RSA-227 - Annual Client Assistance Program (CAP) Report

Arizona (Arizona Center for Disability Law) - H161A130002 - FY2013

General Information

Designated Agency Identification

NameArizona Center for Disability Law
Address5025 East Washington Street
Address Line 2Suite 202
CityPhoenix
StateArizona
Zip Code85034
E-mail Addresscenter@azdisabilitylaw.org
Website Addresshttp://www.azdisabilitylaw.org
Phone602-274-6287
TTY 602-274-6287
Toll-free Phone800-927-2260
Toll-free TTY800-927-2260
Fax602-274-6779

Operating Agency (if different from Designated Agency)

NameArizona Center for Disability Law
Address5025 East Washington Street
Address Line 2Suite 202
CityPhoenix
Zip Code85034
E-mail Addresscenter@azdisabilitylaw.org
Website Addresshttp://www.azdisabilitylaw.org
Phone602-274-6287
TTY602-274-6287
Toll-free Phone800-927-2260
Toll-free TTY800-927-2260
Fax602-274-6779

Additional Information

Name of CAP Director/CoordinatorJohn C. Gutierrez
Person to contact regarding reportJohn C. Gutierrez
Contact Person Phone602-274-6287

Part I. Agency Workload Data

A. Information and Referral Services (I&R)

Multiple responses are not permitted.

1. Information regarding the Rehabilitation Act105
2. Information regarding Title I of the ADA48
3. Other information provided37
4. Total I&R services provided (Lines A1+A2+A3)190
5. Individuals attending trainings by CAP staff (approximate)5,334

B. Individuals served

An individual is counted only once during a fiscal year. Multiple counts are not permitted for Lines B1-B3.

1. Individuals who are still being served as of October 1 (carryover from prior year)55
2. Additional individuals who were served during the year69
3. Total individuals served (Lines B1+B2)124
4. Individuals (from Line B3) who had multiple case files opened/closed this year. (In unusual situations, an individual may have more than one case file opened/closed during a fiscal year. This number is not added to the total in Line B3 above.)3

C. Individual still being served as of September 30

Carryover to next year. This total may not exceed Line I.B3. 28

D. Reasons for closing individuals' case files

Choose one primary reason for closing each case file. There may be more case files than the total number of individuals served to account for those unusual situations, referred to in Line I.B4, when an individual had multiple case files closed during the year.

1. All issues resolved in individual's favor45
2. Some issues resolved in individual's favor (when there are multiple issues)34
3. CAP determines VR agency position/decision was appropriate for the individual0
4. Individual's case lacks legal merit; (inappropriate for CAP intervention)6
5. Individual chose alternative representation0
6. Individual decided not to pursue resolution4
7. Appeals were unsuccessful1
8. CAP services not needed due to individual's death, relocation, etc.0
9. Individual refused to cooperate with CAP5
10. CAP unable to take case due to lack of resources4
11. Other (please explain)

CAP did not have any other reasons for closing.

E. Results achieved for individuals

1. Controlling law/policy explained to individual36
2. Application for services completed.4
3. Eligibility determination expedited2
4. Individual participated in evaluation2
5. IPE developed/implemented13
6. Communication re-established between individual and other party30
7. Individual assigned to new counselor/office2
8. Alternative resources identified for individual2
9. ADA/504/EEO/OCR/ complaint made0
10. Other8
11. Other (please explain)

VR file to remain open (2), VR file now shows counselor made false statements (1), lack of merit (1), caller will advocate for self (2), VR will pay for client’s housing (1), VR assistance to develop self employment plan (1)

Part II. Program Data

A. Age

As of the beginning of the fiscal year. Multiple responses are not permitted.

1. 21 and under20
2. 22 - 4034
3. 41 - 6464
4. 65 and over6
5. Total (Sum of Lines A1 through A4. Total must equal Line I.B3.)124

B. Gender

Multiple responses not permitted.

