RSA-509 for FY-2016: Submission #76

Oregon
9/30/2016
General Information
Designated Agency Identification
Disability Rights Oregon
610 SW Broadway, Suite 200
{Empty}
Portland
{Empty}
97205
http://www.droregon.org
(503) 243-2081
{Empty}
(800) 452-1694
{Empty}
(503) 243-1738
Robert Joondeph
Kathy Wilde
Jamie Jones
(503) 243-2081
204
Part I. Non-Case Services
A. Individual Information and Referral Services (I&R)
224
758
982
B. Training Activities
1
10
Title: Guardianship Presentation to Community Access Services 2016<p>Number of individuals who attended training (approximate): 10<p>Topics covered: Guardianship laws in Oregon<p>The training methods used: Classroom instruction and PowerPoint<p>Purpose for the training: To provide education about DRO and Oregon law pertaining to guardianship, and in particular respondent/ protected person rights, to members (owners adult care foster homes; workers in 24/7 settings; etc.) and to allow them to get their two continuing education units.<p>
{Empty}
C. Information Disseminated to the Public
8
19
0
23138
4326
0
Twitter - 3,774 followers<p>Facebook page - 7,553 likes<p>Executive Directors Blog - 293 views<p>Publications/Booklets/Brochures disseminated - 4,326<p>Recent media stories about DROs work FY16 (19 total)<p>Radio/TV (8)<p>1.Oregon voter registration deadline 3 weeks away; State offering alternative ways to cast your ballot (KOIN, 09/27/16)<p>2.All single-user restrooms in Portland city facilities now gender-neutral (KATU, 09/23/16)<p>3.Groups help Oregonians with disabilities to vote (KTVZ, 07/13/16)<p>4.DOJ Agreement with the State of Oregon Mental Health System (KBOO, 02/11/16)<p>5.Improving Care for Mentally Ill Prisoners (KBOO, 02/03/16): Audio Player<p>6.Oregon Department of Corrections will improve care for mentally ill (KGW, 01/13/16)<p>7.Oregon Dept. of Corrections to improve care for mentally ill (KTVZ, 01/13/16)<p>8.Bringing Sheltered Workers Into the Light (Jefferson Public Radio, 01/27/16)<p>News Reports (10)<p>9.Child will stay small forever (Portland Tribune, 08/04/16)<p>10.Oregonians with disabilities can soon save money (Bend Bulletin, 08/04/16)<p>11.New Report Shines Light on Mistreatment of Deaf Prisoners in Oregon (Willamette Week, 06/23/16)<p>12.Is Biketown bike share for all? Or only the able-bodied? (Bike Portland, 06/02/16)<p>13.Oregon prisons need mental-health improvements (Statesman Journal, 01/22/16)<p>14.Editorial: An Important Change for Prisoners (Bend Bulletin, 01/17/16)<p>15.State agrees with advocacy group to reduce isolation, improve care of Oregon inmates with severe mental illnesses (Oregonian, 01/13/16)<p>16.Judge Approves Shift Away From Sheltered Workshops (Disability Scoop, 01/06/16)<p>17.Judge Weighs Disabled Workers Deal (The Register-Guard, 12/08/15)<p>18.The minimum wage fight you dont know needs to be fought (Street Roots, 12/07/15)<p>Editorials (1)<p>19.My View: Disabilities dont negate human rights (Portland Tribune, 02/04/16): Opinion by Bob Joondeph.<p>Handbooks, Guides, and Brochures (count = 26; disseminated = 4,326)<p>1.Assistive Device Lemon Laws First Edition<p>2.Employment Handbook 3rd Edition<p>3.FAQ-Family & Medical Leave<p>4.Guardianship Handbook Third Edition<p>5.Fair Housing Handbook First Edition<p>6.Involuntary Medication Hearing Handbook First Edition<p>7.Mental Health Law in Oregon Fourth Edition<p>8.Can I Plan Now For The Mental Health Treatment I Would Want In A Crisis<p>9.A Roadmap to Support Services Third Edition<p>10.The Developmental Disability Eligibility Appeal Process<p>11.Get Help Understanding How Work Affects SSI and SSDI<p>12.DRO-Service Animals<p>13.FAQ-Rep Payees<p>14.Social Security Overpayments<p>15.Voting Handbook<p>16.Assisting Voters with Disabilities a Guide for Family, Friends and Providers<p>17.Special Education A Guide for Parents & Advocates Sixth Edition<p>18.Sterilization of Individuals<p>19.General Brochure<p>20.General Brochure<p>21.TBI Brochure<p>22.AT Brochure<p>23.CAP Brochure<p>24.PABSS Brochure<p>25.Get Help Understanding How Work Affects SSI and SSDI<p>26.PAVA brochure<p>
Part II. Individuals Served
A. Individuals Served
30
39
69
2
B. Individuals served as of September 30
40
C. Problem Areas/Complaints of Individuals Served
11
12
2
2
9
3
21
0
0
2
0
3
0
0
0
1
5
D. Reasons for Closing Individual Case Files
20
1
2
1
1
2
0
4
0
{Empty}
E. Intervention Strategies Used in Serving Individuals
4
10
2
11
0
3
0
0
Part III. Statistical Information on Individuals Served
