REGARDING ARCHITECTURAL ACCESS QUESTIONS OR QUESTIONS RELATING TO

MODIFICATION OF EQUIPMENT FOR HANDICAPPED EMPLOYEES, IN MANY CASES,

SUCH AS SANTA CLARA,COUNTY, CA, THE STATE VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION

AGENCY PROVIDES FUNDS TO SUPPORT A LOCAL INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER,

SANTA. CLARA COUNTY ALSO PROVIDES FUNDING TO THIS CENTER IN RECOGNITION

OF ITS VALUE TO COUNTY CONSTITUENTS. OTHER COUNTIES UTILIZE VOCATIONAL

REHABILITATION'S PROVISION OF INTERPRETER SERVICES TO HEARING-IMPAIRED

STUDENTS OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES,

NACO IS CONCERNED TO-NOTE THAT, ALTHOUGH VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION

PROGRAMS HAVE NOT RECEIVED SIGNIFICANT CUTS IN FUNDING, THE PURCHASING

POWER, DUE TO INFLATION, HAS BEEN REDUCED STEADILY SINCE 1975, THE

NUMBER OF CLIENTS SERVED BY VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION HAS STEADILY

DECREASED SINCE 1979,

AT THE COUNTY LEVEL, THIS DECREASE HAS RESULTED IN A NOTICEABLE

CUTBACK IN SERVICES TO COUNTY CONSTITUENTS, WHILE STILL PROVIDING

DIRECT REFERRAL TO VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION, COUNTY OFFICIALS NOW

CAUTION DISABLED CALLERS THAT THEY MAY NOT RECEIVE THE SERVICES THEY

NEED, OFFICIALS HAVE 'NOTED THAT VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION CASES ARE

SOMETIMES CLOSED PREMATURELY, LEAVING DISABLED PERSONS NOT READY FOR

620

614

COMPETITIVE EMPLOYMENT AND WITH NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE.

A RECENT INSTANCE OF THIS OCCURRED,IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND WHEN

GRADUATES OF MAINSTREAMED PUBLIC EDUCATION CLASSES WERE DENIED VOCA-

TIONAL TRAINING,

DISABLED PERSONS UNABLE TO RECEIVE VOCATIONAL TRAINING ARE NOT

ABLE TO FIND COMPETITIVE EMPLOYMENT, THE END RESULT IS THAT DISABLED

PERSONS WHO ARE CAPABLE OF SELF-SUFFICIENCY BECOME BURDENS TO ALREADY

OVERTAXED INCOME-SUPPORT PROGRAMS, POTENTIAL TAXPAYERS BECOME

RECIPIENTS OF FEDERAL; STATE. AND COUNTY ASSISTANCE,

NACo URGES YOUR SUBCOMMITTEE TO CAREFULLY REVIEW THIS SITUATION.

AND TO BEGIN TO PROVIDE. APPROPRIATIONS AUTHORITY THAT REFLECTS IN-.

CREASES IN THE CPI TO VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION PROGRAMS, THIS ACTION

WOULD ASSURE COUNTIES THAT THE LEVEL OF VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION

SERVICES WILL REMAIN CONSTANT.

615

TESTIMONY

of

Stan L. Marshall

prepared for the

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE HANDICAPPED

of.th'e

Committee on Labor and Human Resources

United States Senate

April,

616

Teatiemn/ on 1be Henahtlitation Act

Introduction: my name is Stan L. Marnhall, and I am very appreciative to

the Subcommittee for providing me with the opportunity to testify on the

reauthorizatiOn of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.

An a brief bacYgrousd, I am 30 yearn of age, one A wheelchair for

mobility, awl have among other handicaps, a progrennive, degenerative joint

disease. I am a Management Consultant, with over a decade of experience,

primarily in the public and non- profit sectors.

It An my understanding from Senator Stafford's office that these

particular hearings cover all Titles or the Rehabilitation Act, except

Title V and other related civil rights lows for the handIcapAvd. I find this

both disturbing and'unfortunate, both in light of the Admlniatration's pro -

posed legislation.and their attempts at easing the burden" of the Affirma-

tive Action regulations, and, an I stated in a letter to Senator Stafford

on March 5, 1985, "...if there is not adequate enforcement, then...laws

amount to nothing more than cluttering up the U.S.C.

Put another way, what good doer it do to rehabilitate someone, if

that person can not he employed because. they can't get through the door?

And realistically Senators; that is but one of the innumerable examp,es

of disCrimination that are faced daily by the handicapped.

You have however, I am sure, heard this before; so:let me try to

put this discrimination into a personal perspective. The below listed

events are not a compendium of numerous people's experiences, or *anything

resembling a complete list; rather they are but a few of the more notorious

examplps'that I myself have experienced in lust the last year:,

a) due solely to my physical handicaps I have lost two jobs since

January, 1982: one by direct termination after requesting a meeting to ex-

plore accommodations, and one because a landlord refused to allow a computer

consulting firm to construct (and pay for) a wheelchair ramp;

b) the elementary school our two children attend has no provisions

for (nor will they consider any) to make programs and field trips accessible

62

617

Ito MO, than denying Me the opportontly to toe on fictive role In the child-ren's school and education; and

:,) th,o pi to the mi I I twin of federal dot lora that 'were used to conntructthe perten tri "in mill in lbw] ing ton, Vermont, there/ in not n single store thatI coo get in to. I

I

to in owlerntanding of where theI

ditt. above tog; I critnet 'it lI Itat.lon /wt. needs t rtrInge,

!fii any ternon wh this run for publ I ii .rrice is well aware, 014/ HOC 1. I? typloebn ,* reo I. emphonts on an Old ; v 1 I wi 1 'n " image' ; rind I would submit to you:two, t,nn, that brie of the undo rl y I ng causes off prejudice and iliscrimirwticntr. 1 frhlr 'ttiot in gener.i Led by the current imagen and stereotypes evcbeil

t ' , wbrd "hood lea prod "..

I

iI ,

'nr exottp I ii, one ,,f the necondary effects of the degenerative processI I iv, 41 tti In '01.... spanming of my I Pr,n and armn, and thun , a medically nor-r...,..t label that could lie applied would be that I am a npastic. I would wellin li- i%,, ilbwever, that tha t term conjures up a, picture of a person witht,i -ted 'rid efbiOred limbs, strapped into a wheelchair, unable even to heldi t' ,1- ti, o I tip, od t., to I ly dependent on others . f or all personal care. Yet1 p?0 1',Fitlre you that I hear ;11,scl utely no resemblance to that; in fact,.1f yto were to nee, me ritt ing, on say a couch, you would be unable to tellt'llot I tiliA 1V howl lb:ans.

'low certainly, sonic people will fit the a tereotypei t is after allthe no turn of myths that they tend to have noire basis in truthbut the fartof tbe matter in that most hand ipiipped people ore neither repulsive to 'lookat, nor totally dependerit on others to survive. To quote a well -worn sl pion,"d i rwb i 1 i ty .does not mean unable. ".

it is cry firm bel ice , borne out .by experience, that a dual thrustin needed to help change thin underlying attitude: self -help approaches,ond i7-ar nun, the rest of this testimony will be geared to rrial,,ing nog-

f.wt; for specific tarli3OP in the neliabi litati on. Act within the framewori.0:00 COnCe7 t.

624

0--14:3:-40

618

Title I ...Vocational Rehabilitation Norvicen: let me start off thin nee-

Lion bynoying that I am npeaklng to thin from direct expeienee, as I wau

client for nearly 3 years. I will also ntate that though 1am not ashamed

of having received services, there in no question that there are two neg-

ative public perceptions anneciated with vocational rehabilitation:

I) people who are/were client:1 aro 'retarded', 'dependent', and 'crippled'

individuoln who receive condescending pity; and 2) that VR agencies are

the dumping ground for the handicapped by all other agenclen (the thrice

received response from 'the local employment neviae office after stating

that I wan handicapped and inquiring about accesslhlp services wan, "Have

you teen to VR?"!).

Part of thin image problem has:to do with the terminology 'so often

used, both by profennionaln and lay seasons alike. These terms range from

''cripried (a hopelens cane), to 'wheelchair-bound' (chained to a restrie-

time device), to 'disability' (focusing on lont unagen), to 'rehabilitation'

the same term used in conjunction with prisons---nnd what crime have the

handicapred committed?).

':his in b,y no meann a minor or semantical point, and goes to the

heart of the imaging concept discussed earlier. .A recent letter published

in the quarterly journal, "Accent on Living", by Bob Peters states thin

succinctly:

'Names' alienate, isolate, degrade....Two things can hap-pen when 'labels' are used: 1) a hostile, alienated feelingadversely affects the (handicapned person); 2) the (non -handicapped) innocently perpetuate that hostile alienationand foster a distorted piCture of human beings.

Title I, Recommendation 1: a change in terminology is necessary,

as exemplified by the following:

T.I., R. 1.1: change the name of the legislation to The Hann? -

canned Restoration Services Act;

T.l., R. 1.2: delete all-references to the word "disabled", and

sotstitute in lieu thereof, "handicapred";

623

619

T.1., R.1.3: change the nnme from 'Vocational Rehabilitation'.

to 'Restoration Services Agency'; and

T.1., R.'1.4: change the word "client" to "recipient'of services ".

Beyond terminologyrthene word changen must reflect the realityof

the restorative prolneso; in the words of Dr. Julian n. Myer!), Director of

Rehabilitation Counnelor Training, Graduate School, University of Cincinnati,,

pnychologicai, economic, and vocational factors areoften of major importance in causing, intensifying, or pro-longing illness. The converne is equally true: Prolonged'linens and chronic (handicapping conditions) affect the In-dividual psychologically, socially, and economically; theyinfluence his work adjustment, hin educational accomplish-ment, and his family life.

Any worker can confirm thin, an can the handicapped themselves;

it in not merely a 'do-gooders' theory. Thus, the current VR agencies muot,

by the vary natare of the restorative processes, cLal with much more than

just the specific focus of "getting n job". However, before I make any

recommendations in thin vein, let me assure you that thin is not a plea

to expand the !-,ureancracy or 'to increase funding levels above the present.

T.1., ". Consider the develcrwont of a broader view of restor-

ative services, such as,

T.I., H. 2.1: recognize legislatively that the restorative process

(especially fcr the more severely handicapped) will take 3 to 5 years;

T,I., aid to Title 1, §102(b), a requirement that each

Indlvidnalize (Pestcr-:tive Servl,-:en) Plan shall cover, the areas

of social, ed.d,o';ohal, emoti7i.al, family, recreational, and employment

related services sdch that the Plan represents an intergrated whole (to

re- emphasize, this is hot additional red tape", rather it is a restruc-

turing of the existing TWP); ar.1

T.T., 7.3: it: r(oc,',nitiop cf the lonp-term process involved,

the bureaucratic evait:-:ticr. of recipient ierformance can not be restricted

to the black cr of titre :! -cr cr not a recipient of services

43

626

620

41'. ; ' 1,1,0 is Is I I, tIn SI t.1 VII Vow ci, I'm'. that ,`,, it', halt

is anI Not

IT...! t ot ":1tIv I rtlatt.II t()

1,,

1,i r... la. 1 Iw it-, 1, ,P IY ',a Olt tWo liii-It. a! !... ; .1 is ii I, 1..0s I' } 1:111 I h(', I -

1,.,. ',1`t 111;0, ti%) fr t

1,t' to.,1 fri si int.rrt ; and

1,1' i I. IV vont, 5 's;'5..i. I an.ri.tat,i.,,,t, tin t he :it-

,., ttu, I r. c'.. y hi 1; iii, in 5+1:5.1 irn-

;I

: I i'' ,lrISl,, w r 5., ; t t, o., I I; and commitment

.sc 1. v thy t,,tal t. ,rt.r.1 sirs f.t1 ly pip t'l-;, t) , 1'0 ...,1,1,51 ;in .1 ..15,1 t14;1I

is ch it unit, wider the Actct !qr., tt. t.r.t 15 T.r,r ventum,

r es, ift ::::Vt`rt. j c.;17,pot, sh:111

OM (4,A I ; ;I; ty of nervices

t tt,an ono

'

'11;.: ,a4. ni1.0 t:f t is,

r,,,If Loth Si pt,,,,:tt,is or. .11:,,tFinally,

ye to in.] it:, 1 s.s vs Si, St 7'

t

ly ti. rI tarkt,, Ins-

and r,,,.!tly!-! are ncre

021

T.I., R. At add lo Title 1, 11104, language rugniring that whet

ever felnible, and tb the mnxingim extent possible, n11 ProVided services

snail ho self -holy ooturol em4mplon .Include:

4,1 training mdnullu/hrohurotl rovoring equipmont nelec!;on and

maInteninee, de9ign and conntrnetlen or Hdoptive nilo and poolpTon, oelf-cA,, rveting, bathing, hale. rhnren, ete.l, and stabtafidna and

techniques for drily living, with em;nsuis on ambolsen rind the mwdlitv-

ImPdiroll

worksbore ,end other trainlog devicen to let!ti tne reanicite

management skills fsr mrnaging Lr Inatvidkjolin ,,r

4:3 the provision or Hiwei,oly trained mnimaln to rt,.vide Ride

nervieten to a nanikipred peruon.

Though the bens known of this later example in the ineeln.'-t.vet

for the blind (1110 Dog), monkeys ar, cnrinuitly lined I.i qurdp,,

dogs are tined i ,ho hearing-impaired, and moot recently, A IOW

Support Dogs for the Randivapped, in training dopn to irovild a rf

assistance td veople with fonetional limitationn, inuluding bni;ipg

chairs up rrmio, opening, doott, Int nummoning heir in an emrr,t1"v

To conclude the dincunsion of charges to Title 1, severn1 ree,mm,!..

ntionn that combine elements of the imnging and self-help erno.ot stvd.11

he mentioned.

Au rart of the rogoIrrmonto for approval of funds a.,d the !ltnt- P:an

0102), tie Intlowing need to he a.!led:

T.T., R. bt the !:tote Flan shall be drafted, r.viw,,,A, !*,1

uated on no ancunl hallo with the annintanee and direct tnvolvene-t of ncn-

numers and the providprn of nervires, inrlueinr tut not lir:to', Ti,

and present rerinients of services, rant and pre oat nervice ps,

recipient coon-a.lors; trovidedtbnt no benefit shill directly lr..re

part/icitating retipint cf services or provider of nervides, and f'..7

provided that direct involvement. of consumf.rn nhall not ne ;:mire

628

622

organiestionn reprenenting the handicapped;

T.I., R. 6; each State 1814111lM handioapped individunl, with

emphalie on "visible" handicaps, within the State Executive Branch to co.

Ordinate and further employment opportunitlea for the handicapped, affirm-

ative nation, and the publicity and implementation of the World Program Of

Action of the United Nations Decade of hlnahlod Perianth said boaition may

be funded by the State, receive annintance under thin Part, or,under Title

VI, Pert A, of thin Act;

T.I., H. 71 all State netivitien and programn provided, contracted

for, or asminted under thin Act ehnll be, at n minimum, programmatically

accessible to all handicapped individualni

T.I., R. 8; the Stnte, an part of the annual State Plan, aball

provide ',pacific written detailn of the methods and processes used to im-

plement the accennibility and affirmative notion requirements under Title

I, §101, the actions still required, and thIttimetable(s) for implemetion;

T.I., R. 91 the failure to comply tie requirements of (T.I., H, 8)

or,the other requirements of Title I, §101, obeli be deemed a rebuttable

t'resumption of discrimination, shall be deemed just cause for, and shall

renult in the termination of federal financial anaistance until such time

as the deficiencies are corrected 1S1 past practices redressed;

T.I., R. 10: change the wording in 8101 such that a more strin-

gent requirement in imposed for guaranteeing compliance with the requirements

than the currently stated "satisfactory assurances to the Commissioner"- -

as an example, many of Vermont's VR offices are not physically accessible

to the mobility-impaired, or to the bent of my knowledge, not staffed yith

bilingual personnel to serve Vermont's large Francophone population, the

existing "assurancea" notwithstanding; and

T.I., R. 11: Innovation and Expansion Grants shall be prloriti:.el

such that self-help projects. as discussed under T.I.. R. 4, are given :.1-

crity and the majority of I A funds, with the additional provision t

all I & E grants must produce products that are readily transferable tc

62;

623

other handicapped individaain, 'aninationn, and aerviee provider:a on etleant a regional ooale,

Though Home of the reeommendatione di:mune:0d for Title I are 1411110.

nlly strengthening of existing languge, there is no doubt of the need fortheme chimp%

For example, §101 (6)(A) proAdoo for an affirmative nation require-

ment 44 net forth to 11'.01, yet I have reuelved letters from the State of

Vermont, Deportment of lernonnel, which state,

We are Da nubdeot to...affirmative nction....The etetelecommitment to any form of affirmative action ie purely vol-untary and (ie)...not from federal requirements.

If my experience of the Department" of Labor and Education under

1:1504 ore any indication, acid the follure to receive renponnen to my letters

would seem to indicate nuch, it will be years before a ruling will be

Segued, let alone correction in made. 1 submit therefore, that the need

for the types of recommendations contained herein is real and pressing.

Tit s II - nemearch: tt:tic:Illy, a mingle recommendation is made, nrcingenred to self-help being the funding priority,

T.1I., R. 1: the United States has the capacity, and should have

the goal of, becoming the world leader in the research, development, and

demonstration of adawive equipment and techniques at affordable prices,

and thus the Institute (§202 (n) ) shall give priority tg and the majority

of i't's funds shall go towards, the reasearch to meet this goal by the end

of the United Nations Decade of Disabled Persons (1992).

The rationale for such an approach is straight-forward: there in no

doubt that many aids can "replace" or supplement functional abilities lo:A,

but at the same time, prices for these devices are exhorbitant and do not

reflect the actual costs involved, thus putting much of this needed equip-ment outof the reach of many, with the result that many handicapped people

630

624

are more' restricted than nevensary. :lame examples will illustrate this:

1.1; wheelchair manufacturers charge between S50. and $80. each

for anti-tipping devices and brake handle extenders, I made them froth for

S3.50 worth of copper tubing:.

