RSA-509 - Protection & Advocacy of Individual Rights (PAIR) Program Performance Report

Utah (DISABILITY LAW CENTER -- THE COMMUNITY LEGAL CENTER) - H240A150045 - FY2015

General Information

Designated Agency Identification

NameDisability Law Center
Address205 North 400 West
Address Line 2
CitySalt Lake City
StateUtah
Zip Code84103
E-mail Addressazahradnikova@disabilitylawcenter.org
Website Addresshttp://www.disabilitylawcenter.org
Phone801-363-1347
TTY
Toll-free Phone800-662-9080
Toll-free TTY
Fax801-363-1437
Name of P&A Executive DirectorAdina Zahradnikova
Name of PAIR Director/CoordinatorAdina Zahradnikova
Person to contact regarding reportAdina Zahradnikova
Contact Person phone801-363-1347
Ext.3220

Part I. Non-Case Services

A. Individual Information and Referral Services (I&R)

Multiple responses are not permitted.

1. Individuals receiving I&R within PAIR priority areas207
2. Individuals receiving I&R outside PAIR priority areas570
3. Total individuals receiving I&R (lines A1 + A2)777

B. Training Activities

1. Number of trainings presented by PAIR staff4
2. Number of individuals who attended training (approximate)171

C. Information Disseminated to the Public

1. Radio and TV appearances by PAIR staff25
2. Newspaper/magazine/journal articles65
3. PSAs/videos aired27
4. Hits on the PAIR/P&A website2,176,149
5. Publications/booklets/brochures disseminated4,674
6. Other (specify separately)236

Narrative

DLC posted 236 Facebook posts which reached 54,863 people.

Part II. Individuals Served

A. Individuals Served

Count individual once per FY. Multiple counts not permitted for lines A1 through A3.

1. Individuals still served as of October 1 (carryover from prior FY)45
2. Additional individuals served during the year247
3. Total individuals served (lines A1 + A2)292
4. Individuals w. more than 1 case opened/closed during the FY. (Do not add this number to total on line A3 above.)10

B. Individuals served as of September 30

Carryover to next FY may not exceed total on line II. A.3 above 32

C. Problem Areas/Complaints of Individuals Served

1. Architectural accessibility46
2. Employment110
3. Program access10
4. Housing3
5. Government benefits/services14
6. Transportation7
7. Education5
8. Assistive technology1
9. Voting0
10. Health care18
11. Insurance7
12. Non-government services19
13. Privacy rights0
14. Access to records2
15. Abuse17
16. Neglect20
17. Other24

D. Reasons for Closing Individual Case Files

1. Issues resolved partially or completely in individual favor204
2. Other representation found3
3. Individual withdrew complaint21
4. Appeals unsuccessful1
5. PAIR Services not needed due to individual's death, relocation etc.2
6. PAIR withdrew from case10
7. PAIR unable to take case because of lack of resources5
8. Individual case lacks legal merit24
9. Other1

Please explain

E. Intervention Strategies Used in Serving Individuals

List the highest level of intervention used by PAIR prior to closing each case file.

1. Technical assistance in self-advocacy10
2. Short-term assistance214
3. Investigation/monitoring8
4. Negotiation11
5. Mediation/alternative dispute resolution2
6. Administrative hearings25
7. Litigation (including class actions)1
8. Systemic/policy activities0

Part III. Statistical Information on Individuals Served

A. Age of Individuals Served as of October 1

Multiple responses not permitted.

1. 0 - 42
2. 5 - 2212
3. 23 - 59212
4. 60 - 6428
5. 65 and over38

B. Gender of Individuals Served

Multiple responses not permitted.

1. Females134
2. Males158

C. Race/Ethnicity of Individuals Served

For individuals who are non-Hispanic/Latino only

1. Hispanic/Latino of any race13
2. American Indian or Alaskan Native3
3. Asian2
4. Black or African American6
5. Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander1
6. White262
7. Two or more races1
8. Race/ethnicity unknown5

D. Living Arrangements of Individuals Served

Multiple responses not permitted.