A. Age of Individuals Served as of October 1
0
25
30
4
10
B. Gender of Individuals Served
35
34
C. Race/Ethnicity of Individuals Served
10
0
0
2
0
17
0
40
D. Living Arrangements of Individuals Served
37
20
6
1
3
0
0
1
1
0
0
E. Primary Disability of Individuals Served
6
1
0
27
21
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
1
0
9
Part IV. Systemic Activities and Litigation
A. Systemic Activities
1
1446000
DRO has been representing a blind job seeker for the past three years. He is a computer technical support person, and has also worked in customer service positions. He came to DRO after being denied many jobs because the jobs required an applicant to complete a computerized test as part of the application. Virtually all of the employment agencies and employers used tests that were inaccessible to a person using JAWS, the computer software for people with visual impairments. DRO and co-counsel researched the scope of the problem, and found that two companies offered testing services worldwide, with thousands of on-line applications and tests, none of which were accessible to the visually impaired. DRO, working with attorneys for the National Federation of the Blind, helped the job seeker file a charge with the EEOC, which ultimately became a Commissioners charge against one of the largest companies marketing the inaccessible tests. After years of negotiation, an accessible test was developed and now is widely available in the employment testing marketplace. As a result, thousands of blind and visually impaired job seekers across the country and throughout the world will have access to jobs that were currently unavailable to them. This result is huge, as the employment statistics for people with visual impairments is less than 10%.<p>
B. Litigation/Class Actions
4028977
8
DRO, in conjunction with Legal Aid and private counsel, brought a systemic challenge to the policies and practices of the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). ODOT had, since 1993, systemically failed to create or upgrade curb ramps and pedestrian signals when it paved, resurfaced, or otherwise altered a stretch of the state highway system. The result of its inactions is that over 15,000 intersections in the State of Oregon have curb ramps that are either non-compliant with applicable ADA Design Standards or missing completely. DRO brought the suit on behalf of the Association of Oregon Councils for Independent Living (AOCIL), representing seven independent living centers geographically dispersed throughout Oregon. DRO also represented eight individuals who lived in areas around the state where the absence of compliant curb ramps and pedestrian signals denied them the opportunity to participate in community life, and often forced them to choose between risking their safety or their lives, and leaving their homes. One plaintiff lives in a small town (Clatskanie) where the state highway is the only road through town. When it was resurfaced, no curb ramps were installed, so she is unable to cross the highway from her home to reach the post office and grocery store without someone taking her across the road. The individual plaintiffs, particularly in the Portland metro area (where there is no clear landing), cannot access many of the pedestrian signals, buttons are too high, or the reach is obstructed. As a result, crossing the street becomes a matter of waiting until someone else pushes the walk button. A visually impaired plaintiff is unable to hear when it is safe to cross TV Highway, a major thoroughfare near housing for people who have quadriplegia. This case was settled, and has now become a class action case for settlement purposes. The class consists of all people with physical disabilities, including mobility and visual impairments, who have been adversely affected by ODOTs policies. Under the agreement, ODOT will inspect every stretch of highway, and create an inventory of the locations where curb ramps are missing or non-compliant, or traffic signals are not accessible. These locations will be brought into compliance over a 15-year period: 30% by the end of 2022; 75% by the end of 2027; and 100% by the end of 2032. An Accessibility Consultant will be hired to advise ODOT on curb ramp design issues, design exceptions, work zone accessibility plans, as well as to assess ODOTs compliance with the Agreement. A dispute resolution process is included, along with a Special Master who will resolve disputes. Finally, members of the class and general public can report an inaccessible curb ramp or signal through a complaint process prominently displayed on ODOTs website and receive a response within 10 days. There is also a process by which to request an audible signal. DRO will monitor ODOTs compliance with the agreement for the length of