1.;1: 'floatation' cushions for wheelchairs, designed to prevent

ulcers, yell fur between 5100, amt I mode mine for 325.00 worth of

materials --a 3. thick foam cushion topPd by a canvas air pillow;

1.5 the mirimum price for an electric whr.elchaiir is 22,CC0 and

that minimum Is the same whether or not it in the complete, new chair, or

:simply the conversion parts bought to upgrade an existing manual chair; and

1.4: thoufh there is no reason I can not be totally independent,

including the ability to drive, it would cost at least 517,000. to equip

me with a taints, yet appropriate e1ectie wheelphair and von (to say nothing

of the annual maintenance, deirce:ation, and total replacement every 5 to

7 years).

'Ioreover, such an approach would clearly have a beneficial impact

on ec,womr. ,for: creation, and the creation of new businesses;

and of course, there is the potential world market by virtue of the hundreds

of millions of handicapped people world-wide.

Title III - Supplementary flervices and Facilities: for.a variety of reasons,

including a personal bias against instituticalii, I will limit my testimony

on this Title to the comments 1 Thdp in cunnertiun with T.1., R. 3, viz,

that a certain per centum of the lest: s,. rely P.hdicaPped to eligible for

services under Title III, in order to foster public acceptance of handicapped

individuals in society.

Title IV - National Council on the llandIcanned: again restricting my com-

ments to some previously made, in this case a! R. 5, efich mandates

direct consumer involvement in plonning, reviews, and evaluations.'Consider-

ing part of the National Council's resconsihillties include, "...recommen-

625

dations...respecting wayn to improve rasearch...dervdces...and faciliting

the imPlementation of programs...." there in no better qualified expert than

the handicapped themselves---especially those that have been through the

restorative process and bureaucracy of the current VP system.

Tit:. 7 - Xiscellaneous: in discussing thin Title I will depart, I hope un-

derstandably no, from the more 'intellectual' approach that aharacterizen

the rest of thin testimony, as the subject of civil rights, and the din-

cririnaticn faced everyday in a:I aspect:: of living by handicapped People,

in clearly a more personal and thbn emotional issue.

An I statei the Introduction, and will re-emphasize here, laws

without proper and adequate enforcement are.junt so much clutter. Thus, if

the purraoses of this Act are to ever see fruition, the concept of a "guar-

antee ref equal opportunity" must be made an implementable part of the leg-

' islation, and not the window-dressing it currently is.

Senators, over 200 years ago the Constitution of the United Stater

.ac; ostah!irhed to "establish Justice"; and on April 9, 1866, 42 U.S.C.

ii1981 was added:

All persons within the jurisdiction of the United Statesshall have the...equal benefit of all laws and proceedingsfor the security of persons and property...and shall be sub-ject to like punishments, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses,and extraction of every kind, and to no other.

I'espite these flowery words. however, the 40+ million Americana wiltn

handicaps still have no practical, working assurance that they will be con-

sidered and treated as an equal member of society; the fact that we pay taxes

and are subject to the same responsibilities as every other person notwith-

standing.

In the Introduction, I listed three personal examples of discrimin-

ation, covering employment, family life and education, and commercial enter-

;rise. These occur, aside from the underlying attitudes the recommendations

In this testimony seek to address, for two primary reasons: 1) there are

626

totally iunufficient laws to "guarantee" equality to the handicapped; and

2) there is totally insufficient---and in some cases no---enforcement of

the existing laws.

Take a look Senators, at the laws, Constitution, and practicalities:

7.1: Equal Employment Opportunity excludes by :aw the. handicapped;

V.2: Equal Opportunity lender excludes by law the handicapred;

V.3: the guarantee of voting rightn, excluden by law and the Con-

ntitution,.the handicapped;

V.4: the right to housing excludes by law the handicapped;

V.5: the various federal Departments arc required by law to pre-

vent and correct discrimination against the handicappedyet a yearafter a Clans Action complaint was filed against the Vermont Depart-

merit of Employment t Training, and 9 months after the first,,letterof non-compliance was issued by the Region I office, no formal, writ-

ten initial determination has been released;

V.6: an employer terminates me after I suggested,..a good first

step might be a meeting...to explore potential solutions." for ac-commodationsand I have no right to take the matter to court, and

the "responsible" federal agency (OFCCP) took a fsll year just !a

assign an investigator (of course, nothing has happened since that

appointment 4 months ago);

V.7: the Congress passes 'emergency jobs legislation', yet with

almost all the monies earmarked for construction, few if any jobs

will go to handicapped peopleespecially if the building where one

must go to register is not accessible;

V.13: despite current §503 regulations which require it, not a sin-

gle Vermont bank is accesnible or practices affirmative action;

V.9: the only college in Vermont that offers a two-year'technical

program in computer science and engineering technolcy has exceedinglylimited physical accessibility, and no prt2,rammatid accessibility;

V.10: there in not a single Vermont state agency that has program-

matic access, despite the almost total lack of physical accessibill.ityperhaos due to the fact that most Vermont courts are also in-

accessible; and

V.11: the Office of Civil Rights, Department cf 7.lucation informs

me in the process of "handling" a complaint, that tor proceduresmanual allows them to "translate" written complaints and "determine

the essential issues", the District Court 'of D.C.'s cccrt order not-

withstanding.

And again, Senators, this is not even a complete subject listing, of

627

the daily discrimination we count cope with: it doesn't mention the lack

of accesnible transportation, it doesn't talk about all the movien, plays,

concerts, and other cultural events we can't get into, it doesn't discuss

the lack of accessible recreation and social activities'available---even the.

Medical Center Bonpital of Vermont, despite it's having the "University

Associates in Rehabilitation", in not physically accessible.

Than, ift_ht-Becleration.of purpose contained in the Act In to he

realized, the following must be done:

T.V., R. 1: amend the current civil rights and equal opportunity

laws in,housing, voting rights, edUcation, transportation, financial, em-

ploymen't, nocial, recreational, cultural, health, and all other aspect's of

daily living to .:pacifically include the handicapped as a covered class;

T.V., R. 2: require affirmative action in anything that receives

or bcnefitn from federal asvistance, regardless of whether it in direct or

indirect, and regardless of the type;

T.V., R. 3: legislatively mandate a commitment to a totally barrier-

free environment tv the,end of thin entury, and until that goal is achieved,full programmatic izcetin munt be guaranteed and implemented;

T.V.. R. 4: to assist in implementing R. 3 above, full and con-

tinuing funding and authority must be granted to the Architectural Si Trans-

portation harriers Compliance Board;

T.V., R. 5: legislatively mandate that a tripartite complaint

clasnification be implemented, including associated investigatory and com-

pliance determination priorities, an follows:

5.1: emergency complaintsany complaint, written or otherwise,that result: or threatens to esult in the reduction or denial ofservices;

procedural complaintsany complaint, written or otherwise,the renult of which is a "technical" violation that has no negativeimpact wiatsoever on achieving the purposes of this Act or other non-discrimin.tidn laws; and

5.3: ether complaintsany complaint, written or otherwise, thatis neither an emergency or procedural complaint;

634

628

T.V., R. 6: expand the permissible administrative complaint process

such that a "block" complaint covering several recipients, such an when more

than one recipient shares a single facility, may be filed;

T.V., R. 7: specify legislatively that a private right of action

daps eAlni, for lily discrimination or.disrriminatory practice, and that fur-

ther, admInistrdtive remedies need tint he exhausted prior to commencing an

action At laW:

T.7., P. U: fully implc;ment the related recommendntions specified

in T.1., R. 1", through 10 inclusive;

7.7., R. 9: mandate full tachnical assistance be provided to all

rronpn, individuals,agencies,' and service providers involved in the re-

storative process, and move such section .0506) to a new Title, XIII, "Misc-

ellaneous"; andT,7., R. 10: change the existing name of Title V to, "Equality

and Enforcement Provisions", with adequate funding to rarry out all the

provisions.

Of COurN,, there will be a knee-jerk reaction trot these recommen-

dations will be "ton expensive" and will place an "undue and unfair burden"

upon recipients; to be polite about it, those are totally false issues.

Etrat:y, regardless of any expense---and the handicapped know first

hand the actual coats of handicaps---civil rights do not have a price tag:

this is either a free; democratic, and open society, or it isn't.

Secondly, there in no excuse whatsoever that where physical access

is not the most feasible, cost-effective option, that full and complete

programmatic access should not have (already) been implerented,

Thirdly, this is by no means a situation where the handicapped have

not. been discriminated against and the government in stetting in to Frevent

so:re theoretical occurrence in thefuture.- Rather, the 1A,^1 for these ere-

tectiona is simply the logical and responsible corseeper of thc-existior,

yontinual, and ross discrimination that has beer, and o01%:.%ves to Ix, 'aced

the,handicapsed.

629

And finally Denutorn, let uu be very ,clear about one thing: these

recommendations are not made to request special treatment, or a handout,or to be exempted from the rules. On the contrary, the handicapped want,'

need, yea, demand to be treated the same an any other human being. Don't

hire me becalm() I'm handicapped, but neither deny me r.n equal chance to

compete nimply becaune I am in a wheelchair.

Title VI - Employment Opnortunities for handicapped Individuals:' much of

the rationale for the reeommendntions for thin Title have been dineusned inTitle I, and will not he repeated here.

T.VI., R. 1: that the provisions of 9611 (b)(1)(A) be changed to

require only handicapped individuals be employed, especially as "technical,'administrative, or supervinory pernonnel for a project";

T.VI., R. 2: that the definition of "attendant care" (9616 (3) )

be expanded to include "services provided to assist physically handicapped

individuals to obtain, participate, and remain in employment"---it doesutsolutcly no good to nay to someone 'who uses a wheelchair that they have

an 'opportunity for employ-ent', and then not make it possible for them toget to or into a work site;

T.VI., R. 3: unfortunately, the placement services referrenced in411 (t.) are usually handled either as an after-thought, or as a hopeless

but necniry "string" to get the federal dollars, especially in the numer-

ous areas of the country where very, very rew,fobs are accessible, and thus

the plr.comerit Se'rVi:7e requirement must be emphasized, strengthened, and

fpcunel cr as a pri,rry goal of the project;

R. 4: most 'job programs' focus on unskilled or semi-skilled

production line or clerical jots, which totally ignores the fact thAt there'

are highly skillet workers who also happen to he handicapped, but for a

multiety of reasonseconomic, inaccessibility, prejudice, lack of atten-

dant dsmisinnce---can notcbtnin employment, and thus both Parts A & 3 of-itS.^ roast regAing on equitable distribution of employment opportunities

L11 Still including technical, management, retail, para-pro-ressi,nal, and rn-C,nnional:

636

630

T.VI., H. 5: an rural areas have a higher incidence of unemployed

handicapped workers', and a gi.eater need for aids in such areas an accensible

hoUsing.and transportation, the emphasis on the distribution of funds and

nqrvicen must he hared on need, beyond the minimal equity formula contained

in §615:

6: se previously discusned under T.I., R. 3, and Title

.111, A minimum per centum of the funds (apTiroximately 121!% to 15%) needs to

be allocated to the less qseverely handicapped; and

7.41., B. 7: all employment under. Parts A B nhall be in job

classifications that are projected to have an increasing demand for workers,

an projected by the Department of Labor, Employment Opportunities Outlook

Bulletin.

Title VII - Comprehensive Services fur Independent Living: the concept of

independent living is worthwhile, necessary, and as basic a societal right

as is freedom of expression or the due process of law. Yet I do not believe

that the current legislative wording can promote true independent living.

The primary reason for this belief is that the services and providers are

operating under a false assumption: that the handicapped, especially the

most severely handicapped, are not capable of doing for themselves and/or

that they are not capable of learning the processof independent living un- .-

leen they are 'spoon-fed'. . -

'I can assure you Senators, that this in not the case; and

the firm belief that the dual concepts ofself-help and imaging that

been the thrust of my.teatimony are equally applicable to thia.Titlealf.

,;pia

A 1980 study performed for. the Vt. Agercy of Muman SerViceadal.

78% of Vermont's handicapped were unemployed, and th7mg,t4-Ylr0handicapped population used mobility aids.

631

T.VII., T. I: the Comprehonnive iiervicen and requirements containedin Part are valid, but should not vtand alone, rather, they should be incor-porated and made a regular part of Title I, inclusive of the recommendationscontained within thin testimony;

T.VII., I, 2: minimal requirements to insure that IndependentLiving Centers (IUD') ore constituency-con and based, and operated in anopen manner, must he entablinhedo, including,

2,1: all jobs count be advertined and the requirements of f3503 and§504 shall apply:

2.2: each 15C nhall maintain regular communication (sob 'as a news-letter or audio cassette) with it's

members, participants, recipients, andservice providers, at leant quarterly;

2.3: the 9oard of Directors shall create an open and published pro-'oess for the election and removal of Directors, with elections hell aonually;

2.4: the mandating of minimal standards for information, referral,and resource services, including the

preparation-and dissemination of a com-pendium of information and resources available, and how people can apply/usesame;

2.5 the emphasis in all advocacy and legal services to be ontraining individuals to perform much activities for themselves;'

2,6 all activities will he geared to the self-help approach dis-cussed fully in T.I., R. 4; and

2.7 each recipient nhall have a proven record or demonstrated ca-pacity to carry out a Title VII program, or in the case of'a recently formedorganization, the staff personnel shall each have a proven record or demon-atrated capacity, to perform the requisite activities and tasks.under a pro-posed program;

T.VII., R. 3: at least one ILC'shall be established in eac,. State,and shall be entirely seperate from the State unit approved pursuant to Title

The abuses of one such ILC are documented in a Farch 5, 1953 letterSenator Stafford from the author of this testimony.

838

632

1, with selection in each 11tAte based on nn open eompetative award procens;

T.V1I., P, : each 1111 shall untablinh working linkagen and refer-

ral proc.sses between the .",trite unit approved under Title I, contractors,

recipients, agencies, and any other interested pernonn or organizations, and

ail e! tnd red..n,1 ,ronoien that offer nervices or provide benefits to

.1G++- nm1 m,derale-income persons, and to programs where handicapped pernonn

In estat,lissol priority;

T.11I., each 11C shall provide technical annintance to hand-

ical.ed indivilualn in services and benefits available in that particular

aster the Act, including details of the existence of, and the procenn

and ,1;.lication proreduren for obtaining those services and'benefits;

T.VI[., P. 6: all services provided by an 111.1 shall be available

to all 1,andicdpped iniividuals without regard to the degree or extent of

the handL,lopIng oonditiou(s), provided that each may establish a eliding

scale fee arrangement based on the health nervice guidelinen of ability to

r)y; and

T.111., 1 :. 7: in light of the above recommendations, it is further

eeemeenled that the term "Center for Independent Living" be changed to

"Rea6crce renter for the Handicapped".

Title 11,1 - !.1r!ellaneoss Provisions: in concert with recommendation T.V.,

P. 9, a new Title VIII would be created, and would contain the following:

T.VIII., R. 1: there In a need for national legislation that,out-

lows inning of, or other forme of dincrimination' against, specially .

;rained animals used to assist the handicapped in all areas of daily living,

including housing, transportation, employment, retail shopping, health cen-

ters, edcation, and the like; and the need in demonstrated by a recent

example reported to me by a Director of Support Dogs for the Handicapped:

1.1: in caking arrangements to fly to neighboring state to estab-

lish a new Supnort fogs chapter, she wasdenied permission by the airlines

to bring her S../npert I1og with her, despite the fact that some airlines will

clIew sering-eye dogs, all airlines benefit from federal assistance, and the

has oo rule preventing'it:

633

T,VIll M, there Ina clearly demonstrated need for wording

that would mandate all Staten reente an Interagency Committee on Handicap-

ped Fmployeen, similar to VAI, and would be a requirement for the receipt

of federal annintancei

T,VIII., R. though I can well imagine the decantation I would

feel tr wore to t,,o, visually- or hearing-impaired, I fail to under-

o!.1!1 the 11,nopriatenenn of the apeei,,1 funding provided in various sec-

tia (1. the Act---narely the exborbitahtcont to allow people with .handi-

oa7n nimllar to my own to become mobile (at leant 817,000), or the Si,500

thkes to train and provide a Support hog for the physically handicapped

an deserving an those in need of braille or interpreter ser-

vi'o.p---thun in tIe interest of fairnesn, those allocations need to be

i.r.r -11rinatvd, an,1 the money put into Titles I R VII, or extended tothe s.mer,t1,,r the handirarq,ed population with special or high -coat

T.V1!1., R. 4: the information clearinghouse enabled in 015 mustte az; woii as .made open, accessible, and readily usable by the

te handicia77-ed, with mandated linkages, referrals, and

,.1!11 the Resource Centers for the Handicapped (as recommended

in ;' through 7 inclusive);.and finally,

T.VIII., M, 5: the reauthorized Act needs to contain language

silnportIn and :do:Jim, both the United rations General Assembly's Reso-

lution deolaring to I9'1:" as the Decade of Disabled Persons (dhanging,

of ^nurse, the ward ":,lnabled" to "Handicaoned"), and the World Program of

teAcn, welch call!: an goversmetn, organizations, and citizens to increase

the rarticiiation by the handic;,pred in rational and community life this

should alsr include limited funding to suntort publicity, information packets,

and the eretion and distribution of Public Service Announcements to en-

courage ;,r,ortrar participation in thin'global effort.