1. Independent219
2. Parental or other family home26
3. Community residential home0
4. Foster care0
5. Nursing home25
6. Public institutional living arrangement0
7. Private institutional living arrangement0
8. Jail/prison/detention center17
9. Homeless5
10. Other living arrangements0
11. Living arrangements not known0

E. Primary Disability of Individuals Served

Identify the individual's primary disability, namely the one directly related to the issues/complaints

1. Blind/visual impairment18
2. Deaf/hard of hearing11
3. Deaf-blind1
4. Orthopedic impairment132
5. Mental illness29
6. Substance abuse0
7. Mental retardation6
8. Learning disability15
9. Neurological impairment38
10. Respiratory impairment6
11. Heart/other circulatory impairment7
12. Muscular/skeletal impairment21
13. Speech impairment0
14. AIDS/HIV4
15. Traumatic brain injury4
16. Other disability0

Part IV. Systemic Activities and Litigation

A. Systemic Activities

1. Number of policies/practices changed as a result of non-litigation systemic activities12

2. Number of individuals potentially impacted by policy changes300,000

Describe your systemic activities. Be sure to include information about the policies that were changed and how these changes benefit individuals with disabilities. Include case examples of how your systemic activities impacted individuals served.

1)The AN team has worked over the last year to advocate for an aggressive implementation of the new Home and Community Based Settings (HCBS) regulations. We have done this through public comments to the state, serving on a stakeholder group that has provided feedback on the transition process, conducting outreach, and developing a webpage dedicated to HCBS resources. As a result of our comments the state amended the state transition plan to include measures such as conducting an internal review of its policies/procedures. We have also significantly raised public awareness regarding the transition process with providers, families, and consumers. 2)The DLC received a report that the Key Bank in Bountiful, UT was physically inaccessible. We opened a project to conduct surveys of the Bountiful location as well as a sampling of other four Key Bank locations in Utah to determine if Key Bank inaccessibility is a more prevalent issue. ADAAG accessibility surveys for meaningful accessibility were taken of a sampling of Key Bank locations in Utah: KeyBank Bountiful, KeyBank Orem Parkway, KeyBank Provo, KeyBank Sugarhouse and KeyBank Tooele. A number of significant ADAAG violations were found at those sites (KeyBank Town Center was accessible). An ADAAG violation notice and recommendations demand letter was sent to each branch manager as well as the national corporation headquarters. In-house counsel for Key Bank headquarters (KeyCorp) contacted the DLC attorney working on this project with a positive response and stated KeyCorp would bring those facilities into compliance. KeyCorp property development team commenced plans for updates (some are significant due to issues with slope of cement ramps and property line concerns). As of the end of FY15, four of the five banks had begun working with contractors to complete the necessary upgrades to ensure the buildings are accessible. The fifth bank had some additional difficulties, but in-house counsel ensured the DLC they were working through the building’s management company to ensure necessary upgrades would be made as soon as possible. 3) The DLC conducted a review of complaints that Salt Lake County is not in compliance with ADA standards for accessibility. Complaints included that current recreation facilities are not accessible, and lack of planning for people with disabilities regarding future recreation programs/facilities/construction. As a result of DLC's advocacy, Salt Lake County has included in its plan, policies and activities to improve the accessibility of recreational facilities and programs. 4) A DLC Senior Advocate serves as the chairman of the Bear River Association of Governments Mobility Management Council. In that capacity, she helps coordinate projects and advocacy work to increase access to transportation and local businesses for people with disabilities. This is an on-going project, and its objective is to increase the transportation options for people with disabilities in the (rural) Bear River Region. It also promotes access to public accommodations in the private sector. This project also captures work done to approve or deny participation by applicants of the transportation voucher program. The program, created by the council provides people who do not have access to public transportation, have limited income and have a disability with the means to pay private transportation providers or friends or neighbors to transport them to medical appointments. 20 individuals were accepted into a Medical Voucher Program that paid for individuals with disabilities with no access to public transportation to receive rides to medical appointments. A total of 31 trips were provided through this pilot program. The trips included regularly scheduled medical appointments, pharmacy visits dialysis treatment, physical therapy and other medical trips. The program, created in collaboration with other organizations enjoyed success and will be continued for the coming year. Also - the trip reimbursement rate was increased due to the advocacy of committee members. An Open Access program designed to reward businesses for accessible practices was also implemented. The DLC participated in training the individuals that conduct that program. 