Part V. PAIR'S Priorities and Objectives
A. Priorities and Objectives for the Fiscal Year Covered by this Report
For each of your PAIR program priorities for the fiscal year covered by this report, please:
  1. Identify and describe priority.
  2. Identify the need, issue or barrier addressed by this priority.
  3. Identify and describe indicators PAIR used to determine successful outcome of activities pursued under this priority.
  4. Explain whether pursuing this priority involved collaborative efforts by other entities. If so, describe this collaboration.
  5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority. Indicate how many of these, if any, were class actions.
  6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority.
A. 1. Providing full access to community participation to individuals with disabilities.<p>A.2. Need: There are many barriers for PAIR eligible clients to have full access and participation in their communities. While there is progress, many challenges remain. Clients find themselves limited by inaccessible parks, transportation, courthouses, libraries, sidewalks, businesses, workplaces, and more. Securing accessible and affordable housing and denial of accommodations in housing are two significant challenges many PAIR eligible clients face.<p>A.3. PAIR indicators:<p>a. Removing significant access barriers in public places with emphasis on barriers in education, transportation, and the courts.<p>b. Promoting an increase in the supply of accessible housing through policy work.<p>c. Providing information about reasonable accommodations for tenants to prevent homelessness and isolation<p>d. Advocating for reasonable accommodations in employment-related licensing and the workplace<p>A.4. Explain whether pursuing this priority involved collaborative efforts by other entities. If so, describe this collaboration.<p>DROs efforts were made in collaboration with the following entities: public transit agencies (TRIMET), public and private landlords, the Fair Housing Council of Oregon, the State of Oregon, and County-specific Aging and Disability Services, Oregon Housing Policy Workgroup, Portland Commission on Disabilities, Oregons Disability Commission, and Connecting Communities Coalition.<p>A.5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority: 31 (7 class actions)<p>A.6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority.<p>Case Summary 1)Our client was an athletic and socially successful 15-year old who was permanently paralyzed in a car accident near his home in rural Eastern Oregon. After being life-flighted to Portland where his life was saved, he was moved to a rehab hospital. During the next 4 months, our client received no educational services, was isolated in a population of much older patients, and bed ridden because he had not been provided with a puffer-controlled wheelchair. As a quadriplegic who would have a permanent need for vent and trach services, he would not be able to return home until his home was extensively remodeled for accessibility and a medically supervised team could be assembled to support family provision of vent and trach care. In addition, he needed sophisticated assistive technology that would allow him to operate a wheel chair and access the world outside of his family home.<p>When DRO became involved in May of 2014, various agencies had been unable to sort out their responsibilities to an extent that there had been no progress toward meeting any of these needs or returning our client to his community. Eventually, 2 DRO attorneys worked on unsnarling the bureaucratic impasses at play. During the next 4 months, we secured special education services. We also pressured the State to identify a home care medical
B. Priorities and Objectives for the Current Fiscal Year
Please include a statement of priorities and objectives for the current fiscal year (the fiscal year succeeding that covered by this report), which should contain the following information:
  1. a statement of each prioirty;
  2. the need addressed by each priority; and;
  3. a description of the activities to be carried out under each priority.