Sumaation: tbrounhcut the course of this testimony, I have attempted totake a l-.71.;-ter, positive view of the ways in which services to the handl-

ca;red cl:h he impro?edrnamely, by creating a framework that supports and

64021-974 0-83--41

634

eneonragen greater independenee and nel f-nuf flviency,

Though it In a change In d 1 reel on, it In neither n rad Iva , untried

approach, nor Inconntstent with the ntated alma of the Adminintratton. None.

thelens, almont any "now" method in likely to encounter renIntance, an well

14 reline the falne innue that "nIgnificiantly more funding will he necennery

CD IMO.Mnt them, revisiona",

Ny experience, an well an the objetive.data avallahle, clearly demon-

atra ten however, that both, the Imaging and nelf-help ronceptn are workable

and coat-ef f vet I ve. An ,hint one nma 1 1 example of thin, the hherink I Ind iann

of northern Vervont received on $130,000 "need" grant under Neighbor-

hood :101f-delp Development Program in 1980. Leon than a year later, unite

of whatered-nIte ho..ning had been constructed by and for the AhenokIn;

noleiine with Tortgage value of over 3 million. A 37:11 to 1 return on the

I.e....site ,n1, and n f1011r0e Of perpotaal pride to the en tire rem-

And pernaun the ;argent single key to thin is that it in not a new

',0y that Sr being proponed here, but rat'ier a redirection

nf i,on: away from doing for, and towards working with no that the

I -..dica;Ted :!.to onee again do for themselves.

H.rrh,tfo:ly 3uhmitted, Ap-i I 9, 1983 by:

Stan L. !orshall125 i:!nt Pill Pwilwill: Vera ont

641

05495

(335

EASIER SIAI 6001iWill RIIAISIRlIS RLHAIIILITATION CENTER, INC.20 Uruokside Avenue, New Haven, Connecticut 06515.0116

History of Projects With Industryin

New Haven, Connecticut

At the end of 1912, the Easter Seal Goodwill Industries Rehabilitation Center in New Haven,Connecticut was Invited to participate In the Projects With Industry Program. Nationwide,the federal Projects With Industry Program, funded under the Rehabilitation Services Admin-istration as found in the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Public Law 93.112) Section 304 (d),and also the Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter X111 of Title 45, Part 1326.43 got ItsStart in 1971. The purpose of the Projects With Industry Program was to establish projectsdesigned to prepare handicapped individuals, especially severely handicapped individuals,for gainful and suitable employment In the competitive labor market including training andemployment in realistic work settings and such other services as are necessary for suchindividuals to continue to engage in such employment through Contracts or jointly financedcooperative agreements made with employers and organizations.

The Projects With Industry Program presented a unique and challenging opportunity to bringabout the employment of disabled Individuals into the private competitive labor market. It

was a major organized effort on the part of the Department's Rehabilitation Services Admin.Istration to invite the free enterprise system to serve as a full and equal partner in therehabilitatio. process. Corporations, both large and small, as well as labor organizationsalong with private voluntary agencies and rehabilitation facilities were asked to providemeaningful leadership and development of training programs locked into employment commit-ment for disabled individuals. The Rehabilitation Services Administration shared in thecosts of approved projects through contracts or jointly financed cooperative agreementsin order to enlist the cooperation and participation of the private sector in innovativeand creative progranemtic approaches for accelerating the employment process involvingdisabled individuals.

The Innovative provisions contained in the Projects With Industry concept offered employersan opportunity to employ, train, and furnish necessary services to disabled individuals.Identifiable costs or a pre-arranged price under a contad or jointly financed cooperativearrangement with the Rehabilitation Services Administration was defrayed by the Departmentof Health, Education and Welfare.

4 This project was unique in its concept in that the federal government was encouraging thefull participation of private industry in the development of programs to train and helpemploy disabled individuals. Additional information regarding the federal Projects With'ndustry Program can be found in the attachment to this paper, as extracted from the!habilitation Services Manual under the Projects With Industry Section, No. 4085.01 throug.85.16.

&ice the program began in 1971 there have been approximately sixty programs financedthrough the Rehabilitation Services Administration. New Haven, as stated earlier, wasfunded from June of 1972 and was one of the first six projects in the country to receivethis funding. The New Haven Rehabilitation Center's Projects With Industry was fundedfrom June 30, 1972 and plans were formulated and initiated to be in full operation bySeptember 1, 1972. In the initial year. the Rehabilitation Center solicited the supportand commitment from over twenty companies from the Greater New Haven area pledging totrain and hire handicapped individuals. In the fall of 1968 the Rehabilitation Center becaraan organization comprised of three separate and distinct non-profit organizations mergedInto one: The Easter Seal Society of New Haven; Goodwill Industries of South CentralConnecticut; and the Rehabilitation Center of New Haven. The merger of these three distinc.yet very compatible non-profit organizations allowed the business community to relate toone organization set up to serve the needs of the disabled individual.

642

636

the businesS contacts developed through these three separate and distinct organizationsin just four years had provided the foundation necessary to launch a Projects With In-dustry Program, By 1971, the Rehabilitition Center had developed into a comprehensiveOutpatient rehabilitation facility provAing services to handicapped individuals Inphysical therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, vocational assessment, vocationalwork adjustment, sheltered employment, skill training in twelve distinct occupations,all of which produced a potential work force just welting for a place to "fit in" intothe business and industrial community.

Since July of 1972, the Rehabilitation Center has maintained a creative job opportunities

program for the severely handicapped. Through the years of evolution and refinement,effective methods and relationships have been developed to facilitate the training and/orplacement of qualified handicapped workers Into competitive Job slots. Principals involved

in this effective working relationship In New Haven are the employer community, specificallythrough the Advisory Council concept; the local and state offices of the Connecticut Divisicof Vocational Rehabilitation; and the Rehabilitation Center. This business /industrial /re-

habilitation triangle provides for the natural flow of individuals through the system Intocompetitive employment. The Rehabilitation Center in New Haven has always enjoyed an ex-cellent relationship with both the state and the local offices of the Connecticut Division

of Vocational Rehabilitation. These offices provided the referrals to the Rehabilitation

Center, who In turn became the link with business and industry. For years (and this con-

tinues today) the business Community has preferred to work with our local rehabilitation

center. The main reason is the absence of "red tape". The Rehabilitation Center, in enter-

ing into a cooperative agreement with the Rehabilitation Services Administration in Wash-ington for its Projects With Industry Program, is allowed to enter into on-the-job trainingcontracts with employers and direct job placement with employers, and his assumed theresponsibility for all of the paper work during this process.

As Is the case with most of the Individual Projects With Industry Programs throughout thenation, New Haven has its unique components. The New Haven Project has worked with anyand all employers with the objective of attempting to match the skills of the disabled

individual with the appropriate job in their community.

In 1968, The Rehabilitation Center operated some twelve training programs, and yet by 1974were surprised that more individuals were not being placed in the competitive job market.

A thorough evaluation was conducted, setting up the base for the Business Advisory Council.Business leaders from throughout the Greater New Haven area were asked to serve on theAdvisory Council for the following reasons: (1) to evaluate the feasibility of the current

training programs; (2) to evaluate the elimination or addition of training programs; (3) toidentify job slots within their organization. With the evaluation of the training programs,many programs were eliminated as there was no longer the need for qualified trained indi-viduals in the fields of work that were becoming obsolete ie: shoe repair, laundry, and dry

cleaning, etc. With those training programs that remained, sub-committees were establishedto assist the Center in rewriting the curriculum based on industry, standards. This perhaps

was one of the most significant accomplishments of the Business Advisory Council in the New

Haven area. For the first time we utilized business and industry to come into our facility,

recommend elimination of training programs, and with those that remained, 'aired business to

write the curriculum. The end result was a business-designed course of study for whichbusiness was committed, which in turn led to their commitment to hire qualified handicappedworkers. From then until now, the Business Advisory Council continues to function at theRehabilitation Center and the strongest of all these councils is the Computer TrainingAdvisory Committee which began in December of 1975. This Advisory Committee continues to

be a strong viable committee with input into the most sophisticated training offered, namelya program to train severely physically handicapped individuals as computer programmers.This particular training program which has seen six graduating classes with a placementrate of over 90% into jobs averaging $16,000 per year, would not have been possible withoutthe total commitment and involvement of the Business Advisory Council. Yale University,

637

Since the program's Inception, has donated 411 of the computer time and has allowedthe Rehabilitation Center to be connected to the Yale University cOmputer, The SouthernNew England Telephone Company, 414O since the program's Inception, has provided freeterminals hooked up to the Yale University computer. Perkin-Elmer Corporation of Dan-bury. Connecticut had provided, at no charge, two computer terminals, again hooked upto `!ale's Computer. There have also been numerous volunteers hours from the BusinessAdvisory Council into the program, continuing to modify and refine the curriculum{monitor and refine the selection of students' monitor and recommend the refinement ofequipment' monitor and help place these handicapped individuals in conjunttion withthe Projects With Industry staff.

From September 1st of 1072 through December 31 of 1982. 1,664 clients have been placedInto competitive employment by the New Haven Projects With Industry Program. The retentionrate for these individuals placed into competitive employment averaged 75% over thesepast ten years. The hourly average wage for those individuals placed In 1982 alone Was$4.11 per hour. Funding for the Projects With Industry Program from 1972 to 1983 wasslightly over $1 million with the amount of funding fluctuating year by year from a lowof $50,760 in 1972 to a high of $150,000 in the years of 1976, 1977, and 1978.

Of the 155 clients admitted to the Now haven Projects With Industry Program during thefirst eleven months of 1982, 584 reported receiving some kind of subsidized income. Com-bined, they received approximately $594,000 in subsidized Income during the previous elevenmonth period. Upon placement, these salmi Individuals no longer received assistance, butinstead paid back to the government, through income taxes, a total of approximately$340,000 annually. With their average age being thirty, it Is reasonable to expect theywill remain employed for approximately twenty -five years, which represents en additionalincome tax revenue totalling over $8.5 million,,without taking into consideration anyincrease in salary during these twenty-five years7"Thiie statistics are not unique toNew Haven, but rather statistics that are unique to Projects With Industry's concept.It has been quoted many times that the average, cost of placing an individual throughthe Projects With Industry Program is $1,000 or less. In New Haven, for the past fewyears, it has been less approximately $800 per individual. One can easily see, as wein New Haven have seen, that this program Is cost-effective. In fact, for every $1.00spent in rehabilitating an individual through the Projects With Industry Program in NewHaven, over $8.50 has been returned to the government in the form of taxes.

A statistical breakdown of the Projects With Industry clients placed from September 1, 1972through December of 1982 can be found on an attachment. In addition, the funding levelsfor the Projects With Industry Program in New Haven from 1972 thrOugh.1982 can also befound on the same attachment.

As the New Haven Projects With Industry Program enters its eleventh successful year, onecannot help but look back and reflect as to why this program has been successful. Thereason Is simple. An innovative program was conceived in Washington under the RehabllitaticServices Administration using very few dollars, which allowed the Rehabilitation Center inNew Haven to enter into a jointly financed cooperative arrangement with the RehabilitationServices Administration to develop a unique and innovative program. The key to the successlies within the open reception the New Haven Easter Seal Goodwill Industries RehabilitationCenter received from the business/industrial community through the formulation of theBusiness Advisory Council. Without the help, assistance, and full cooperation of thebusiness community in the Greater New Haven area, the project would not have succeeded.

64421-974

638

EASTER SEAL GOODWILL. INDUSTRIES REHABILITATION CENTER, INC.20 Brookside Avenue, New HaVen, Connecticut 06515-0176

PROJECTS WITH INDUSTRY CLIENTS PLACED FROM INCEPTION OF PROGRAM (NEW HAVEN)

September 1, 1972 through December 31, 1973 148.

1974 - 93

1975 -

1976 - 132

1977 - 176

1978 - 203

1979 - 230

1980 - 161

1981 - 205

1982 - 208 TOTAL CLIENTS PLACED: 1,664

,FUNDING LEVELS - PROJECTS WITH INDUSTRY PROGRAM (NEW HAVEN)

1972 - $ 50,760

1973 - 56,250

1974 - 89,920

1975 - 108.750

1976 - 150,000

1977 - 150,000

1978 - 150,000

1979 - 100,000

1980 - 100,000

1981 - 95,173

1982 - 114,350TOTAL FUNDING: $1,165,203.00

639

PROJECTS WITH INDUSTRY 4085.01 - 4085.03

40a5.01 Legal basis

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-112) Section 304(d).Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter XIII of Title'45, Part1362, Section 1362.43.

4085.02 Purpose

Contracts or jointly financed cooperative arrangements may bemade with employers and organizations for the establishmentof projects'which are designed to prepare handicapped indivi-duals, especially severely handicapped individuals, for gainfuland suitable employment in the competitive labor market includ-ing training and employment in realistic work setting andsuch other services as are necessary for such individuals tocontinue to engage in such employment.

4085.03 Background

The Projects With Industry program presents a unique and challeng7ing opportunity to bring about the employment of disabled indivi-duals into.the private competitive labor market.

It is a major organized effort on the part of'the Department's.Rehabilitation _Services Administration to invite the freeenterprise system to serve as a full aid equal partner in therehabilitation process. Corporations, both large and small,as well as labor organizations, along with private voluntaryagencies and rehabilitation facilities, are asked to providemeaningful leaderhip in the development of training programslocked into employment commitments for disabled individuals.

The Rehabilitation Services Administration will share in thecosts of approved projects through contracts or jointly financedcooperative arrangements in order to enlist the cooperation andparticipation of thr. private sector in innovative and creativeprogrammatic approaches for accelerating the employment processinvolving disabled individuals.

The innovative privisions contained in the Projects With Industryconcept offers employers an opportunity to employ, train andfurnish necessary services to disabled individuals. Identifiablecosts or a pre-agreed upon price under a contract or jointlyfinanced cooperative arrangement with the Rehabilitation ServicesAdministration will be defrayed by the Department of Health,Education, and Welfare.

Rehabilitation Services Manual MTN

646

640

PROJECTS WITH INOUATRY 4085.03 - 4085.05

The State vocational rehabilitation agency (or the State agencyfor the 81ind) will be the on-the-spot link between the handi-capped individuals being trained and the employer. The rehabili-tation agencies will provide assistance and support in this jointendeavor, selecting handicapped individuals on the basis of theirabilitieS and potential and help prepare them to fill job openingsand be trained for upward mobility in the employer's'establishment.

These guidelines contain instructions on the proper proceduresfor preparing an application, types of allowable costs, andmethods and procedures for carrying out the objectives of thisprogram--equally beneficial to handicapped individuals andemployers.

The main thrust of the Projects Ili th Industry program is toprovide handicapped individuals with an equal opportunity towork and succeed as well as to share and contribute to the qualityof life for all. Also, to demonstrate to employers and otheremployees that handicapped individuals can perform in the competi-tive labor market.

0

4085.04 Employers and Organizations

Employers and organizations with whom the Commissioner, RSA mayexecute a contract or cooperative arrangement include any in-dustrial, business, or commercial enterprise; labor organizations;or employer, industrial, or community trade association; orassociation; or other agency or organization with the capacityto arrange, coordinate, or conduct training and other employmentprograms for the handicapped in a realistic work setting. Suchtraining and employment programs shall include a planned andsystematic sequence of training and instruction in occupationaland employment skills, and provide reasonable assurance ofgainful employment at the successful termination of such train-ing and instruction. (Assurance must be given to the applicantthat a specific number of appropriate jobs will be providedby the trainer or by similar enterprises for successful trainees.)

4085.05 Initial Inquiry

The State vocational rehabilitation agency (contact the Regionaloffice for proper address) is the preliminary contact for pro-spective employers or organizations wishing to develop training

Rehabilitation Services Manual MTO

641

PROJECTS WITH INDUSIRY 4085.05 - 4085.06'

and employment projects for disabled individuals under thisauthority. (Projects involve services for blind personsthe vocational rehabilitation agency will inform and workwith the appropriate State agency dealing with the visuallyhandicapped.) State agency staff should encourage applicationsfrom employers and organizations which'have particUlar expertise,capacity, facilities, and interest in preparing handicappedindividuals for gainful employment through training in a realisticwork setting. Employers and organizations interested in suchprojects are encouraged to discuss their ideas with State agencystaff.

State agencies will be kept informed of the general level of funds. available for such projects so that State agency staff will bein a position to determine whether exploration is feasible beyonda general exchange of information concerning on-the-job trainingneeds and capability to provide training.

Federal program staff at the Regional or Central office levelwill collaborate with State agency personnel in providingtechnical advice related to the development of applications.

For a project covering more than one State, the Commissioner, RSAwill be the initial point of contact who in turn will coordinateactivities with appropriate. State agencies and Regional representa-tives.

4085.06 Project Activities and Assignments

Projects With Industry may include, but are not limited to, suchactivities as the following: (a) The provision of on-the-jobtraining for handicapped individuals; (b) the provision of pre-vocational and other job readiness training for handicapped indivi-duals; (c) such special orientation for supervisors; foremen,and other personnel as might contribute to the training and con-tinuing employment of handicapped individuals; (d) supportiveservices such as job coaching, basic education, personal adjust-ment training, and personal and job counseling to assist handi-capped individuals to maintain themselves in employment; (c) therecruitment and employment of special placement personnel.byemployers or organizations to assist in the job placement ofadditional numbers of handicapped persons; (f) trail employmentin industry or occupations as may be necessary to prepare handi-capped individuals for competitive employment and/or to assistthem to continue to engage in such employment.

Rehabilitation Services Manual MT#

648

642

PROJECTS WITH ITIHIPiTkr4085.07 - 4085.08

4085.07 Matching Requirements

Applicants for Federal support shall be expected to match

part of the costs of projects. The amount of the costs to

be borne by the parties to the contract or arrangements will

be a matter of negotiation.

4085.08 Federal Financial Participation

Federal financial participation within contracts or arrange-

ments may be available for:

(1) The costs of job training and related vocational rehabili-

tation services;

(2) Instruction and supervision of trainees;

(3) Training materials. and supplies, including consumable

materials;

(4) Instructional aids;

(5) Excessive waste and scrap;

(6) Bonding fees, liability and insurance premiums;

(7) The purchase or modification of equipment adapted to the

special capacity of handicapped individuals;

(8) Such minor alteration and renovation as are necessary to

assure access to and utilization of buildings by the

handicapped;

(9) Transportation;

(10) Staffing;

(11) Technical assistance; and

(12) Seminars and special conferences.