1. Female72
2. Male52
3. Total (Sum of Lines B1 and B2. Total must equal Line I.B3.)124

C. Race/ethnicity

1. Hispanic/Latino of any race21
For individuals who are non-Hispanic/Latino only
2. American Indian or Alaskan Native5
3. Asian0
4. Black or African American19
5. Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander0
6. White75
7. Two or more races4
8. Race/ethnicity unknown0

D. Primary disabling condition of individuals served

Multiple responses not permitted.

1. Blindness (both eyes)9
2. Other visual impairments6
3. Deafness8
4. Hard of hearing5
5. Deaf-blind0
6. Orthopedic impairments14
7. Absense of extremities0
8. Mental illness31
9. Substance abuse (alcohol or drugs)1
10. Mental retardation2
11. Specific learning disabilities (SLD)25
12. Neurological disorders13
13. Respiratory disorders0
14. Heart and other circulatory conditions0
15. Digestive disorders0
16. Genitourinary conditions0
17. Speech Impairments0
18. AIDS/HIV positive0
19. Traumatic brain injury (TBI)3
20. All other disabilities7
21. Disabilities not known0
22. Total (Sum of Lines D1 through D21. Total must equal Line I. B3.)124

E. Types of individuals served

Multiple responses permitted.

1. Applicants of VR Program20
2. Clients of VR Program104
3. Applicants or clients of IL Program0
4. Applicants or clients of other programs and projects funded under the Act0

F. Source of individual's concern

Multiple responses permitted.

1. VR agency only114
2. Other Rehabilitation Act sources only5
3. Both VR agency and other Rehabilitation Act sources5
4. Employer0

G. Problem areas

Multiple responses permitted.

1. Individual requests information1
2. Communication problems between individual and counselor6
3. Conflict about services to be provided107
4. Related to application/eligibility process9
5. Related to IPE development/implementation1
6. Other Rehabilitation Act-related problems0
7. Non-Rehabilitation Act related0
8. Related to Title I of the ADA0

H. Types of CAP services provided

Choose one primary CAP service provided for each case file/service record.

1. Information/referral16
2. Advisory/interpretational26
3. Negotiation55
4. Administrative/informal review0
5. Alternative dispute resolution2
6. Formal appeal/fair hearing0
7. Legal remedy0
8. Transportation0

Part III. Narrative

Narrative

Part III. Narrative

a. Type of Agency used to administer CAP: 1) External — Protection and Advocacy

b. Source of funds expended:

Federal Funds: $216,150 State Funds: $0 All Other Funds: $0 Total from All Sources $216,150 c. Budget for current and following fiscal years:

Category Current Fiscal Year Next Fiscal Year Computer Consulting $1049 $974 Accounting/Legal Fees $3829 $4220 Advertising $47 $41 Bank Charges $48 $0 Board/Staff Meetings $535 $606 Copying/Printing $113 $133 Office Supplies $1871 $1849 Postage $724 $778 Reference Materials $131 $148 Payroll Processing Fees $661 $679 Equipment Rental $853 $700 Equipment Maint./Repair $594 $725 Equipment Purchase $1633 $3073 Rent/Parking $14063 $12393 Telephone $2539 $2276 Ins. — General Liability $749 $840 Ins. — Professional Liability $1914 $1706 Prof. Development/Seminars $877 $344 Professional Dues $673 $690 Travel — In-State $4373 $4326 Travel — Out-of-State $593 $1120 Salaries $128046 $115951 LRAP Expenses $0 $0 Consult./Interpretation Fees $655 $2013 Accommodations $1438 $4088 Temporary Staff $2223 $107 FICA — Employer $9245 $8861 Health Insurance $30851 $30294 State Unemployment $272 $208 Workers Comp. Insurance $324 $249 Long-Term Disability Ins. $909 $846 Property Tax $16 $15 NDRN Database $736 $710 Trainings — Facilities/Supplies$808 $608 Pension Plan Expense $2758 $2317 Total Budgets $216150 $203888

d. Number of person-years:

Type of Position Full-time equivalent % of yr. position filled Person Years Professional Full Time 1.78 100% 1.78 Part-Time 0 0 0 Vacant 0 0 0

Clerical Full Time .79 100% .79 Part-Time 0 0 0 Vacant 0 0 0

e. Summary of presentations made.