PAIR Priority 1: Providing full access to community participation to individuals with disabilities<p>2. The need addressed by each priority:<p>While progress is slowly being made for PAIR-eligible clients, many challenges and barriers still exist for clients to have full access and participation in their communities. Clients find themselves limited by inaccessible parks, transportation, courthouses, libraries, sidewalks, businesses, workplaces and more. Securing accessible and affordable housing is also challenge many PAIR eligible clients face, in addition to the denial of accommodation in housing.<p>3. A description of the activities to be carried out under each priority:<p>a. Remove significant access barriers in public places with emphasis on barriers in education, transportation, and the courts<p>b. Promote an increase in the supply of accessible housing through policy work<p>c. Provide information about reasonable accommodations for tenants to prevent homelessness and isolation<p>d. Advocate for reasonable accommodations in employment-related licensing and the workplace<p>PAIR Priority 2: Getting and maintaining quality community support services<p>2. The need addressed by each priority:<p>Difficulty in acquiring and maintaining services that allow individuals with disabilities to remain living in their communities continues to be a frequent issue among Oregonians experience disability, especially accessing health care. Individuals who are reevaluated to determine their level of need often experience a loss or decrease of services. Individuals with disabilities face additional barriers to health care, including access to clinics, qualified interpreters, appropriate and reliable assistive technology and more.<p>3. A description of the activities to be carried out under each priority:<p>a. Secure entitled services and supports needed for safety and independence,<p>b. Expand available health care through policy<p>c. Provide advocacy and education to people with questions about vocational rehabilitation services<p>d. Monitor and enforce implementation of initiatives to achieve full community integration of employment, residential, and day services<p>PAIR Priority 3: Getting a free and appropriate education for children with disabilities<p>2. The need addressed by each priority:<p>In Oregon, some schools continue to fall short in their responsibilities to children with special needs. Based on their disabilities, children are being suspended from school, subject to inappropriate seclusion and restraint, and provided shortened school days that result in rights violations and educational failure. Schools fail to follow Individualized Education Plans, fail to develop appropriate behavior plans, fail to provide adequate transition services, and fail to provide reasonable accommodation.<p>3. A description of the activities to be carried out under each priority:<p>a. Prevent schools from keeping students out of school because of their disabilities,<p>b. Secure appropriate transition servic
Part VI. Narrative
Narrative
At a minimum, you must include all of the information requested. You may include any other information, not otherwise collected on this reporting form that would be helpful in describing the extent of PAIR activities during the prior fiscal year. Please limit the narrative portion of this report, including attachments, to 20 pages or less.

The narrative should contain the following information. The instructions for this form outline the information that should be contained in each section.
  1. Sources of funds received and expended
  2. Budget for the fiscal year covered by this report
    Outline the budget for the fiscal year covered by the report (prior fiscal year), as well as a projection for the current fiscal year.  Be sure to include a breakdown of dollars expended/allotted for:  administrative costs (i.e., personnel salaries, equipment, etc.); services to individuals; and other expenses (i.e., staff training, travel, etc.)
  3. Description of PAIR staff (duties and person-years)
  4. Involvement with advisory boards (if any)
  5. Grievances filed under the grievance procedure
  6. Coordination with the Client Assistance Program (CAP) and the State long-term care program, if these programs are not part of the P&A agency
{Empty}
Certification
Signed
Yes
Robert C. Joondeph
Executive Director
Tue, 12/27/2016 - 00:00
OMB Notice

OMB Control Number: 1820-0627, approved for use through 07/31/2023

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 16 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The obligation to respond to this collection is required to obtain or retain a benefit (Section 13 of the Rehabilitation Act, as amended). Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. 20202-4537 or email ICDocketMgr@ed.gov and reference the OMB Control Number 1820-0627. Note: Please do not return the completed form to this address.