Rehabilitation Services Manual MT#

643

PROJECTS WITH INDUSTRY 4085.09 = 4085.10

4085.09 'Prior Assurances for Contracts and Arrangements

Prior to entering into a contract or a cooperative arrangementwith an applicant, it will first be determined that there is:

(1) Concurrence with the project by the bargaining agent wherethere is a collective bargaining agreement applicable tothe employer and the occupation;

(2) Reasonable assurance that the wage rate to be set fortrainees will not tend to create unfair competitive laborcost advantages nor have the effect of impairing ordepressing wage or working standards established forexperienced workers for work of a like or comparablecharacter;

(3) No abnormal labor condition such as a strike, a lockout,or other similar conditions, existing with respect to theapplicant; and

(4) Reasonable assurance that the State agency will, to themaximum extent practicable, maintain a continuing relation-ship with the handicapped individuals to be served in theproject in order to provide, or ensure the availabilityof necessary vocational rehabilitation services and relatedsupportive services.

4085.10 General Provisions of. Contracts and Arrangements

Any contract or arrangement entered into shal7, in addition tostandard provisions:

(1) Provide for adherence to the terms or conditions of employ-ment prescribed by an applicable Federal, State or locallaw;

(2) Provide that determination by competent authority of failureto adhere to the terms or conditions required by subparagraph(1) of this paragraph shall constitute cause for terminationof the contract or arrangement;

Rehabilitation Services Manual MT#

644

PROJECTS WITH INDUSTRY 4085.10 - 4085.11

(3) Provide that the recruitment, examination, appointment,training, promotion, retention, or any other personnelaction with respect to any handicapped individual receiv-

ing training or employment shall be without regard to race,sex, color, creed, age, or national origin, or disabling

condition and that violation shall constitute grounds for,termination of the contract or arrangement and that theUnited States shall have a right to seek judicial enforce-

ment of this provision;

(4) Provide that trainees shall be compensated for hours spentin production of any goods or services;

(5) Provide that individuals to receive training or employmentservices under the contract or arrangement will includeonly tho%e individuals who have been determined by theappropriate State agency to be handicapped individualswho are suitable for such services;

(6) Provide reasonable assurance that handicapped individualssuccessfully completing the training program will beemployed by the employer or within a similar enterprise;

(7) Specify the duration of the project;

(8) Contain an agreement to make such reports and to keep such

records and accounts as the Secretary/Commissioner, RSAmay require and to make such records and-accounts available

for audit purposes; and

(9) Contain an agreement to provide such other information asthe Commissioner, RSA may require.

4085.11 Rates Under Cooperative Arrangements

(1) The cooperative arrangement shall include the rate of

compensation to be paid to trainees engaged in theproduction of any goods or services. In no case shall

the wage rate paid a trainee be less than the following,

whichever is higher:

(a) The minimum entrance rate for inexperienced workersin the same occupation or if the occupation is new

Rehabilitation Services Manual MT#

645

PROJFC IS W1111 MIMIC 4005.11 - 4085.13

to the establishment, the prevailing entrance ratefor the occupation among other establishments inthe community or areas; or

(b) The minimum rate required under the Fair LaborStandards Act or the Walsh-Healy Public ContractsAct, to the extent that such acts are applicableto the trainee.

(2) The contract or arrangement ' 11 further provide for anincreasing rate of payment t -ainees if the trainingprogram is of such duration at periodic increases arereasonable and if the proficiency of such trainees meritssuch increases.

4085.12 On-The-Job Training

The contract or arrangement shall:

Provide for methods of instruction, progression of trainees,and size of the training group (including any appropriatecombination of individualized or group training), whichshall be compa;.able in duration to other training programsfor the particular occupation, amid adequate in content-to qualify trainees for employment;

(2) Provide adequate and safe facilities and equipment; and

Require that suitable records of attendance, performanceand progress of trainees be maintained and that suchrecords be made available to t e Commissioner, RSA whenrequested.

4085.13 Role of Federal Project Officer or trectorXof Projects WithIndustry Trrogram

The Project Officer or Director of FWh is responsible for admin-istering and servicing the Arrangement or Contract on behalfof the Federal government. To ensure that the objectives ofProjects with Industry are being att 'fined periodic review ofboth the training establishment and he' trainees' progress isessential.

(1)

(3)

The Project Officer or Director is responsible for instructingthe Project Director as to compliance requirements, includingnecessary records and reports; for inspection of the training

Rehabilitation Services Manual MT#

652

646

PROJECTS W1)HEpluvi 4085.13 - 4085.14

establishment to assure that the quality of instruction andsupervision is adequate to achieve the training objectives;for determining that the on-the-job training and the facilitiesused by both the employer or organization and any sub-contractori

conform to those agreed upon in the Arrangement or Contract;and for assuring that provisions concerning wages, safe workingconditions, equal employment opportunity, and a continuingrelationship between the State agency and the handicapped traineeare carried out as agreed.

During the formative years of this program; the Federal ProjectOfficer will be a National Office program representative, withassistance from Regional Office staff, in order to assure develop-ment of expertise among both National Office and Regional Officestaff, and to assure uniform guidelines and procedures for thistype of activity in the vocational rehabilitation program. He

will work with State agency and Regional Office staffs in theinitial stages of developing the project application and will bethe continuing liaison with the Federal Contracting Officer orother authorized individual if a Contract is executed.

4085.14 PublicatiorjLL22pilliattpolicy.

A. Publication Policy

Awardees may publish results of any special projects withoutprior review by RSA, provided that such publications carryan acknowledgement of assistance received under the project

award and that copies of the publications are furnished toRSA. For uniformity, it is sugges.ted that the acknowledge-

ment read:

"This project was supported in part by theRehabilitation Services Administration,Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,Washington, O.C., under Award #

Since Awardees may publish reports of projects without prior

RSA review, no formal publication should ascribe to the RSA

responsibility for the work other than the acknowledgement

mentioned above. The project program is the responsibility

of the Awardee.

Rehabilitation Services Manual MU

647

PROJECTS WITH INDUSTRY 4085.14 - 4085.16

B. Copyright Policy

Where the project activity results in a book or other copy -rightable material, the author is free to copyright the work,but the RSA reserves d royaltyfree, nonexclusive, and irre-vocable license to reproduce, publish, translate, or other-wise use, and to authorize others to use, all copyrightableor copyrighted material resulting from the project activity.

4085.15 Advisory Council

Each project should establish an Advisory Council consistingof community leaders of business, educators, voluntary agencies,etc. The Advisory Council should have meaningful input intothe policy and decision-making proceS.ses governing the operationand conduct of the project.

4085.16 Projects With Industry Arrangements with State VocationalRehabilitation Agencies

State agencies may wish to consider one or more of the followingsuggestions:

(1) Utilize basic support program funds or expansion grants tosponsor projects with selective major industries or othersuitable agencies or institutions, e.g. General Electric,AFL /CIO, Workshops, small businesses, etc.

(2) Upgrade the capacity of State VR agencies in respect toplacement by bringing in a full-time or part-time businessexecutive to serve as a consultant to State agencies inrelating to private industry.

(3) Utilize qualified State VR agency persons to place greaterimportance on the placement capability, particularly relatingto business and industrial community.

(4) Make special arrangements with workshops and rehabilitationfacilities for the development of Projects With Industry.These facilities, in turn, would develop special cooperativearrangements with industries within the community to sharein the training and placement of the disabled.

Rehabilitation Services Manual MT#

648

PROJECTS WITH INDUSTRY 4085.16

(5) Create State Advisory Councils to develop policies andprocedures to initiate State-wide or community projectswith industry. These councils would include a strongrepresentation of individuals from private corporations.

(6) Develop Joint programs with labor oriented organizationsto stimulate the development and expansion of the job

market for the handicapped.

(7) Arrange special or functional relationships with businessoriented organizations..such as, Chamber of Commerce.Association of Manufacturers. or other business bureausand similar bodies for facilitating placement and employmentprograms for the disabled.

(8) Strengthen in-service-training programs for counselors bystressing the importance of the placement function as apriority consideration for job effectiveness.

(9) Stress in public information programs the prime importanceof private enterprise is a full and equal partner in the

rehabilitation process.

(10) Initiate action to create the development of a new positionin the State VR agency. entitled "Job Coordinator forBusiness and Industry".

655

649

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES

QUESTIONS FOR GEORGE CONN_

AGING ASSISTANT SECRETARY

Of f ILI . Ilf SP' CIAL 11111EA I ION AND RI: HAIM I TAlllif SIIIVICES

HEM ,,,,, I1A110N Si RV ICES AD1111115IRAI ION

Question OMB's policy of reducing States' paperwork burden hasdiminished the amount of data available for programevaluation.

What initiatives have been undertaken to ensure thatadequate program data will be available to the Congressand the States?

Response;

Questionswr and d3

Response:

RSA, with the assistance of State Vocational Rehabilitationagencies, has developed an individual case closure reportingsystem to replace the Client Case Services Reporting System(RSA-3001, The new system is the Program Impact Reportingrid es I05A-9111, and is designed to collect the minimum data

necessary to adequately administer the Vocational RehabilitationProgram at the national level. State VR agencies, already col-lecting the required data, have unanimously adopted the system.the RSA -911 will be used to request Fiscal Year 1982 data of',tate VR agencies.

The f,SA-(111, together with data collection forms already approvedby OMB, will provide sufficitai: infortheition on tne Tir,In I :irogramto provide adequate prograti data to the Congress and to the States.

Data indicates that services for handicapped youth are declining.This could oe due to he "philosophy" that since PL 94-142 mandates

youfg-5 age 22, vocaticnalneed mit-iniETWE8 services-TY 14-611":216-War old poiliiiiritiOn.riis was not tTe infent of PL 94442.

How can you account for the decline in vocational rehabilitationservices for handicapped-Youth, under 18 to 24 years old?

We do not believe that an underlying "philosophy" concerning PL 94-142has had much, if any, effect on the availability of VR services tohandicapped youth. What has probably had an effect is theRehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and the emphasis it places onservices to the severely disabled. This emphasis appears to havebrought about services to an increasingly older clientele. A Stateagency's order of selection when funds are insufficient to serveall eligible applicants can also impact on the average age of personsreceiving services. RSA program data indicates that prior to theenactment of the Rehabilitation Act, the proportion of clients inthe under 25 age group had been growing among rehabilitated persons.One full year after enactment of the Act (Fiscal Year 1975), the

656

guest inn n4:

Response:

Question 05:

650

looporti.n of tonibiliiallid plosions under years began, and

,ontinuvd, to t11.1 lInv,

los'. than 2 percent of the students, age 14 to 21, coveredWin,' IL 94.142 are new being referred to or are now"reCeisoing

froe'ltate VR dg uncles. This age group of disabled

,!,clent,. are prime candidates fur vocational rehabilitationservices and placement in jobs Upon leaving the school system.

16A records show that State. VR agencies have more success with

this ago category than any Other category receiving services.

A concerted effort aver the past two years has been made byRSA Regional staff, in conjunction with school and rehabilitation

officials at the State and local levels of government, to develop

and implement prototypes or models directed towards addressing

the needs of young disabled people and to prepare them for jobs

upon leaving the school system. Success is dependent on thecormnitment of staff operating within the system, plus the cooperation

of parents and business runway in providing these young people

support and an 01quirtnnity to learn through formalized training and

work incentive programs.

What specific technical assistance is RSA providing States and

local Rog ions to ensure coordination between special educationprooiam and vocational rehabilitation?

In recognition of this important issue, the Office of Special

Education and Rehabilitative Services has established as one of

its major objectives for FY 1983 a goal to facilitate joint planning

and programing on behalf of handicapped students by enhancing the

cooperative linkages between Special Education and Vocational

Rehabilitation.

kSA and Special Education staff dre visiting exemplary cooperative

programs within each of the Regions. 'These visits will lead to the

development of training materials for the States in the establish-

ment and improvement of cooperative programs.

As a result of these activities, we expect that a more systematic

and coordinated approach will be taken regarding the assessment and

evaluation of the disabled student/client. Additionally, joint

planning will be carried out to achieve specific educational and

employment goals.

Learning Disabilities were included as a service category under

Vocational Rehabilitation in the regulations issued January 19. 1981

(Part 19). Have separate provisions been established to ensurethe vocational rehabilitation of both youth and adults who are

learning disabled?

When will data be collected for the number served and specific

services provided for learning disabled rehabilitation clients?

Why is data not collected for the learning disabled population

currently?

651

RSA has taken several steps to assist In the vocationalrehabilitation of both youth and adults who are learningdisabled since the issuance of the January 19, 1901 regulations.Included among these are the funding of a special project,A ComprehenSive Vocational Service Model for Persons withr1 citIc It rtil'ng`AisaUl1ftIvi curreirlly underway at theVocational' RehATTITatfoii-tenter of Allegheny County, Inc.,and the Inclusion of a learning disabllitieS objective intho RSA Planning System, rho Objective is aimed at improvingthe capability of State VR agencies to deliver services to thelearning disabled by assisting State agencies In the developmentof policies and procedures that Will benefit service delivery.RSA is studying the diagnostic evaluation process and the develop-ment of the Individualized Written Rehabilitation Plan specificallyin relation to the needs of the learning disabled and the elementsof su,:cessful job placement. The results of these measures areintended to improve service delivery at the State level.

In response to your questions concerning data collection, thenew reporting 'system (RSA911) includes a separate disabilitycode for the learning disabled. If a sufficient number of agenciessubmit data by June 30, 1983, RSA will have its first count of learningdisabled persons by mid - or late Summer.

Question $0: According to the 1981 annual report of the Rehabilitation ServicesAdministration, the Federal-State vocational rehabilitation programappears to be a good investment which pays for itself over approxi-mately four years through increased payment of trues and decreaseddependency of rehabilitated per'sons. However, the September 22, 1982,letter from the director of the General Accounting Office to theSecretary of Education indicated that some clients receiving physicalrestoration services did not appear to have a substantial handicapto employment.

What steps is the Administration taking to ensure that vocationalrehabilitation services are only provided to persons whoseimpairment is a substantial handicap to employment?

Response.: RSA issued a memorandum on Jar'ury 19, 1983, to State VR agenciesto inform them of the findings of the GAO review and the joint effortsneeded to make program corrections. We are working toward a ProgramInstruction issuance'which will require more stringent application ofeligibility criteria: Monitoring and technical assistance activitiesalso are being airected to eligibility determination as part of theongoing work plans of regional offices. Related special activitiesinclude a project to review case files, provide feedback, and thenassist with a corrective action plan; a management control project,and a newly established Research and Training Center in Management.

Question.#7: A recent evaluation study indicated that 80% of the clientsrehabilitated in FY 1980 were placed in competitive employment.

What plans does the administrOtion have to maintain or increasethe number of handicapped persons rehabilitated into competitiveemployment?

658

Repons:

652

In ccrwerItIon with ',trite vocational rehabilitation agencies,RSA initiated a national objective on job placement iq FiscalYear 1963, and proposes to contihue that effort throu' 1984.Pie objective is designed to improve both vocational optand outcomes for all disabled individuals, especially mote withsevere handicaps. RSA believes tliat, with a focus on compet/tiue,employment, opportunities can be expanded and outcomes can beelevated by strengthening the role of private business endin the rehabilitation process similar to that found in the

Projects with Industry program.

In addition to the RSA Initiative, the adn.inistral al Os proposed

legislation that would establish performance -baler lundkri.Distributing these funds on the'basis of performarrewoulradditional incentive-for State vocationalto rehabilitate severely handicapped individuals into :om.:etitive

employment.

65.I

653

08 MR. MAY IARYTul f

1.1 SINCE FY 19;9, THE INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTERS PROGRAM

HAS I NCREV.F.D FROM Irj GRANT AWARDS FUNDING 20 CENTERS,

TD. /3 GRANT AWARDS PROVIDINI, FUNDING FOR 156 CENTERS

IN FY 1982, WHAT IMI.Ac1 HAS THE INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTERS

PROGRAM HAD ON THE LIVES OF SEVERELY DISABLED PEOPIE AND

HOW IS THIS IMPACT MEASURED?

2) HAVE YOU ExPERIINEID ANY DIFFICULTY IN FETERMINING WHOM

THE. INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTERS ARE INTENDED BY LAW TO,

'.I IN)

00E 7,t[ (1!(-.V.,' PROGRAM TEND TO r:VERLAP WITH THE VOCATION-

Ai REHABILITATION SERVICES OFFERED BY THE BASIC STATE GRANT

PROGRAMS?

3) HOW ARE THE INTEREii, OF MENTALLY HANDICAPPED AND AGED DIS-

ABLED PERSONS PROTECTED IN THE INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTERS

PROGRAM?

WHAT DO YOU SEE AS THE ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST FUNDING

THE STATE ALLOTMENT PROGRAM FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING SERVICES

AUTHORIZED UNDER PARE A?

6601:1 iE7d L)-83

654

oN:i

1 In 1:179 oath I II (Iependen1. I. I V,1111.: tveet Uppl'fiX1111alfily 150c),,,tis in their first year of operation. Depending on the Center

t lie number persons served has increased. In 1082 the number ofIgo disabled pem.on, nerved has remained relatively steady. There -! ,r, 012 at hew, t 2'1,11,0 person!, iii Lb distil)! l it ies were served.fstortunatelv, no evaluation by !h Pebahilitation Services Admini-stration ha:, been done ,s th, Independent Living. Centers Program,which is a m)eormaindat in tv t St t on a I Council of IndependentLiving Piss:rams, hut mane per,onc served are indi victim Is who havebeen inst. tut i ona 1 I ;Jul rm. Imo: 1,eriods I ulna, or have been turnedd.,wa by other agenc ies due to the !toyer ity of the ir di said 1 i ies.Some Cent ers have used basic. mthod!: of col lect I ng data on persons

I' 1 . For ( xample a woman who is a quadriplegic from spinal cordi!jinn, 1 i veil In a long term care hospi tat for the past ten Yours atan awns, 1 $1:(.))00 . A little over a year ago she moved intoher ow) apartment ,and tt it; now cost tug $1:1,000 per year.