Center staff conducted or participated in the following 39 outreach and training activities during Fiscal Year 2013:

1) 03-Oct-12, Booth/Table, AT Open House, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, 120 people attended. 2) 11-Oct-12, Booth/Table, Disability Resource Fair, Davis Monthan Air Force Base, Tucson, AZ, 75 people attended. 3) 15-Oct-12, Booth/Table, 12th Annual Transition Fair, Talking Stick Resort, Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community, 850 people attended. 4) 16-Oct-12, Presentation, “Your Rights as a Vocational Rehabilitation Client,” 12th Annual Transition Fair, Talking Stick Resort, Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community, 22 people attended. 5) 07-Nov-12, Booth/Table, Pro-Bono Fair, Phoenix School of Law, AZ, 75 people attended. 6) 30-Nov-12, Booth/Table, 16th Annual Vision Rehabilitation & Technology Expo, Shriner’s Auditorium, Phoenix, AZ, 200 people attended. 7) 04-Dec-12, Presentation, Overview of ACDL, DIRECT Center for Independence, Tucson, AZ, 12 people attended. 8) 07-Dec-12, Booth/Table, Academic and Career Fair, Pierson Vocational High School, Nogales, AZ, 200 people attended. 9) 02-Feb-13, Training, “Your Rights as a VR Client,” Phoenix Hotel, Phoenix, AZ, 10 people attended. 10) 08-Feb-13, Overview of ACDL and Extern Program, Phoenix School of Law, five people attended. 11) 09-Feb-13, Booth/Table, Transition Conference, Sierra Vista Transition Conference, AZ, 31 people attended. 12) 09-Feb-13, Presentation, CAP Services, Sierra Vista Transition Conference, Sierra Vista, AZ, 13) 13-Feb-13, Booth/Table, Public Interest Law Association Event, Phoenix School of Law, AZ, seven people attended. 14) 13-Feb-13, Booth/Table, Government/Public Interest Networking Fair, Arizona State University College of Law, 20 people attended. 15) 15-Feb-13, Booth/Table, 2nd Annual Exceptional Education Ping Pong Tournament, Cholla High School, Tucson, AZ, 150 people attended. 16) 27-Feb-13, Presentation, AHCCCS Appeals (CLE training), Disability Empowerment Center, Phoenix, AZ, five people attended. 17) 01-Mar-13, Booth/Table, 2nd Annual African American Conference on Disabilities, Coast Hotel, Phoenix, AZ, 264 people attended. 18) 08-Mar-13, Presentation, “Partners in Policymaking” State Agency Roundtable, Arizona State Capitol, Phoenix, AZ, 30 people attended. 19) 08-Mar-13, Booth/Table, Arizona Veterans Stand Down, Veterans Memorial Coliseum, Phoenix, AZ, 310 people attended. 20) 09-Apr-13, Training, “The Americans with Disabilities Can Help You!” Eastern Arizona College, Thatcher, AZ, 13 people attended. 21) 12-Apr-13, Booth/Table, Brain Injury Alliance Rays of Hope TBI Survivors and Family Conference, Tucson, AZ, 60 people attended. 22) 17-Apr-13, Presentation, CAP Services, RSA Training Center, Phoenix, AZ, 55 people attended. 23) 20-Apr-13, Booth/Table, Connecting Tucson Resources & Transition Expo, Beacon Group, Tucson, AZ, 500 people attended. 24) 26-Apr-13, Booth/Table, Health and Wellness Fair, Disability Empowerment Center, Phoenix, AZ, 70 people attended. 25) 04-May-13, Booth/Table, Self Advocacy Conference, Disability Empowerment Center, Phoenix, AZ, 70 people attended. 26) 04-May-13, Presentation, “Your Rights as a Vocational Rehabilitation Client,” Self-Advocacy Conference, Disability Empowerment Center, Phoenix, AZ, 37 people attended. 27) 15-May-13, Booth/Table, UDC Independent Living Fair, Apache Blvd Living Center, Tempe, AZ, 80 people attended. 28) 21-Jun-13, Training, Powers of Attorney and Guardianships, Arizona State Bar Convention, Arizona Biltmore, Phoenix, AZ, 63 people attended. 29) 30-Jun-13, General Outreach, East Valley NAACP meeting, Mesa, AZ, 21 people attended. 30) 26-Jul-13, Booth/Table, ADA Celebration, Disability Empowerment Center, Phoenix, AZ, 100 people attended. 31) 31-Jul-13, Presentation, Priorities Forum FY2014, Disability Empowerment Center, Phoenix, AZ, 18 people attended. 32) 06-Aug-13, Presentation, Priorities Forum FY2014, Woods Memorial Library, Tucson, AZ, 20 people attended. 33) 11-Aug-13, Presentation, Overview of ACDL, Presentation to monthly lunch group, Phoenix, AZ, 20 people attended. 34) 22-Aug-13, Presentation, Priorities Forum FY2014, Bluewater Resort and Casino, Parker, AZ, 26 people attended. 35) 23-Aug-13, Presentation, Vocational Rehabilitation Services, Disability Conference, Talking Stick Resort, Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community, 200 people attended. 36) 23-Aug-13, Booth/Table, Disability Conference, Talking Stick Resort, Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community, Scottsdale, AZ, 200 people attended. 37) 18-Sept-13, Training, Overview of Arizona Medicaid, Due Process Rights and AHCCCS, Prescott Conference Center, Prescott, AZ, 10 people attended. 38) 30-Sept-13, Booth/Table, 13th Annual AZ Department of Education Transition Conference, Talking Stick Resort, Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community, Scottsdale, AZ, 800 people attended. 39) 30-Sept-13, Vocational Rehabilitation Training, 13th Annual Transition Conference, Talking Stick Resort, Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community, Scottsdale, AZ, 55 people attended.