) Independent Living. Center.; tree had no difficulty in determin-ing wh,nn t.;) serve. Then) a re n le»; exceptions,. but a vast major i tyof the Independent Living (lintrs serve a cross disability piipti lat. ionand make evert: effort possible to expand that concept.

since the Independent Living Centers serve at large population ofseverely d i sal) led persons who are inst. i tut ional ized or who are living

th faint 1 y members and have never had access to Vocational 10.'11111)11 i -t at reu i(ervi, ei, there is llno ro I overlap between the 'Independent

v ;nit Cent e, . Programs and the haste State Grant Programs. In fact,there is a ing work ng rot at ionship between the two because1 nilependee t. I ying centers :ire helping severely disabled people

which prepare them for Jot train ing or further educat ion .

".; ) slated above, t loclis by Most. of the Independent LivingCenters is to serve a .) miss (I i saki 1 i ty popu I a t ion. This is a majorconcern of the Nat. i luta I -Conn() i 1 of Independent Living Programs andwe strong g y emphasize that Independent Living Centers make extensiveeffort I l l serve a .ruts disability population. I t is also emphasizedthat t here should not be a restrict ion on age of persons served, butto reach out to the aged disabled as a group which can benefit fromIndependent Living services.

Kith Part A of tie VII funds, Vocational pehubLlitation can beginto work even more closely i th Independent Living Centers, therefore,

14; the i ry Lof Independent Li ving services. An examplewould be when a .1 habled person has been institutionalized and hasbad little opportun ty to acquire skills to pursue a ,job hejshe canbegin fiining in an' Independent i,tving Center, with financial sup-port fro, the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation. This relation-ship cat. lead to some vocational training, ultimately leading toc (nape LiLi ye employment..

For further st.:ltistiraI information on Independent hiving Centers,

Vont ;111

655

tbs. I ,11 1:1I i1,f,.`i Fr' 1(41,1), Di 10,1111(11,011(10t1I Li t irir 1{,-;r; rrIr Ift f I iznl I oil Pro jo,( t ( I 1,1111)

1ns t i tut. fur lir.11:11, 'III ;it iom and rh. (), 11)X 20095

11,11!.. r n , Tr.r<r-; 770(2:,1 7117- 11.10 , ',n1

;11111, V, fitidd. , lii s

Its ;11,,J 'I'r.i l n i nt Coo , nrl I Ii(lo twildf,11( L f a 1 nI I I Rf111!;i1.,.

Iii'ii 1;t ix1.:1W1.011e1 litin::11.; 1101115

(Di a) ,`i11.1_.1;45(1

Helen KellerFor Deaf -Blind

of 1p r 1 SAL WIN. ft I) f .tinfloLo IN A Apt. E 0, WAN. (br et.tco

,1 19, 1983

656

he Honorable Lowell Weicker, Jr Chairman

Subcommittee on the HandicappedUnited States SenateCommittee on Labor and Human ResourcesWashington, D.C. 20510

D'ar Senator Weicker:

National CYouths arid Adults

oprbyled by

tHL iNDUSTHI AL HOME FOB THE BLIND

We are very appreciative of your interest in seeking more information regardingdeaf-blind persons and the national service delivery program at the. Helen KellerNational Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults. Your questions went to theheart of the matter, and we will attempt to reply as concisely ant' to the pointas possible.

The one question that personally gave me the most difficulty related to theproblem of why we consider deaf-blindness to he the most serious of all handi-capping conditions. I know when my older daughter was born with an orthopediccondition - to me it was the most serious problem in the world. It was my

daughter, and I felt deeply. Nothing else mattered. I know many other handi-

capped individuals (and, in fact, non-handicapped individuals) regard theirpersonal problems and limitations as the most serious and important in theirlives.

I asked Dr. Robert Smithdas, who is our Director of Community Education and adeaf -blind person since the age of four, to answer Question No. 1. Dr. Smithdasis a most unusual individual, even in the world of the hearing and sighted -yet he required several hundred volunteers who worked with him and for himin order for him to go through college and graduate school. He had a full-time

paid interpreter for all his years in college. He had exceptionally strong .

family support and an organization (The Industrial Home for the Blind) speci-fically committed to work for this one individual. He had those kinds of volun-teers and support services that rarely exist for any handicapped person. His

achievements as a professional person and his abilities as a deaf-blind personcan be directly attributed to those support services he received. The follow-

ing paragraphs. are Dr. Smithdas' contribution as to why he feels deaf-blindnessis the most serious of all handicapping conditions:

1. Would you please discuss why /0u consider deaf-blindness to be the mostserious of all handicapping co.Tallons7-

"Deaf- blindness is defibi,ely one of the most serious of all handicapping

conditions known to mankind. Without sight and hearing, the world literally

657

shrinks ter the deal -blind individual, and becomes only as large as he canreach with his fingertips and ;NOW through his remaining senses of touch,taste, and smell.

Sight and hearing are the two cardinal avenues through which any individualobtains knowledge and information of the world and its experiences. De-prived of sight, the individual cannot develop concepts of light, color,symmetry, size, and the actions and manners of what is socially acceptableby society. Deprived of hearing,: the deaf-blind individual Cannot !War soundsand the spoken language, cannot learn speech and develop vocabulary for theexpression of personal wants and needs, lhis dual disability imposes tre-mendous problems of mobility and orientation, and receptive-expressive com-munication, and denies the individual opportunity to participate in society,except'through the use of specially developed methods of training and theuse of special aids and devices'.

The limitations imposed by deaf-blindness are far more severe and isolatingthan they are for other types of handicaps. A deaf-blind person cannot ob-serve what is happening around him; he cannot use the telephone, enjoy radioor television, or participate in ordinary conversation and activities whichmay tie available to other handicapped persons to a notable degree, Deaf-blindness imposes isolation and loneliness. The condition invariably meansthat the deaf-blind person must obtain all information and knowledge second-hand through another person who can communicate with him.

Because of the severity of the limitations imposed, the deaf-blind individualis almost totally dependent on others for assistance in performing the ordi=nary necessities of life - shopping, coping with personal. emergencies, andfulfilling personal needs. The only means of overcoming these limitationsis by providing very intensive, highly specialized and comprehensive train-ing in special methods and aids and devices that can provide a limited ;measure if independence. Such training is absolutely essential if tee deaf-blind person is_to gain a degree of self-reliance and self-sufficien..y, anddevelop potential skills that can be used to earn a livelihood and to anactive member of society in spite of the tremendous obstacles imposed by thelimiting effect of this dual disability."

2. Given _the severity_of this disability, what are reasonable rehabilitate.,:goals for deaf-blind persons anJ how effective has the Helen KelleTrer.e-been in assisting deaf-blindpersons achieve these goals

Reasonable.rehabilitation goals for deaf-blind persons can perhaps best .e

summarized by offering the following two objectives:

(a) Employment on some level ranging from sheltered workshops to tompeti ,,eand professional employment.

Achieving some level of indepa, 'n skills of daily living,includes communication and roUii. enabling the deaf-blind in-dividual to either live wits :11,'or to be released from an in-stitution (frequently a ment: "t'?1,1; ficilify) and lii, in acommunity or group home.

(b)

The above are reasonable rehabil nr? , Hnwever, each deaf-blind

6 6 /4

658

ler,,,u at ei'd vVAitidtod, and worked With, ;0 that

reh,rt'!litatron are ;won tel our educated

ristin:dte of ,how [oat person Can reach madrigal, potential. Notarise ui the

and highly sk flied staff, highly Intensive taioing, and re-

halm riat Ion programs carried out within the IIKNC system, esnly 505' of our

tenter', are now employed in various types of work including elec-

t/ ,n , Uri+ !NI ,` AM} r,il lnrt making, hospital various forms of

flue collar support s 1. 1 as veil .1', teachers, ref lid 1 tatIon workers

arrid life'. in special re11.11,1 1 1,1 len renters. Dyer 400 Oval-blind individu-

als, ',any iit whom (.une from ION( ire now 1,inilloyed in National Industries

for 1,11n hlihd 'iii' teied wo0Ogge..

3 how effective has the Helen feller Center lien i 11 improving the skills of

,dxational rehabilitation counselors serving deaf- blind persons?

Perhaps the most concise way to answer Question No. 3 is to indicate thatmost deaf -blind 51,00 Ali s ts now practicing in the 22 affiliated agenc les

within the Hrric syston, were trained at HOC. Our National Training Team

and our week-long twining seminars at. IIKNI are fully booked, for example,

our' Na t ond (relining Team is new accepting twirling alp) i ntments and visits

for January 1984. The reputation of our expertise in training programsprompted most of the Rehabilitation Service Administrators to spend theweek of February 7 at our Center. Their positive remarks are on record in

Contni SS i liner George Corn's office (RSA). The National Training Team con-

din fed 44 i ntenx Ivo conferences in 21 different states between May 1981

and the present time. Week-long seminars at HKNC occur on the average at

once a month. Participants in these seminar activities can acquire

1 gr Al4 4 I I- r011 t c or 4 continuing education credits from Western Maryland

Col lege. Again, AS a result of our reputation and expertise, Western Mary-

land Col of Westminster. Maryland and HKNC have co- sponsored a master's

degree program in deaf-bIliviness - the only such program in the. United States.

What types of competitive or sheltered employment are most appropriate for

dea -hi i nd nd iv 'dual s to enter fol lowing rehab t fen?

The above question is more difficult to answer, as there are many levels of

functioning within the deaf-blind conimunity. Some individuals who are deaf -

blind but have had sight or hearing at one time, and perhaps even post-secondary school training, can achieve and do achieve competitive employ-

ment. For cxample, we do hive a number of HOC graduates who are working

dS professionals and Taraprofesiona s in different rehabilitation systems,

school', and agencies throughout the country,

There are many other deaf-blind individuals who as a result of taining at

Igt/C and our affiliated .agencies are able to perform businesses nnnerally

classified as industrial or blue collar. They are in assemb. 1).es, small

industries, the armed services,- and the federal government. re ''oaf -blind

graduate of HOC was one of the 10 outstanding federal hand .''rice workers

of 1980.

Many other deaf-blind individuals who have lost their sight hearing at

A very early age - perhaps, were even pre - lingually ,:edf and h',equently

havn A very I 1111 1 red educational experience - frequently find ct,loyment in

sru,Itered workshops throughout the enited States. National Industries for

6 6,

659

the 011nd ,. 11, chi al eon 0ot tt agent i whI,h tiniialtilatet shit) tef141 Wet*-for t he ttl lod , rinf ts that 199 deal hl tnd od i v Idud I won' In it'.

sheltered workshops ,Ind 215 nd v i 141 I who are hard of hearing and blindalso are employed in the 618 sheltered workshop pronpiart. Some 70 ol thoseindividuals are graduates of the Hilit Program', Many of these siteitapied4,10 pflIpl Mu; !NMI at least the minimum wage, and I know personally ofseveral Will, are earning substantially above minimum wage in sheltered work-shop imploiment. I he ill I fy f0 rnnyrunlcate and the opportunity to find1 tying tifetrters near the place of employment are perhaps file most crucialfactors de term i ming a deaf -1,1 ind person'; shoe''', In finding and retainingeewlopuent. We are currently in the planning stages will Notional Indus-tries far the BI Ind and 411 Independent rgi Center in 01!,/(!11)1/ sys-till) of r elohl 1 1 Winn ti a inInq, housing placement, and 510d tered workshopamployment fur the drat - blind. Onte dna, system is developed, it can hereported throughout . too couu try . It would primarily give more deaf -hl indindividuals the opportunity to work in sheltered work shops and 1 1 v neartheir place or employment.

5. What percentage of deaf -Iliad persons in need rut rehabilitation servicesreceive such ia,rvi cps through the Helen Vet 1 er Center and lin ()ugh thenine regional centers?

Recently Rehabilitation Service'; Admini s List t On ccumni ssioned on organ xa'to conduct a survey of deaf -blind individuals throughout A he co,ntry. lhissurvey, , niuttrted by Redvx, Inc., estimated that there are sonwM Ind Ind 1 viduals in the On) ted States. its definition of deaf - blindnesswas siniil,ir to the HOC 1114 initinn. 11680, at our training facility in',and Point, N.Y., general ly serves approximately 80-100 clients per year.flipto , stay at the. Center from 10 weeks to 3-4 years.

The faintog it Hoc. is intensive and on a one-to-one basis. The one-to-oneaportnith I, the dwA red and most efficient method. of commnicating.wi th thedeaf -blind Individual and enabling that individual to respond to the re-iiat,t iaativ Although it atettive, it certainly is not. cost.,ftii lent; but there is no other reas, able way with most deaf-blind indi-vidual',. in addition to the nearly 1(1(1 clients that are served at SandsPoint, our nine regional representatives work with approximately another700 clients in the field. They provide direct counseling, concrete as-sistance. vocational placement, and numerous other support services. Thus,in effect, the Hoc system, excluding our affiliation network agencies,works,with -.cure 600 clients per year. This is approximately 2T per yearof the estimated deaf-blind population within the country. Although thesefigures seem quite insignificant, we do again point out the intensive andinvolved methodologies necessary to work with deaf-blind people. The af-filiated network agent les sonic 22 of them, general ly work with approximately600 deaf-blind clients per year.

6. How much funding is made available to the national Training_Team and i,this amount .adequate?

Ouring the Fedc, di ri sra 1 Year of 1982, $87,855 has been allocated to theNational Training Team. Approximately $54,000 is for salaries for one full-

6 6 6

660

r hoe Im' f ion And I.r l part r I,, people the !mandrill fund', rover hri

travel, and other 0.pnegstote.. Ink amont 1, net

for Federal fiscal we plan to ireayhtse the team. ,mposition to two

fill -time eqecienced Instructors (supervisor and mobility) and 1,,,,r othere.iptudeined instructor, each contributing $01 of their lime. Each person

will tootinue the remaining SO.:. in current job assignments (Daily living

',kills, hir'r,l lltarton Audiology and Home Management), The

above personnel will he drawn /row the tairtagit. 'daft roster. Additional

staff will he recruited It-"replace the tour 'Olt positions within the directwryhe or rehabilitation unit. lhls will include one fill' -tbile audio-

inght, 'listed as an imtrIolor k4tory Sl'1l569 p.a.). We have detoomined

from bast eulggience one hill audiologist. was nut sufficient tn hilly

evaluate and work with the caseload at headquarters. With the anticipatedinflux of rubella clients, who would be more difficult to audiologicallyvaluate, an additional audiologist is required. One full-time rehabili-

tation counselor ($2,9,?65 p.a,) with a speciality in genetic counselingwill replace the rehabilitation counselor assigned 50b to the NH. HOSgt!ovtic ,ounseling spfm..ialty necessary to meet. the counseling needs of

deaf-blind client% with a genetic pathology - notably Usher's Syndrome.

Generally, 40 to b01. of our (divots have Usher's 5yngt!mtn. An assistantinstructor (Slb,281 p.a,) will replace and oi3Ost the home management in-

structor that iS assigned 'JCL. to the NTT. An instructor's aide ($13,88/ p.a.)will also replace and assist the daily living skills instructor assignedWI. to Nil This system will enable management to continue to assign someof It', most otoorlvoCttd staff to NTT and still retain.' 01 of their skills'In oo0,11 departments while adding new personnel,

WO hOP, caw ansvored your oaestions to your satisfaction. Please feel free

to call 0s If we may be ot further assistance.

Vt).y truly Our

)

Martin A. Adler, ti5W,

Director

MAA: jar

CZ)

661

'31.ttilvb -Sictiez -Shrunk:tI 1,N,. ION II

April 11, 1983

Ethan Ellis, Deputy DirectorDivision of Advocacy for the

Developmentally DisabledN.J. Department of Public AdvocatesCN 850 '

Crenton, New Jersey 08625

Dear Mr. Ellis:

I am writing to thank you for your recent testimony' before theSubcommittee on the Handicapped and to seek your further inputinto the process of compiling a written record on the reauthor-ization of the Rehabilitation Act.

plvaco review the attached questions and forwardrAir wi,tten response to:

Natalya Smith, LASubcommittee on the HandicappedSH 113 Hart Senate Office Bldg.Washington, D.C.

20510by April 22, 1983.

If yOu need any further clarification, please contactNatalya Smith or Mike Hardman at 202.: 224-6265.

Thank you for your a sista

/n

Lowell Weicker, Jr.United States Senator

662

tier'rte 7

'state ut Neal 31r1.11111

DEPARTMENT OF THE PUBLIC ADVOCkDIVISION OF ADVOCACY FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLN45ISABLED \*

CN 1150

1111 N ION 1.11W JtIISEY 00111511111 II, 11 115n11

II

1)11.11,1,

Ap r !! , 'Hi 1

Ms. Satalya Smithit the Handl,apped

'',11 111 Matt IlIdgW1,11 Ingt 205I

Below are rergonowo to the questions raised by Senator Wicker in

cmlnection with my test. imuny. before the SenateSubcommittee on the 11,111111-.

,apped regarding the Client Assistance Program funded through RSA.

You represent an Independent advocacy agency which also

includes a Client Assistance Project. Cart you clarify for

me the differences between,the people your general agency

represents and the clients served by the Client Assistance

'Poject? Can you tell me where the two programs overlap?

A. As the designated Protection and Advocacy System for New

Jersey, this office is mand,,A to provide advocacy services

to Tersons with developmental disabilities who number

approximately 80,000 la this State, Our Client Assistance

Prolect offers advocacy services to the clients of the New

'Jersey Division of Vocational Rehabilitation Services and

the vocational rehaBilitation clients of the New Jersey

Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired, regardless

of the nature or origin of their disabilities. They number

about 27,000. of whom approximately 6500 are developmentally,

disabled. Persons in this last category, vocational rehabili-

tation 'clients with developmental disabilities, are eligible

for services trom both elements of our advocacy program. In

percentage terms, etsht percent of those eligible for the 00

P&A program are also eligible for services under the Client

Assistance Project.

This measures the overlap in terms of eligibility. In terms

of actual service, this small overlap disappears almost en-

tirely since the demand for advocacy services has increased

663

663

11111 1,1 I, , 111.1,111 ., .11 .,111 Wail' hitt .11

t, Ity vj, I, I, It/ 1.111 1111,1 I .11 1,11 61 .011'.11,(We 11.1V1. 1r.11.111,1 .111 lye 1 1p,r ..1 1111, 1 . 11 ..1,1 1,11.1e

..VI1 11,1-1 ) I 1,1 , 11 .1 Ve1,11 1011.1111,1111,1 11 AI 11111 11 14'111 with .1 11-V1.1 1/111'111I 11 li ..11111 11 y aatinot be..etved by the l'hA becatr,e ..! ,,verload, wi.e v1 him/het Iiru udt 11111 111..111 'tan., Pt o iect anti v

'1.111 111,111 loll, ,1 In v.nu I r..I mow/ 111.11 y.al ,

71111 , 111'11 .'11'.1 i'l .1 lot I , ILI, II I, I cilli.'0.111 -It it.li ill I lent!,

agtiti..1 the V.11. V. Ilt 1,1,11 71111I ,1111 I t, el VIA 111101111.1k

III,/ I lit III. 111/.11.1 11ili III 1010'1 011rntv7 How does thatt'i ierl I II, l .1 II Iii W,..,11 your agency am' the Vii. agency:

A. II anything legal represent at ion of a few clients in disptdo!.With improved our ability to !feet informalt..oltit hat of I I-01110.1111f I 'rill 1'h, knowledgehal will piir4111. .111 1'0,1)0 Irg.;1Iy, II lire. ..nay, onrnural;rs

I ht t. Olt '1 before ,01,11.1 tun becotgt

11,t1) ill' lit loll, our relationship with the V.11. agency1111111,V1,1 liver 111, year; when mravured by the number of referralswe get 1 rout V.11, stall and by that agency's will ing,nes5. tu sup-

port our requests, for adtlit lonal funds from RSA for Lhr Cl letitA ...1,tats.t. i'colect . It should also he noted that the director

Division of VoC11.1011:11 Rehab ill! :It Services'in.' it .tt 001 111.11 h.. t!t !lit. pot: It hill of tin! Nat ion,11i.e 10,, i ,.,.1 ion tittl Advocacy Systems that CI it'llt Assis-

t tile, Pr, I ht. had. pi ti.t. it ..t V,ht, .ty,eac ice; It ntdorI1. bet ter servo the Int et ..,t 7. i.1 I licit I II t;

Q, Please dosrrlite the 1.1 I oct. aver the p.it f lye ycnrs, ofthe CI lent ASS I St :Met. 'fee Li; , What. Illy:let 11:1:4 the 1)111b1.1(lii111:111u111 elit Itad 1111 t111. cl 11,11, anti c I lent :will Jean I. o of the Slate

vnrat tonal rehab( Ii tat It'll prcigrattl, Mid What has heel) 11111

011 1 1 1 . ' .;;1., ICC del ivory System?

A. In New Jersey, we have seen several positive changes in the voca-tional rehabilitation agency's responsiveness to client complaintswith It we Ira., directly or indlrectly to CAP, At our suggestion,h,th the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation Services and thecommission for the Blind and Visually Impaired have clarified andexpanded their efforts to inform their clients of their rights toappeal decisions with which they do not agree. Both agencies havealso regularized their appeals procedures. Through negotiations,due process appeals, and litigation, we have it ninety percentsuccess rate in sot t. 111:4 disputes to our el lent t isf act toll.

We Bier I wit, r I 1, 1 1 /4. hi r V ill. ill.' I Vr l'y system

evil .1111. , whet, .1 . on, en, tot Ion oe.plaiti s

t I Irma 'olggest od y'a mil tool) I ems 1114,1,Tented

.d the ft'. 01:11,11.111.1 1411,1 which 11Irw uul of n111 011,1

hnn broil a dromat lc tdin't ion of client 1.011111Id11114 1.111'1'0"

'It .

r, A year, wr do'agura o (alining paagrom lot persons,

with disakillties In New 1,1 wy 1111 Cm111wiot.'d 11 with KW/

T1, New 1.1,ey cetlitten el titi,..ew, with bisabIlltion. Its

idualos wet,. t, roiled to the cetoostiet Advlsoty Boald III DVRS

And 1/ now servo oo It, ievitoll:log it atle1 three yoals el

inset ls. As A tr,Ull rl thls posit ive experhice, DOS nowemploys some of those graduate, as paid trointy in an (signing

,II lee °I HI-tie '" Ild11110II programs for Its counselors and

supervisors to lie them to the nerds and perceptions ol

their clients, Ibis ptogram was dsighod by CAP staff. The

,onmel tloiners Afr nrW 1.1Ming 0 n0111,14,11( cotporotion to

otlet this sotvlee to piddle ond 1.11vdto VII agencies In Now Jona!),

and elsewhere.

la states where the CAP operates within the VR agency, cliontmhave been given [wt.e extensive descriptions of VII services andthe appeals to-ocesses availably to them. They have also been

4 sIsted In Interval resolutions of their complaints throughnew', lotion. Their lack of independence frost the VR agency has

curtailed Chir eftectivoness In bringing ,(boot the types of

systeml, ,lianges we have seen to New Jersey. Their Inability to

ptnvLlr dltett frpU1srlit4tiOn to in dun process appeals

and litigation has often deprived those clients of such represen-tation And diminished the CAP's ability to resolve complaints

htformilly.

Q. In 1,1' 19111, dh Client Assistance Prolects were supported with

federal funds. In CY 1982, this number was reduced to 17 due

to a 60: reduction in the federal funds made available to Client

Assistance Prolets. What has been the Impact of reduced federalsupport on advocacy activities on behalf of the clients In thestate vocational rehabilitation programs?

A, Beyond the obvious loss of advocacy services in the statesaffected, these cuts have resulted In a significant Increase inthe demand for advocacy services from Protection and AdvocacySystems by VR agency clients. In states where the MA Systemhas a mandate and funding to serve nondevelopmentally disabledpersons, theye clients have been served. In states where no such

mandate exist., they have been referred to underfunded legalservieos :1,.n-irg or gone.intserved. In stares like Connecticut.

-where (I, manda..e '2xists but no funding has twist provided for VR

665

chants, they have ahnoihuil advocacy renonrcuo needed byethers.

g, Are tiler's any.operational constraints related to the fact thatClient Anolotanne Prolectn are administered by state vocatlenalrchabilltal ion agencies?

A, Vlt agency-opeloted CAPo have neverni liMilotIonn which restrictthe rAAW and quality of advocacy services which they can provideto VS client

MOO such ,gentles do not provide their clients with legal orparalegal representation at formal due process proccedings, butlimit their interventlowon behalf of clients to informalnegotiation, Au a result, most of their clients hnve no -r,-N.qpitMlon In ouriouo disputes with the VR agency ar, as_t droptheir complaintos An mentioned earner, this lack ot ?'Kitt rnpt-blIlty also weakens the CAP In Ito attempts nt informal negotiationsince the VR agency knows that the CAP has no other recourse.

Our experience in New Jersey has demonstrated that an independent,advocate can he very effective in bringing about systemic changeIn the VII !wrvice delivery system through

studios, legislation,and work with constnner groups Interested in improving the VR pro-gram. :;11C11 changes are infinitely more difficult to develop,.iuggHt, and implement when they imply criticism of the agencywhit It p4y4 votir notary.

I hope this Information will be helpful to you.

Yours,

EISE:olo

672

666

/Jfnifeb -Sfafez ZonateWASHINGTON. O.C. 20510

April 11, 1983

Joseph R. Galotti, CommissionerDepartment of EducationState of ConnecticutState Office BuildingRoom 305Hartford, Connecticut 06106

Dear Commissioner Galotti:

I am writing to thank you for your recent testimony before theSubcommittee on the Handicapped and to seek your further input

into the process of compiling a written record on the reauthor-ization of the Rehabilitation Act.

Would you please review the attached questions and forward

your written response to:Natalya Smith, LASubcommittee on the HandicappedSH 113 Hart Senate Office Bldg./Washington, D.C.,

20510by April 22, 1983.

If you need any further clarification, please contactNatalya Smith or Mike Hardman at 202: 224-6265.

Thank you for your assistan

/ns

Lowell Weic er, JrUnited States Senat

667

QUESTIONS FOR MR. AOE GALOTTI

1) IN FY 1981, $124 MILLION AUTHORIZED UNDER THE SOCIAL SECURITY

ACT WAS USED FOR TIH: REHABILITATION OF SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY

INSURANCE BENEFICIARIES AND RECIPIENTS OF SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY

INCOME (SSI). THIS PROGRAM HAS BEEN REPEALED AND WAS REPLACED.BY

A REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM wilicn WAS EXPECED TO PROVIDE $3.5 MILLION

FOR REHABILITATION OF THESE SOCIAL. SECURITY AND SSI CLIENTS DURING

FY 1982.

WHAT HAS BEEN THE EFFECT OF THE LOSS OF THESE SOCIAL SECURITY FUNDS

ON THE BASIC STATE GRANT PROGRAMS?

2) GRANTS FOR INNOVATION AND EXPANSION ARE AUTHORIZED TO ASSIST

STATES IN DEVELOPING SPECIAL PROGRAMS TO EXPAND. REHABILITATION

SERVICES 10 PERSONS WITH UNUSUAL OR DIFFICULT PROBLEMS. THIS PRO-

GRAM WAS LAST FUNDED IN FY 1979 AT $11.8 MILLION.

WHAT WERE SOME OF THE MAJOR BENEFITS OF THIS PROGRAM, AND WHAT HAVE

BEEN 11IE EFFECTS OF ZERO FUNDING OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS?

3) THE NUMBER OF PERSONS REHABILITATED IN THE BASIC STATE GRANT

PROGRAM HAS BEEN DECLINING OVER THE PAST 8 YEARS FROM A HIGH OF

361,100 PERSONS IN FY 1974 TO AN ESTIMATED LOW OF 225,900 PERSONS

IN FY 1982.

674

668

3) Cr .

tclIAT HAVE BEEN THE MAJOR CAUSES OF THIS DECLINE AND WHAT ACTIONS DO

YOU N/COMMEND THE CONGRESS MIGHT TAKE TO REVERSE THIS TREND?

4 ) IUNDERSTAND THAT mE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET POLICY OF

RED ICIING THE' STATE'S PAPERWORK BURDEN MAY BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE

NE ESS I TY OF/COLLECTING STATE PROGRAM DATA NEEDED TO ADEQUATELY

AD II NI STER!AND EVALUATE THE BAS IC STATE. GRANT PROGRAM.

IAT ROLE HAS THE COUNCIL DE STATE ADMI NI STRATORS OF VOCATIONAL REHAB

/LITA'TION PLAYED IN ATTEMPTING TO ENUSRE THE QUALITY AND CONSISTENCY

OF THE DATA COLLECTED?

669

STATE OF CONNECTICUTS TE ROA RI) OF EDUCATIOA'

Ms. Natalya Smith, LASubcommittee on the HandicappedSH 113 Hart Senate Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20510

Dear Natalya:

April 19, 1983

I am writing in response to Senator Weicker's request of April 11,1983 for information concerning reauthorization of the RehabilitationAct as presented in the form of four'questions. As you know from ourtelephone conversation of April 18, 1983, my response will be from theConnecticut perspective rather than a national one, but I am taking theliberty of asking the Council of State Administrators of VocationalRehabilitation to provide you with information with similar answers fromthe national view. .

5501/551 Beneficiary Rehabilitation Programs

The loss of approximately $843,000 of the SSDI/SSI programs resultedin an additional drain on the basic support program funding sources whichwere used to continue services to clients formerly served with 550I/$Sifunds. In addition, costs of staff and operations formerly funded with55Di/5ST money were transferred to the basic support program (Section 110).A more important impact of the loss of SSDI /SSI special funds was theresulting reduction in the number of clients who could be served andrehabilitated. The reimbursement program which was instituted in FY 82is an impractical, ineffective substitute for the advance funding underthe 55DI/551. beneficiary program. It is impossible to plan and fundprograms on a reimbursable basis, especially when the criteria for reim-bursement precludes any degree of certainty of reimbursement.

Innovation and Expansion

During the years that-innovation and expansion (I81) grant fundswere available, opportunities were provided for state agencies to attemptmovement into areas of rehabilitation on a trial basis. They providedthe impetus'for placement of counselorp in school systems; work with thealcohol and drug dependency division oh a cooperative basis; work withclients in the.area of corrections; anti more recently, the emphasis onplacement through the cooperative efforts of the Connecticut agency withrehabilitation.centers, business, anCindustry in the Projects With Industry(PWI) effort. The effect of zero funding of 18E over the past 2 years isdifficult to measure. I am certain, however, that such funding would haveassisted in our planning in the areas!of services to learning disabledadults and our efforts to work more cooperatively with school systms.The primary impact of the loss of I8E-funds is tha opportunity to review,consioor and implement untried methods of improving client services.

676

21-974 0-911---44

670

Decline of Numbers of Clients Served and Rehabilitated

The reasons for the decline in numbers of disabled persons are several.The emphasis of services! to the severely disabled without the accompanyingincrease in funding.levels to address increased costs and time required to

serve the snore severely 'disabled has certainly had an impact on the number

of clients served and rehabilitated in the last 8 years. The response to

the first and second questions with the resulting reduction in available

funds is another reason/ for decline. The reduction in staff through attri-

tion and, in some States, by layoff certainly contribute to the decline ofthe number of persons served. The uncertainty of the level of fundingproduced by the continuing resolution at the federal level has made itdifficult, if not impossible, to plan an effective, stable Proyram, and

has resulted in delays and Sometimes discontinuance of individual clientservices resulting in an!erosion of credibility of a rehabiliation agency'sability to serve clients on the 'part of referral sources.

The Council of State 'Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation's Role inAttempting to Ensure.Quality and Consistency. In Data Collection

In response to question #4 I wOuld ask that the Council of StateAdministrators of Vocational Rehabilitation provi.le you with the answer to

this question along with the Council's further expansion of informationconcerning the previous tnree questions.

Please let me know if I can be of further assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

JoSpdh R. Galotti-Ap,ting Commissioner of Education

JRG:kal

671

'ZICrtiteb Ziafeo ;SenateWASHINGTON. G.C. 70510

April 11, 1983

Mr. John H. Moore, PresidentThreshold Rehab. Services, Inc.1000 Lanca3ter Avenue -

Reading, PennsyDrania 19607:

Dear Mr. Moore:

I am writing to thank you for your recent testimony before theSubcommittee on the Handicapped and to seek your further inputinto the process of compiling a written record on the reauthor-ization of the Rehabilitation Act.

Would you please review the attached questions and forwardyour written response to:

Natalya Smith,. LASubcommittee on the HandicappedSH 113 Hart Senate Office Bldg.Washington, D.C.

20510by April 22, 1983.

If you need any further clarification, please contactNatalya Smith or Mike Hardman at 202: 224-6265.

Thank you for your assistanc

/ns

Lowell Weicker, Jr.United States Senato

678

672

1

!

yOLsTIONS FOR JOHN MOW'

1

1 WHAT KINDS OF JOBS ARE PROVIDED TO THE CLIENTS BY THE

PROJECTS WITH INDUSTRY?

DO THESE JO6-3 OFFER CAREER ADVANCEMENT TO PERSONS WITH

SEVERE HANDICAPS?

2) FROM FY 1981 TO FY 1982, THE NUMBER. OF PROJECTS WITH

INOUSTRY INCREASED EIROM 50 TO 65. HAS THIS PROGRAM GROWTH

BEEN ACCOMPANIED BY ANY INCREASE IN THE FINANCIAL ASSIST-

ANCE 'PROVIDEO BY PRIVATE INDUSTRY?

673

NwwNATIONAL ASSOCIARON OF REHABILITATION FACILITIES

P.O. Box 17675. Washington. D.C. 20041 (703) 556-8848

James A Cos. Jr, Eiecutive Director

April 22, 1983

Senator Lowell P. Weicker, Jr.ChairmanSubcommittee on the Handicapped113 Hart Senate Office BuildingU.S. SenateWashington, D. C. 20510

ATTN: Natal ia Smith

Dear Senator Weicker:

I am glad to provide for you additional information that your office has re-quested.

Under Projects With Industry, handicapped persons are placed in jobs rangingfrom highly skilled, technical positions to unskilled, manual jobs. Thiswide spectrum of job opportunities is illustrated by the diverse organizationsthat participate in this program.

IBM and Control Data are training severely handicapped persons for joss in dataprocessing and computer technology. Arkansas Enterprises for the Blind pre-pares persons for jobs as information special ists in large corporations aswell as the U.S. Civil Service Commission. The Electronics Industry Founda-tion is arranging for training and placement of handicapped individuals inelectronics. The Human Resources Institute of the AFL/CIO is training handi- -capped persons for jobs in union-related firms. The National RestaurantAssociation Prepares individuals for all types of jobs in restaurants. Place-ment and training through the National Association of Rehabilitation Facilities.include custodial, food service, data processing, bench assembly and clericalpositions. Each Partnership capital i7Pc on business opportunities, the localjob markets and the skills and abil ities of handicapped job seekers,

Career advancement opportunities for handicapped, persons are often affectedby copipany policies and practices. Attitudinal barriers still present- "ob-stacles to the advancement of disable() persons. Many Projects With Industryprograms provide training and on-site ci,risultations to companies to overcomethese barriers. Through education and public information, many PWIs assist .

managers and top-level decision-makers to formulate advancement and promotionprocedures which are based on more objective appraisals of handicapped persons'job performances. This reduces stereotyping and discrimination.

A study conducted by Portland State University for the National Institute ofHandicapped Rese,...rch found that a comparative study of PWI clients and other.vocational rehabilitation clients found that twice as many PWI clients (41%)said they were promoted than in the V.R. comparison group (22%). The survey also

680

674

found that job satisfaction was higher among PWI participants. Nearly 48%of the PWI clients said they "liked their jobs a lot" as compared to 38% ofthe V.R. group.

Corporate contributions to PWI have been a significant ingredient to thesuccess of the programs. An informal random survey of PWI projects illustra-ted that industry has given generously. Business executives have given un-selfishly of their time to develop advisory councils and implement job train-inglnd placement programs. Corporations have donated space', equipment andfacilities. Many organizations now provide numerous training slots in theircompanies to give handicapped persons the opportunity to acquire skillsand d work history.