Total materials disseminated at all events and mailed to clients were 7,480. Total attendees at the outreach events and the trainings or presentations were 5,334.

f. Involvement with advisory boards:

The CAP Coordinator is a member of the State Rehabilitation Council (SRC). Along with being an active member of the SRC, the CAP Coordinator also participates as a member of the subcommittee known as the Program Review Committee (PRC). This committee is particularly important to CAP since it involves monitoring and providing input to relevant issues regarding Vocational Rehabilitation (VR).

The CAP Coordinator is also member of a Stakeholders Committee. This committee consists of various agencies that work with individuals with disabilities. The committee is working collaboratively to find solutions to the many problems that continue to burden the VR system, risk program compliance, and unnecessary barriers to employment for clients. This year the committee met with staff from RSA Administration to discuss issues with VR. g. Outreach to Unserved/Underserved Populations:

A large underserved community in Arizona includes Native Americans throughout the state. On August 23 and September 30, 2013, ACDL staff attended the Disability Conference and the 13th Annual Arizona Department of Education Transition Conference — two events organized by the Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community. A CAP staff member did a presentation during the August 2013 conference entitled “Your Rights as an Applicant or Client of Vocational Rehabilitation.” The presentation was attended by approximately 200 Native Americans who were participating in the conference. CAP staff also did a co-presentation with RSA staff during the September 2013 conference that was attended by high school students in preparation for transition into the VR program.

On October 11, 2012, ACDL staff participated in the Disability Resource Fair at the Davis Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson. Center staff also participated in the Transition Conference in Sierra Vista, Arizona on February 9, 2013. Both of these events focused on the needs of the military population that is an underserved community in Arizona.