There has not been a comprehensive analysis of the actual dollars contri-buted by industry, but'most service providers and project directors believethe contributions are substantial. The Menninger Foundation, Topeka, Kansas,reported that the Brock Hotel chain had contributed over $200,000 to expandProjects With Industry. In addition, the company provides 30 training slots.for transitional employment. The Kansas Elks Training Center estimates thatover $200,000 has been contributed in training to disabled persons. TheWorkshop, Inc., Menands, New York, reported that since the inception of theirproject, one employer has turned over a large portion of his company to the,facility as a site for PWI. Almost all community programs receive supportfrom industry through direct grants or contributions in the form of eqUip-ment, facilities and executive time.

It was a pleasure appearing before you to provide testimony onbehalf of

the National Association of Rehabilitation Facilities. Please let me knowif I or the NARF staff can provide you with additional information.

Sincerely,.

&)14.- lh ineint 6-7

John H. Moore, Jr.

JHMJdsg

6 81

675

PAICnifeb -Ncticz 'SenateWSMINGION. O C 21)5,0

April 11, 1983

Mr. Harry E. Blandford, Jr.Advocacy SpecialistDivision of Protection and AdvocacyDepartment of Public Advocacy

°State Office Building AnnexFrankfort, Kentucky 40601

Dear Mr. Blandford:

I am writing to thank you for your recent testimony before theSubcommittee on the Handicapped and to seek your further inputinto the process of compiling a written record onthe reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Act.

Would you please review the attached questions and forwardyour written response to:

Natalya Smith, LASubcommittee on the HandicappedSH 113 Hart Senate Office Bldg.Washington, D.C.

20510by April 22, 1983.

If you need any further clarification, please contactNatalya Smith or Mike Hardman at 202: .224-6265.

Thank you for your assistan e.

/ns

Lowell Weickee, JrUnited States Senato

682

676

QUESTION FOR HANK BLANDENBN

1) PLEASE DESCRIBE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF .THECIJUT ASSI5TAVCE

PROJECTS FUNDED WITHIN THE PAST FIVE YEARS.

WHAT IMPACT HAS THE OMBUDSMAN CONCEPT HAD ON THE CLIENTS AND

APPLICANTS OF THE STATE VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM,

AND WHAT HAS BEEN TiiE EFFECT ON THE SERVICE DELIVERY SYSTEM?

The Client Assistance Projects (CAP) in general haveestablished an important, rudimentary due process on which can bebuilt a truly comprehensive system which links persons to "allavailable benefits."

The CAP pilot projects were designed to emphasize "assistancein pursuing legal, administrative or other appropriate remediesto ensure the protection of rights under this Act." The successof the CAP on informal levels of remedy is most apparent. CAPsutilize their placement within the parent agency to influenceclient-counselor relationships and expedite problem solution.The initial outreach program of the CAPs had a significant effecton information dissemination and the enhancement of consumereducation. The result was clearer understanding of agency/eligibility and service criteria, which improved the planningprocess, its negotiative implications, and counselor-agencyaccountability.

Kentucky's CAP made 251 contacts in fiscal year 1900. Thevast majority received information or referral services, withover 50 percent ultimately receiving satisfactory agencyservices. CAP did not represent any client or applicant in anadministrative review or fair hearing.

In fiscal year 1981, CAP had 466 contacts, with 62.9 percentreceiving CAP services in one day. Information only was providedto 73.4 percent. CAP did not represent any client or applicantin an administrative review or fair hearing.

Unfortunately, the CAP lost its autonomy and half its staffin fiscal year 1982. Only 102 contacts were made. Importantly,a review procedure was established which emphasized problemresolution at the counselor level by direct contact andintervention. The foundation of due process was firm.

However, the CAP has been reduced in fiscal year 1983 to apart-time function of one staff member who is also the fairhearings officer. If the agency could have been more confidentin continued funding, the CAP would stil be an autonomous fulltime function.

677

':ith due procw5s in Sts developmental_ stages, the benefits ofthe CAPs can be continued. Increased support will enable any CAPto remain independent of a service providing agency'sbureaucratic structure, an eiroanizational necessity. It must beempowered to broaden its scope to any applicant or client'sindividualized, comprehensive needs for remedy.

At least six states serve only persons with visualchallenges. Two states serve only native Americans, while otherstates have geographical limitations on the population which canbe astisted by the CAP. As any assistance project grows incapability, visibility, and organizational maturity, it can beeffective for all applicant-clients regardless of vocationalchallenge, heritage, or res4,,ence.

It is also possible for CAPs to realize their intendedpotential for administrative and/or legal remedy. In somestates, the CAP is independent of the rehabilitation agency. InNew Jersey, the CAP is part of the protection and advocacyservice, which already provided remedy at all levels for personslabeled developmentally disabled. CAP staff in New Jerseyincludes an attorney and other professional and support staff whohave provided effective client assistance on all levels, as theVocational Rehabilitation Act intended. Increased support forseparate CAPs will enhance the due process and service deliverysyl,te. of the state vocational rehabilitation programs.

678

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY

FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES

COMMISSIONERREHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

The Honorable R,bert T. StaffordUnited States SenateCommittee on Labor and Human ResourcesWashington, D. C. 20510

Dear Senator Stafford:

This is in response to your letter of February 28, 1983, concerningfurther questions about the Vocational Rehabilitation Program.

I hope that you find these answers responsive.

Sinc ely,

Georg1 A. Conn

Enclosure

679

twestions for Commissioner Conn

'lehabilitation Services Administration

Question PI: In 1975 the total number of individuals served in theVR program was 1,244,338 and in 1982 it was 975,000.Since 1975 there has been a steady decline in the numberof individuals served. Why has there been this decline?

Response: The steady decline in persons served in the last sevenyears is attributed to a combination of (a) losses in pur-chasing power of the rehabilitation dollar due primarily tohealth-care related inflation; and (b) the mandate to serveseverely disabled persons on a priority basis for whom ser-vices are more costly than for non-severely disabled persons.

Question $2: In 1982 the total number of individuals rehabilitated was 266,800.This is the lowest total of rehabilitation since 1968. Pleaseexplain.

Response: The final count of rehabilitations in Fiscal Year 1982 was266,924. It was also the seventh annual loss in the lasteight years after the record of 361,138 rehabilitations wasset in Fiscal Year 1974. The decline in rehabilitations isattributed to the same factors causing the number of personsserved to decrease: (a) the steady loss in the purchasing powerof the rehabilitation dollar; and (b) emphasis on serving theseverely disabled for whom services are more costly.

Question .3: How many evaluation studies has RSA conducted on its programsduring the last four years? Please give titles of these studies.

Response: RSA has conducted 34 evaluation studies in the past four years.They are:

1. Evaluation of Methodologies for Cost Benefit Analysis ofPhysical Restoration Services in rehabilitation.

Facility Improvement Grants .

3. Client AsSistance Projects.

4. Projects With Industry.

5. Evaloation of rehabilitation Engineering Centers.

'886

680

6. A Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness of VocationalRehabilitation Services to Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Clients,

7. Study of State Vocational Rehabilitation Agency Use ofPost Employment Services.

8. Evaluation of the Research and Training Centers.

9. Policy Development and Promulgation in the State/FederalVR System.

10. An Evaluation of the RSA Research Utilization Laboratory(RUL) Program.

II. Linkage of Data Records Between the Rehabilitation ServicesAdministration and the Social Security Administration.(The RSA-SSA Data Link)

12. Similar Benefits and Economic Heeds.

13. Evaluation of State YR Agency Placement Activities.

14. Analysis of FY '77 and '78 Data on Evaluation Standards.

15. Vocational Rehabilitation Follow-up Study - (NationalStudy of over 3,000 Rehabilitants).

16. Evaluation of Financial Management of the VR Program.

17. Testing and Refinement of the Vocational RehabilitationEvaluation Standards (two projects).

18. Testing and Refinement of the Facilities Reporting System(two projects).

19. Six Comprehensive State VR Programs and Policy SystemsThrough Model Evaluation Management Information SupportUnits (6 separate projects).

20. Coordination for Comprehensive State VR Program and PolicySystems through Model Evaluation/Management InformationSupport Units (Coordinated the 6 State Programs).

21. Evaluation of the Blind and Visually Handicapped Program.

22. Evaluation of Long Term Training..

23. Evaluation of Short-Term Training.

24. Management Information System: (Evaluation, Provision andDevelopment of the RSA Data Retrieval and Management System).

25. Analysis of FY '79 and '80 Data on Evaluation Standards.

26. Evaluation of State Agency Outreach and Referral Processesas They Relate to Recruitment and Selection of UnderservedSeverely Disabled Clients and Other Minorities, i.e., Rural

68

681

and City Ghetto Clients, Native Americans, etc.

27. Needs Assessment of Services to Deaf/Blind Individuals.

28. Evaluate the Effectiveness of Agreements Between StateVR Agencies and State Associations of Student Aid Offices.

You will note that studies #17 and #18 consisted of two proje2lsand study # 19 consisted of six projects. These numbersaccount for the total of 34 studies althuugh only 28 titles.are listed here.

Separate from the evaluation studies conducted under theSection 14 authority, RSA has also produced a number of in-house.studies which are evaluative in nature. The most recentones are:

1. "The Long-Term Impact of V9cational Rehabilitation Services,by Severity of Disability" (November,1982)

2. "Economic Gains forIndividuals and Governments ThroughVocational Rehabilitation" (July, 1982).

3. An Assessment of the Validity of the Homemaker Closure"(April, 1982).

4. "The Provision of Post-Employment Services, Fiscal Year 1980"(September, 1981)

5. "Do They Stay Rehabilitated?: Returns from the RSA-SSAData Link" (July, 1981).

6. Reviews and Reevaluations Conducted in Fiscal Year 1979(September, 1980).

7. "8enefit/Cost Ratios: The State-Federal Program ofVocational Rehabilitation" (July, 1980).

8. "Poor Persons in the State-Federal Program" (.2uly, 1980).

Question #4: The American Indian VR program was instituted in the 1978Amendments. Has this program been evaluated?

How many individuals have been served in this program during1979-1982?

How many individuals have been rehabilitated in this programduring 1979-1982?

How many trained counselors are involved in this program?

688

Respohse:.

682

The American Indian Vk program was authorized under the 1978Amendments to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Funds were

not authorized to initiaie the program until Fiscal Year 1981,however, and all Fiscal Year 1981 funds were fully earmarked bythe Congress for the sole use of the Navajo Nation. In both

Fiscal Year 1982 and Fiscal Year 1983 all program funds wereagain earmarked for the Navajo Nation. The Navajo Tribe there-fore is the only tribe which has thus far participated in the

program. The Navajo Vocational Rehabilitation program arrangedfor an extern:1 review team to evaluate its program in September1982. The review team reported that the program has made consid-erable progress toward becoming an autonomous unit comparableto established State vocational rehabilitation agencies. The review

team noted that the lack of job opportunities on the Navajo reser-vation was the most serious problem facing the project.

0

500 disabled persons were served under the program in Fiscal Year1981 and 375 disabled persons have been served thus far under theFiscal Year 1982 project which is still underway.

20 disabled persons were rehabilitated under the program in FiscalYear 1981 and 12 disabled persons have thus far been rehabilitatedunder the Fiscal Year 1982 project.

There are six trained counselors involved in the Navajo VocationalRehabilitation program. Five of these counselors were trained atthe bachelor's degree. level and one at the master's degree level.In addition, there are two project administrative staff who havebeen trained in the field of counseling.

'Guestion #5: According to the 1981 RSA Annual Report, a computer data-system wasset up to provide immediate data regarding eligibility and pastservices in the migratory program.

How well has thisPriigram'iorked?

Give the number of individuals served in the migratory program during

1979-1982?

Give the number of individuals rehabilitated in the migratoryprogram 1979-1982?

Response: The computer system, operated by the University of Arkansas,is very effective for tracking migrant school children. 'VR migrantprojects tie in with that system. Results are being evaluated atthis time by field visits to projects.

The last four years for which data are available are Fiscal Years

1978 to 1981. During this period, 1,335 persons were vocationallyrehabilitated who had been enrolled in a migratory agricultural worker

project. This amounted to 0.1 percent of all persons rehabilitated

in that span of time. In addition to those rehabilitated, 778 migrants

683

received service; but could not be successfully rehabilitated,the total number of migrants receiving services during thOfour fiscal years in rgOestion is estimated at abUirt 1,300,

Question a6: how many training project, has RSA had in the followingareas? Vocational. Medical, Social and Psychological.Employment Assistance.

Response: .Draining projects in these areas are as follows:

FY '79 FY '80 FY '81 FY '82

Vocational 255 254 242 199Medical ..160 148 117 66Social and-.Psychological 25 33 '2& 19

EmploymentAssistance 2 2 2 5

Question: What has been the impact of the training program?

The most critical impact of the Rehabilitation Training GrantProgram has been the increase of personnel available for entryinto employment, and the upgrading of skills of personnelcurrently _ involved in the provision of rehabilitation servicesto severely disabled persons. Through the Training GrantProgram, RSA has been able to assist in responding to criticalmanpower shortages in such areas as rehabilitation medicine,rehabilitation counseling, prosthetics and orthotics, and jobdevelopment and job placement.

Question #7:. _ . _ What areas of personnel shortages has your long-term

rehabilitation manpower plan targeted? (Sec. 304(c)).

Response: The targeted areas include physicians specializing in physicalmedicine and rehabilitation, prosthetics/orthotics, interpretersfor the deaf, vocational evaluators, speech therapists, vocationalnurses, physical therapists and occupational therapists. Theseareas have been cited as manpower shortage areas in the Senatereports for the past three years.

Question 8: According to the RSA Annual Report, an evaluation study ofthe Independent Living Center Program was done. The studyfound that the Centers were providing direct services, informationand referral services

69Q

684

How effective has the total Center program been?

How well has it served handicapped individuals?

Does the program serve mire mobility impaired individualsat opposed to other handicapping conditions? If so, what1,, your recommendation on extending these services to allhandicapped persons?

Response; The study to which reference is made was an evaluabilityassessment. It determined that there was a consensus amongthe Congress, Federal administrators, and program operatursregarding the purpose of the program, its goals, and ob-jectives. ft least two States (California and Wisconsin)have conducted studies of their own Centers (28). These States

''concluded that the Centers should continue because of theprovision of needed servicesfor severely handicappedindividuals as an integral 'Part of the total continuum of care,over. and beyond that previded by, the State agencies. The

Wisconsin study of 301 clients whose cases were closed reportedan improvement in 66.8 percent of these cases.;

There is no Federal requirement to report client or caseservice data by the Centers assisted under Title VII.Therefore, questions regarding mobility limitations cannot beanswered with any precision. Sketchy data suggest that whileall disabilities are being served in some degree or another,persons with physical limitations constitute more-than halfof the persons being served. In the California report referencedabove, it was found that 69 percent of the persons servedhad physical disabilities, including hearing and visual impair-ments. The Wisconsin study already cited, noted that the mostfrequent disabilities seen are spinal cord injuries, cerebralpalsy, deafness and hard of hearing, heart' disease, arthritisand other orthopedic disability, and multiple sclerosis. Anumber of Centers focus on specific disability(ies);last year,one such center which principally served blind individualsreported 348 clients, including 55 deaf-blind persons.

Question ,9: Hcw do you see Part A of Title VII evolving?

Response: Part A of Title'VII was authorized by the 1978 Amendments to theRehabilitation Act. As it has never been funded, the Administrationhas proposed to the Congress that it and the other unfundedauthorities be repealed.

691

685

Question M10: RSA has developed a standards evaluation system for theState Grant Program, How soon will you be implementingthis system'? When do you feel a report will be readyonce the first evaluation under this system is Completed?

Response: The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 mandated the development ofstandards. The standards were developed under contract,revised and then put into place. The 1978 amendments tothe Act removed the requirement for such standards. BerkeleyPlanning Associates (DPA) has recently delivered a completedversion of the Vocational Rehabilitation Program StandardsEvaluation System to RSA. The package is intended for use byState VR agencies to assist them in setting their own objectivesand measuring how will they are performing. There are 8 programperformance standard and 5 procedural standards. RSA willsoon be distributing the standards package to each State VRagency and will be available to provide technical assistance to theStates in implementing the system within the States.

We do not have plum to develop and issue a national report onthe use of the system.

Question #11: We have received increasing numbers of calls from parentsemd consumers about the lack of transitional services fort,handicapped students to assist them in moving from school to theworld 'of work. Do you have any national or State estimates onthe =ter of handicapped students who will be graduating orleaving school over the next five years who will need some levelof services from rehabilitation or other service agencies.

if no, what steps will your.office be taking to encouragesystematic collection of data on the numbers and t:eds of handicappedstuderts who will require transitional and adult services.

Response: Although we lack specific estimates of handicapped student totals,we are aware that these students leave school for varying reasonsand, at times, at earlier aces than their non-handicapped counter-parts. The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Servicesis working on an operational objective intended to achieve acloser relationship between local special education and VR programs.Thia action will assist in assuring a continuum of services forhandicapped students in the transition period fro-n school towork.\ At the local level cooperative agreements between VR andSpecial education programs are.another wad the programs arelinked.\

In FY 1941, 32,891 or 13.2'. cf the VP cases successfullyrehabilitated were referrec by an educational

692.21-974 0-83--45

686

During the coal year, SLP has a number of projects underconsideration that should serve to broaden our knowledge ofsecondary bandicapped students. One of these projects wouldfollow groups of handicapped students, over a period of years,to determine what happens to these students after they leaveschool setting. Specifically, this study Would examine support

networks, including family, Community, and vocational/rehabilitationservices, that were available to handicapped students and the effectof these support networks on the transition from school to work.A second area of consideration, given optimal funding, would bethe designation of an area, within research grant authority,that would examine the role of Support programs such as rehabilitationon the long-term success of handicapped students in the communityand on the job.

Question 012: Given the reported effectiveness of Projects With Industry and thecritical need to provide alternative vocational training to handi-capped Yeilth,. haS.YoUr office considered targeting a number of PWI's

at secondary aged handicapped students?