On October 15, 2012, ACDL staff also participated in the 12th Annual Transition Fair sponsored by the Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community. These three events reached more than 1,800 Native Americans in the state.

On December 7, 2012, ACDL staff participated in the Academic and Career Fair at the Pierson Vocational High School in Nogales, Arizona. This event reached 200 families and students in the border town of Nogales.

On March 1, 2013, the Center co-sponsored the 2nd Annual African-American Conference on Disabilities at the Coast Hotel in Phoenix. Attendance surpassed last year’s conference with 264 individuals participating. Workshops included vocational rehabilitation, ADA and employment, assistive technology, special education, healthcare, legal options to guardianship, and mental health.

Short-Team Assistance Team

ACDL utilizes a centralized intake system known as the Short-Term Assistance Team (STAT). STAT staff initially handles all requests for assistance, including CAP issues. Our STAT is staffed by trained advocates under the direction and supervision of the Information and Referral (I&R) Supervisor and the Deputy Executive Director. CAP advocates have provided training to STAT staff so they can provide callers with information and referral assistance, a brief service, or short-term technical assistance at the time of their initial call to the Center. Annually, CAP staff conducts training sessions for the STAT to acquaint them with new issues relating to the CAP program which will, in turn, assist them in conducting initial interviews. Once STAT staff has conducted these initial interviews, they assign cases to CAP staff for further advocacy services.

Center Self-Advocacy Guides

The Center disseminates 19 Self-Advocacy Guides on topics related to vocational rehabilitation rights and Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act. CAP callers can view or download the guides from the Center’s website. The guides are available on the Center’s website 24 hours a day, seven days a week, thus facilitating outreach to our clients not only in the urban areas of Phoenix and Tucson, but also in outlying areas. The majority of our callers indicated that they have access to our website and prefer obtaining copies of our materials via the Internet rather than through the mail.

The following guides relating to the CAP are available from the Center: — An Overview of the Employment Protections of the Americans with Disabilities Act — How to Enforce Employment Rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act — The ADA and the Job Applicant: Recruitment, Applications and Interviews — The ADA and the Reasonable Accommodations — Drug and Alcohol Testing under the Americans with Disabilities Act — The ADA and Medical Examinations — The ADA and Confidentiality of Medical Information — The ADA and Disability-Related Harassment — Summary of Vocational Rehabilitation Rights: Eligibility for Services — Summary of Vocational Rehabilitation Rights: Evaluations — Summary of Vocational Rehabilitation Rights: Individual Plan for Employment (IPE) — Summary of Vocational Rehabilitation Rights: Vocational Rehabilitation Services — Your Appeal Rights for Disputes about Vocational Rehabilitation Services — A Summary of Your Vocational Rehabilitation Rights: Assistive Technology and Services

The Center provides guides that have been translated into plain language to accommodate our clients who may have cognitive disabilities, have a seventh grade or lower reading level or difficulty with English. These guides are listed below:

— How to File a Charge When You’ve Been Treated Unfairly — Making Your Job Work for You — Have You Been Treated Unfairly at Work? — Getting a Job When You Have a Disability — How the ADA Protects Your Medical Information at Work

The Center has 17 of our self-advocacy guides written in plain language for individuals who may have difficulty understanding our guides or manuals. The Center also has 17 of our guides translated into Spanish. All of our guides are available on our website and in alternative formats by request. All of our intake information materials have been translated into Spanish and are available at our conferences and trainings and on our website. We have also translated surveys, training materials, and grievance procedures into Spanish.

h. Alternative dispute resolutions:

Two case examples of alternative dispute resolutions are presented below:

Client M.G.

A CAP Advocate represented M.G. in mediation with the Arizona Rehabilitation Services Administration’s Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) program. When M.G., a 52-year-old woman with mental illness, applied for VR services, VR thought she might be too disabled to benefit from services. To reach this conclusion, VR must have clear and convincing evidence which included conducting a trial work experience. M.G. participated in a trial work experience and did very well, showing good work skills and an ability to get along with co-workers and supervisors. VR then made an eligibility determination but placed M.G. in the Priority 2 Category of the Order of Selection. This meant that M.G. would be placed on a waiting list for services. M.G. appealed the Priority 2 status and requested mediation. CAP represented M.G. in the mediation process because we questioned how VR could first believe this client was too disabled to benefit from services in terms of an employment outcome and then find her to be not significantly disabled. Even though VR agreed to mediation, they did not change their mind. CAP discussed this case with the new VR administrator who instructed her staff to change M.G. to Priority 1. M.G. is now receiving VR services.

Client T.P.

CAP represented T.P. in mediation concerning a delay in receiving Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services. T.P. is a 51-year-old man with a mental illness and a physical disability. He has an extensive work history and wanted VR to assist him in returning to similar work. Delays in his case occurred when his VR counselor was on extended medical leave. The counselor who was then assigned the case was not familiar with T.P. or his case and said that due to the counselor’s increased workload, she would not be able to give him the kind of attention his previous counselor had. She wanted him to sign an extension for developing his Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE). T.P. thought he was ready to develop the IPE so he declined signing the extension and filed an appeal requesting mediation. VR agreed to mediation and an agreement was reached. T.P. was reassigned to his previous counselor, and the two of them decided on what services could be provided as soon as possible to assist T.P. in developing the IPE. T.P. has now participated in a psychological evaluation and a vocational evaluation.

i. Systemic Advocacy:

The Arizona CAP has addressed the following issues regarding systemic advocacy:

Review of Counselor Determination Form VR has implemented the use of a new form called the Review of Counselor Determination Form. Initially, CAP staff thought this would be a good idea, since this form would be used to file appeals by clients. This form also included the timelines when a client needed to file an appeal. However, VR counselors are now overusing this form. VR counselors no longer try to negotiate and resolve issues on behalf of clients. Instead, clients are given this Review of Counselor Determination Form. CAP staff has noticed an alarming number of clients who are going to hearings because they fill out this form. The CAP Director recently told RSA Administration that VR counselors have lost the ability to negotiate with the clients and try to resolve issues. Instead, it has become routine for counselors to simply provide clients with this form. Most clients do not realize that filling out these forms will lead to the traumatic experience of having to go to an administrative fair hearing. CAP staff have spoken with the new Director of VR and explained the issue and offered some solutions on the overuse of the form. VR’s Contracted Consultants Having the Authority to Deny VR Client Services CAP staff has noticed that many of the consultants who are working with VR clients are making the final decisions on whether VR clients are to receive specific services. Consultants appear to be acting as VR Counselors in making the final decision on whether a client receives a service. CAP staff has witnessed this in all different areas where VR uses consultants — from those who provide visual evaluations to psychological evaluations to evaluations where specific therapies are being requested by clients. Instead of making their own conclusions, VR counselors are accepting the consultants’ decisions and, therefore, denying a service because the consultant has stated a client should not have a particular service. One example of this was our client, S.H. When S.H. applied for VR services, his counselor questioned his ability to benefit from services in terms of an employment outcome. She sent him for a psycho-vocational evaluation. The psychologist concluded S.H. was “not a good candidate for Vocational Rehabilitation Services” due to his emotional difficulties being at a level which would interfere with his work performance. Based on this conclusion, VR found S.H. ineligible for services. VR failed to provide S.H. with a trial work experience which is required before an ineligibility determination can be made. VR also failed to consider that S.H. was successfully doing volunteer work at a cafĂ© and was an active participant in his behavioral health services. CAP assisted S.H. in appealing his ineligibility decision. S.H. won his appeal based on VR’s failure to provide him with a trial work experience. After the appeal decision, a new counselor was assigned who found S.H. eligible for services. He quickly found competitive employment and is a successful VR client.