Response: While all PW1's usually have some clients from the special educationpopulation, three of the fifteen new Projects With Industry awardsof Fiscal Year 1982 focus solely upon handicapped youth. They are;

1) The Board of Cooperative Education Services ofNassau County, New York,

2) the Battle Creek Public Schools,Battle Creek, Michigan, and

3) the Chicago City Wide Colleges,Chicago, Illinois.

Question #13: Does the 1983-1985 preprint fcr the State Plan follow currentregulations in 34 CFR 361? If no: Please e"plain. Also the legal

basis by which you felt this coThirrte done.

Response: The 1983-1985 pre-print does not reflect...all of the require-

ments that the States must comply with under existing law and

regulations. This is the case because this new pre-print was

revised to incorporate some of the changes the Department

expected to make in the regulations for the VP program during the

regulatory review being undertaken pursuant to Executive Order

12291.

The Department had originally planned to crx-iplete its review

and issue final regulations by October 1, 192, the date the

new three-year State'plan cycle became effective. Because of

delays in the deregulation process, theregulations nave nct

been revised along the lines reflected in the new pre-print.

Since the States are required to complywith tee current regu-

lations, RSA plans to issue an amendment to tre State plan

pre-print incorporating the provisions that 1.sd bee; celeted.

693

687

Oliv*P" 14: AcLofding to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,the duties of the National Council on the Handicapped aro:to provide advice to the CommisSioner with respect to thopolicies of and conduct of the Rehabilitation ServiCeSAdministration; to advise the Commissioner, the AssistantSecretary of OCRS, and the Director of NIHR on the develop-.,merit of the programs to be carried out under this Act."

To what extent has the Council participated in the formationof the Administration's proposed changes to this Act? If theyhave not: Please explain,

Response: The Administration's proposed changes to this Act werediscussed with various members of the Council via teleconferenceon March 17, 1983. Participants included: Commissioner Conn,two staff members of the Department's Office of Planning, Budgetand Evaluation, and the following Council members: Mr. Hunt Hamill,Dr, Henry Viscardi; 'Dr. Latham Breunig, and Mr. Justin Dart, Jr.

694

688

"Zritileb wifeWA/fill/041141C II C illIttl

April 11, 1983

Dr. Douglas Fendertioni. DirectorNational Institute ofiHandicappedResearch400 Maryland Avenue, ,S.W.Room 3511Washington, D.C. 20202

Dear Dr. Fenderson:'

I am writing to thank you for your recent testimony before theSubcommittee on the Handicapped and to seek your further input

-into the process of compiling a written record on the reauthor-ization of the Rehabilitation Act.

Would you please review the attached questions and forwardyour written response to:

Natalya Smith, LASubcommittee on the HandicappedSH 113 Hart Senate Office Bldg.Washington, D.C.

20510by April 22, 1983.

If you need any further clarification, please contactNatalya Smith or Mike Hardman at 202: 224-6265.

Thank you for your assistan

/ns

Lowell Weicker, Jr.United States Senat

089

QUESTION #1: THE INS1ITUIL HAS THE RESPOISIOILITY 10 DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTETECHNOLOGICAL DEVICES AND EQUIPMENT FOR HANDICAPPED INDIVIDUALS,HOW CAN THE INSTITUTE IMPROVE THE AVAILABILITY ANU EFFECTIVENESSOF NCW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVICES?

Answer The Institute is launching a major new effort this year to im-prove the availability and effectiveness of now technologicaldevices for handicapped persons. Two now Rehabilitation En-gineering Centers (REC's) In the priority category area of"Stimulation of Industry and Evaluation of Technology", willbe supported in Fiscal Year 1983. These Centers will identifyoevices ready for clinical evaluation, sot uniform standardsand performance criteria for manufacture and use, aqd stimulatethe private conviercial markets to manufacture and distributesuch devices,

In addition, some 5,000 existing and available devices are in-cluded In our National Rehabilitation Information Center (NARIC)ABLEDATA computer files. Many Inquiries are received each year'regarding such devices. Additionally, NIHR's utilization staffcontinues to publicize the availability of such devices usingseveral information dissemination methods. Each of the Researchand Training Centers (RTC's) (21), and REC's also provide infor-mation and guidance on a regional basis on technological devicesin the Center's particular area of competence,

QUESTION #2: TO WHAT EXTENT DOES THE INSTITUTE INTERACT WITH INDUSTRY INDEVELOPING AND MODIFYING TECHNOLOGICAL DEVICES TO IMPROVE THELIVES OF HANDICAPPED' PEOPLE?

Answer : The two new REC's will be responsible for interacting with

business and industry, encouraging their participation through-out the research,,development and evaluation process to assurethat the results of research are utilized by handicapped indi-viduals. These Centers will assist industry by identifyingneeds, providing information On potential markets and evalu-ating devices io laboratory settings and clinical facilities. Amajor aspect of Center activities will be to work in closerelationship with trade associations, such as the ElectronicIndustries Trade Association, to inform them of needs and re-search developments that would be of interest to member Indus-tries in developing, producing and marketing devices forvarious handicapped population groups.

696

At a regional level, the 10,C'' have well developed 0/14%101101M

with industries that translate advance:a in techn4149y 0094 and61inical evaluation into commercially available prouucti,

QUEMON 03; HOW MANY APPLICATIONS WEAL THERE RELATIVE TO THE OMER OF

I) RLSEARCH AND TRAINING CENTER, 2) ENGINEERING CENTER AND3) PROJECT GRANTS AWARDED?

Answer ;for Research and Training Centers, MI a0PlIcation5 wore received

and were (ended; for Rehabilitation Engineering Centers, 37

APPlitationS wore received and 12 were funded and fur projectgrants, 113 applications were received and 14 were funded,

QUESTION .4: HOW MANY MERITORIOUS APPLICATIONS WERE THERE WHICH COULD NOT

HE FUNDED?

Answer :Of the 231 applications received, 48 wervJunded Lind 39 were

approved, but not funded,

QUESTION 0S; WHAT SIZE BUDGET FOR N_ItiR WOULD IT HAVE TAKEN THIS YEAR TO FUND

ALL MERITORIOUS APPLICATIONS OR ALL APPLICATIONS APPROVED FOR

FUNDING? ARE THERE NEW PROGRAMS THAT WILL BE FUNDED THIS YEAROTHER THAN THOSE FUNDED IN RESPONSE TO THE 1982 COMPETITION?

Answer :In order to fund the 39 approved but unfunded applications,approximately $17 million would have been required.

NIHR plans to fund two new Research end Training Centers concern-ing rehabilitation needs of Native Americans and handicappedindividuals living in the Pacific Basin, The Institute will also

initiate a new research fellowship program during the latter part

of this fiscal year.

QUESTION ARE THERE PRIORITY AREAS WHICH, IN YOUR OPINION, HAVE NOT BEEN

FUNDED AT ALL?

Answer :The Institute is now conducting preliminary work on revisions to

the long range plan and the development of priorities for FY 1984.

In this process, we have identified a number of topics that merit

consideration as new or complementary research priorities. Ex-

amples include:

a) Pediatric rehabilitation including arthritis and joint re-

placement

b) Data system and evaluation of burn treatment and recovery

691

Ativ4400 05(lo of %on'..wcy 4145 fur 11n4rInq 144411114 4ndcoopunic4tion 054b1o0

0) Mothodi 444 offoct% of tr4ining f4milio% t(! 414 in m4ifil4iningroh4bilit4tion loot*

o) K4n4gomont princlifl45 And work5ito loo41fic4tion to incf0010productivity Among dfoitilod worikor5

f) Policy option% row4Ecn in v4rioui 4ro45 of roh4bilit4tion. eflincifilly in niont41 fot4v44tion

692

Frank Porter Graham Child Development CenterHighway 54 Bypass West 071 A, Chapel Hill, N.C. 27514 - (919) 966-4121

March 28, 1983

Dr. Nina Bar-DromaSubcomittee on Handicapped Children'113 Hart Senate Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20510

Dear Dr. Bar-Oroma:

It was a pleasure to meet you, however briefly, in Washington at the

hearings on the discretionary programs for the handicapped. I was also

pleased to see the positive response of Senator Weicker to the testimony,and feel that some constructive advances took place during the morning of

the hearings.

One of the points that I did not get a chance to make was about the

overall value of the discretionary programs. It is my belief that these-.

are the programs that bring quality to the service delivery for handi-

capped children. When there is a wise investment in research that gener-ates new ideas and products; leadership training to generate gifted youngpersons to influence the shape and direction of the field; demonstration

to provide models of excellence and outreach to speed dissemination, then

one_has a program that is alive with energy, enthusiasm, and quality

people. It is precisely this recipe that has transformed programs forhandicapped children from a backwater in university programs to one that

is top rated in most schools of education;

Indeed one can make the argument in another fashion. It has been

the lack of a systematic discretionary program undergirding Head Start,

and Follow Through, and Title I that has hindered the development of the

full potential of those programs. If there had been as systematic aninvestment in research, development, training and dissemination in -thoseprograms as there has been with the handicapped, they would be on much

more solid ground at the present time.

Accordingly, I think that the continued presence and nourishment ofthese discretionary programs are of the highest priority, if we wish tocontinue to deliver high program quality to handicapped children and

their parents. I am most reassured by Senator Weicker's approach to-

this issue. We trust that other senators understand it as well.

I' hope that you will feel free to call upon me again if you have

need to obtain a response to a particular point. I trust my uncertain

arrival did not raise too much _anxiety in the staff.

Cordially yours,

ti

J. Gallagherctor

6

Honorary NationalChairmanIlwV1

National Officers

'1Z4=1,="=,

IC W. S OF W1 F01.

sr cxne.

IDIADDRIA

001111-11115,01NIMINIJ01 sNAlwIll

1141101/11 wSI 1,011/101141.00011014110

National DirectorsC141110 1/100110

1,010 DAMONMOM. CANID11DAJD, C01111410 C..00,0IIv DODO,DIJS.W.7100/11WASNTT, IIDCFG.,OArrOPOLII,.1.0.1DIDWDaw1011ArKIS

11::0.0Z4r1!111,1014IAA rFIVIOiJ01 .4 W. IN

Professional AdvisoryCommittee

.0:41=019 2:=" no

VIgn.at'XineWWJJOADD.A.1 OD0010S .010151. .

ttgag77711=NND. WWW Isa

t.":Zsrig="""))===1°IAA/Wm( I A DCW1.11. Wl1W0, 0 9DVID no

FaDDI %AWN

111..OVICrg4

-Youth and AdultsSection011JOA101

NW WWI TNI

National ExecutiveDirector1011 JFJJ IJF IFWif

693

ACLD/in Asiocialion For Children and Adults With Learning Disabilities

4154 iihrary Rnar.J'itt%hurgh, PA 15234 412!341-151 412/34144077

7806 Draeburn Valley DriveHouston, Texas 77074May II, 1983

Mr. John Doyle

Committee on Labor and Human ResourcesS.D.B. Hart BuildingRoom 113Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear John:

The Governmental Affairs Connittee of the Association for Childrenand Adults with Learning Disabilities (Ann, Inc.) is writing tocomment on several aspects of the proposed "Education of theHandicapped Act Amendments of 1983."

First, under Part C. Sec.' 625 (a) the Amendments of 1983 speakof specially designed programs of vocational, technical, continuing,or adult eduCation for deaf and other handicapped persons. ACLDrecommends strongly that a definition be included setting forthwho the "other handicapped persons" Include. It would seem con-sistant to again use the language of Part A, See. 602 (1) for"handicapped-persons" to insure that the intent of Congress toserve all handicapped_ is not circumbented by the ,1sslon ofspecific learning dIsahilities.

Second, ACLD applauds the introduction of Secondary School andTransitional Services for Handicapped Youth, Part C, Sec, 626,Amendments of 1983.

Third, we are excited *about the Parent Training and Informationprograms. There is a great need for training parents so that they canparticipate effectively with professionals and so that they canbetter understand the nature and needs of their handicapped child.However, we feel that there is some- inconsistency in the wordingfor receivinga grant or contract under Part 0, Sec. 631 (b).

Must the-"agency, organization, or colt?' applying for a grant orcontact at thetime of application.be_ in the process-of servingparents of children "with the full range of handicapping conditions"or as was written into the draft we reviewed In Washington last weekwhich stated "Centers are authorized subject to prior approval bythe Secretary, to contract out for training that they cannot provide."

-^-

694

If the intent the first (serving multiple handicapped at the-time of application) we feel that the language. is very 1113ItTriii

and exclusionary, We would like to see the wording clarified nothat the applications will be open to a greater number of organ=

Izations that are directed "mostly by parents" who can show a

background and ability to serve parents of handicapped children

and who will be given the authority to'"contract.out for training

that they cannot provide."

Again we would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to

participate in the legislative process. Your support for all

persons with handicaps is greatly appreciated,

Sincerely,

Alice Scogin, ChairmenACID Governmental Affairs Committee

cc: Dorothy Crawford, PresidentJean Petersen, Executive Director

695

pAMERICAN PERSONNEL AND GUIDANCE ASSOCIATIONTwo Skyline Place, Suite 400 5203 Leesburg Pike

'Falls Church, Virginia 22041 Phone: 703/820.4700

.1

June 23, 1983

Honorable Lowell P. Woickor, Jr.Chairiiian,-Subcommittee on the HandicappedU. S. SenateWashington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Weickers__

The American Association for Counseling and Development (AACD), formerlythe American Personnel and Guidance Association, representing a nation-wide membership of 41,000 is Interested in your most recently sponsoredbill-S.1341, cited as the "Education of the Handicapped Act Amendmentsof 1983." We Axe extremely supportive of the bill, as it contains manyvaluable needs and approaches to assist disabled children develop totheir maximum potential.

Since our organization is primarily interested to human development andour - counselor's work is directed toward career development and guidance,vocational exploration,. selective job development and Placement, we areconcerned that this point of view and focus is not reflected in the billand warrants attention in 5.1341.

The following sections of the bill are areas where counseling and, morespecifically, career and vocational counseling is or should be a vitalcomponent_. in the delivery of specialized services to disabled youth in

- primary.and/cr secondary schools. This is extremely important asstudents are prepared'. to move into further training such as college,vocational training, or employment.

Incentive Grants, Section 5 (Section 619(c)), Counseling services at theelementary, and secondary level is vitally needed-inbridging the gap between student needs, their teachers;'and parental involvement.

Regional Resource Centers, Section 621(a), Each.Regional Resource-Center,should have a recognized Guidance and-Counseling com-ponent

\

in order to provide consultation and materialsto school districts in the provision of counselingservices to meet the specialized needs of children and

i_

I

-_ Section 621(D), .9Effective Consultative Services"should include Counseling.and Guidance consultation.oriented toward.parents, teachers, etc. to assist in--the-adjustment procesS, orientation, and educatfon.

702

696

Research, Tratnly411 Gmule:tion 1411.h Centers and Services for the Handicapped,Suction (''21k , Training of special uducaffon and counsel-ing and ,uidancu services in programs designed for suchichildren-4nd youth.

. .

. ..

Post-Secondary Education Programs (Section1625,b,(2)), Counselors need toto involved and aro often the only professional staff 1

equipped to coordinate, facilitate, and.encourage educe»tion of handicapped individuals with non-handicappedpeers.

Sedondary Education and Transitional Servic's for Randicapied Youth, Section 626,Guidance Counselors, Vocational Counselors, and RehabilitationCounselors are trained-to provide the. functions necessary forinsuring a smooth transition from school to continuing educalLion, as well as preparation for competitive employment,work adjustment techniques, and selectiv, job placement.

Section (A) should also specify vocational counseling' programsto make "vocational programs" more relevant and reflect thereal needs-in this area.,

,

Section (* Developing appropriate procedures forivialuatingvocational Ara4ning, placement, and transitionalAservices arealso t4ne focus'of guidance counselors and rehabilitationcounselors )33, irtue of. their training and.hands-on .

experiences.

.Training for the Education of the Handicapped (See Section 631)omits one verysignificant professional discipline, _namely Professionalcounselors. This would appear-to be an oversight, sincea substantial part of these new-amendments are focused oncJ-eer development, evaluation of educational abilities,intevets 'and achievements, and job placement, especiallyas we prepare for the transition from school to work or.higher education. The need to train more counselors in'order that more.:andicapped students be better served de-mands the recognition that.inservice and preservice train-'ing is emphasized for this group.

Recruitment of Educational Personnel, (Section 633)(2). There is'a need toencourage students and professional personnel to seek andobtain careers in counseling and other relevant fields.Who would be better equipped and the most logical to pro-vide such career counseling to students.at'the college..level if it is not career_counselors or guidance coun-selOrs? They would be in the best posSible position to'encourage others. with an interest and potential to workin schools and rehabilitative settings-with handicappedcitizens.

703

(W7

Panels or Mullyto 011otioo Wu would highly recommend that "otherrelevant dincirdinen Include Guidance Counselors andRehabilitation Counselors and that thie be specifiedin order to insure the. kind of oxportiho that deals -

specifically with career development, evaluation ofpotential for training, higher education, work adjust-ment issues, selective job placement, and pout-employ-ment services. To our knowledge, these kinds of pro-fonnional activiti are performed beet by counselorstrained In those areas.

We appreciate this opportunity to bring to your attention some informationto increase the bent possible services for our nation's handicapped youth.I have asked Dr. Leonard Perlman of our- staff, who has over 22 yearsexperience in counseling and rehabilitation of handicapped persons, to be

-available to assist In any way possible as your bill moves through thelegislative process. -

Again, theAA00 and Its 41,000 CoSnsolor-Membors thank you for your interestand efforts in behalf of handicapped youth and their families.

Sincerely,

CP /1/1/

P. J. McDonough, Ed.D.Associate Executive Vice President

cc: Senator Orrin Hatch,Chairman, Labor and Human Resources Committee

Please note: Effective ',July 1, 1983 our new address is:

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT599 Stevenson AvenueAlexandria, VA 22304

Telephone- 823-9800

Senator WEICKEIt. The committee will stand in recess.[Whereupon, at 11 a.m. , the subcommittee was adjourned.]

0