CAP staff has spoken to RSA Administration about this growing problem in the past. RSA Administration stated they would look into this issue and inform consultants of their role. However, CAP staff continue to see this issue happening.

VR’s Becoming Policy Oriented and Not Client Oriented

In this current VR administration, policy has become the most important part of the VR process. VR has gone from “how can we help the client” to “how does policy relate to the services a client can be provided.” VR counselors are no longer making their own decisions about providing services to clients. It has become basically mandatory to check with policy staff before a counselor can make any progress on a client’s case. There are many problems with policy becoming the standard. First, the individual who is now VR’s policy manager has only been with VR for less than five years. This individual has no background or experience working in the VR program. This individual is writing specific, ironclad policies that are making it very difficult for counselors to provide client services. In past administrations, counselors had the freedom to think outside the box and be creative in how to provide services.

CAP staff is very frustrated in trying to resolve issues on behalf of clients. The policy manager’s lack of experience, background and knowledge makes it difficult for counselors to provide services to clients. The new practice no longer addresses what services a client needs but what services can be provided according to a specific policy. Also, CAP staff is constantly being told by VR counselors that they receive changes in policy almost on a weekly basis. This causes confusion with counselors not knowing what services to provide and also causes frustration and uncertainty on what counselors are allowed to provide. Another critical concern is that VR administration is not providing public forums whenever they make significant changes to policy as per the Rehabilitation Act.

CAP staff has discussed this policy concern with VR administration in several meetings. To respond to our concerns, VR administration had only one public forum. CAP staff has concerns that there have been changes in various policies throughout this year for which VR should have provided public forums.

This problem is compounded by the fact that there are so many new VR counselors. Most of these individuals have little or no background or experience in VR thus making policy even a stronger focus of this VR program to the detriment of clients’ being able to receive appropriate services.

j. Interesting case:

The case of C. M.

CM is an 18-year-old who was transitioning from high school to Vocational Rehabilitation. Since Arizona VR is under an Order of Selection, clients’ cases have to be designated into three priority categories. Due to financial constraints in the State of Arizona and VR, VR administration is only serving clients in Priority Category 1. Although CM has a multitude of disabilities, including mental illness, epilepsy, learning disabilities and respiratory disease, he was placed in Priority Category 2. A CAP advocate advised CM to file an appeal. THE CAP advocate assisted CM by meeting with one of the program managers to discuss his case. The program manager agreed that due to the number and severity of his disabilities, CM should have been placed in Priority Category 1. Once CM was placed in Priority Category1, he started to receive services. CM is now attending Arizona State University (ASU) studying in his vocational goal of Software Engineer.

k. On-line information/outreach:

ACDL, the P and A which houses the Arizona CAP, has a main website and several social media websites. Consumers can visit ACDL’s main website at www.azdisabilitylaw.org. Included on this site are descriptions of the CAP, the hours of the STAT intake lines, as well as all the CAP and ADA Guides. All self-advocacy guides are available on the website for immediate viewing and downloading. Our social networking sites provide information on trainings, outreach events, and other topics of vital interest to our clients. For fiscal year 2013, our website had 135,539 total hits.

During this fiscal year, the Center increased our presence on Facebook and Twitter social networking sites to keep our clients and the general public better informed. Our Facebook site now has 642 followers, increasing by 194 from our members at the end of last fiscal year. Our Twitter account has 189 followers — a 33% increase from last fiscal year, and we are following 203 individuals, agencies or organizations on Twitter. We are constantly researching innovative methods to get our message to the public who are interested in our services and programs and can further our goals throughout Arizona.

Arizona’s CAP advocates and staff will continue to provide vital information and assistance to consumers through a variety of communication methods.

Certification

Approved

This Report is Complete and Correct.Yes
Date Signed:19-Nov-13
Name of Designated Agency Official:Peri Jude Radecic
Title of Designated Agency Official:Executive Director