5) The DLC receives electronic copies of all CMS Survey reports of long term care facilities and hospitals in Utah, including those in rural Utah. The DLC's Abuse and Neglect Team (AN) reviews incoming reports to identify potential clients who are victims of serious abuse or neglect, resident on resident abuse, or larger facility concerns of serious abuse and/or neglect. We also give attention to those facilities with a D grade or lower in patient rights and patient safety. This information is also used to assist the AN team in identifying facilities needing more focused monitoring visits, rights training or outreach.We increased our presence in 3 facilities due to findings of rights restrictions, not reporting abuse and neglect allegations and overuse of psychotropic medications from reviewing these survey reports. 6) The AN team conducted several facility monitoring visits at Federal Heights last FY, and then submitted a letter of our concerns to the Administration of the facility requesting the address those. In their recent CMS Survey, those same concerns were also raised. A DLC attorney wrote a letter to administrator to inform him of abuse and neglect concerns regarding residents. In the letter, the DLC stated that we would follow up with residents and monitor the facility to ensure conditions had improved. On follow up, the facility announced they were closing. The DLC monitored the process to ensure the facility was following appropriate discharge procedures. 7) The DLC received a several complaints from students at Utah State University about the University's website being inaccessible. The DLC conducted research on legal background of website accessibility and technical requirements beyond federal agencies (already expressly covered by Sec 508 of the Rehab Act) and survey of state and local government departments/agencies as well as institutions of higher education websites to determine if they are accessible to individuals with disabilities. The DLC sent a letter to Utah State University on 9/25/15 laying out their legal obligations .The DLC requested that they create a formal policy for the entire university to ensure that students had necessary access. This project will continue in FY 16. 8) The DLC renewed its connection to local government by getting on of our attorneys appointed to the Mayor’s Accessibility Council to ensure we are aware of the issues in our capitol city. Through this council, we were able to work with the city on van accessible parking along the newly installed protected bike lanes throughout the city. We received assurances from the city that they were already implementing the standards from the proposed right of way regulations from the United States Access Board. 9) The DLC received a report that Western Neurological Associates (WNA) centers and affiliates in Salt Lake City, UT were physically inaccessible. This project included a survey of the location to ensure compliance with ADA accessibility standards and ADAAGs so that people with disabilities may be provided appropriate access to health care services. As a result of our intervention, all ADAAG violations were remedied. Specifically, railings were added to both sides of all ramps and edge protection was added to bottom of all railings. 10) In response to a referral from Interwest Interpreting that a number of individuals who are deaf had been denied their individual requests for an interpreter at their medical appointments by Intermountain Healthcare (IHC), a DLC attorney contacted a number of the individuals referred and confirmed that they were denied the provision of interpreters by IHC. The DLC attorney sent a formal notice to IHC of their obligations under the Americans with Disabilities Act to ensure effective communication with their patients and to secure qualified ASL interpreters for individuals who are deaf at future doctor appointments with IHC. As a result of our advocacy, the ICH responded to the request and the problem was remedied. The DLC was instrumental in helping secure qualified ASL interpreters for future medical appointments. 11)The DLC's Access and Rights( AR team) was notified that there were architectural barriers at Utah State University (USU) dormitory areas. The DLC conducted an accessibility survey of the USU dorm areas, including parking and sidewalks, and found several major ADAAG violations. An ADAAG violation notice and demand letter was sent to USU officials. USU agreed to make the requested modifications and provided construction/modification plans the DLC. Construction will commence in the spring and the AR team will continue to monitor the progress until the modifications are complete. 12) The DLC continued to monitor the state's efforts to develop curb cuts required by our class action suit (Decker Curb Cut settlement from 2006).

B. Litigation/Class Actions

1. Number of individuals potentially impacted by changes as a result of PAIR litigation/class action efforts9
2. Number of individuals named in class actions0

Describe your litigation/class action activities. Explain how individuals with disabilities benefited from your litigation activities. Be sure to include case examples that demonstrate the impact of your litigation.

The DLC provided services for a client who experienced employment discrimination in termination from the Utah Anti-Discrimination and Labor Division (UALD) process throughout litigation. We conducted extensive discovery including interrogatories, requests for production of documents and depositions. Additionally, the DLC drafted summary judgment response pleadings. Unfortunately, we were unsuccessful at the summary judgment phase and the judge granted summary judgment on all claims for defendant in reviewing our options for appeal, and discussing it at length with the client, we decided in conjunction with the client not to appeal the decision. The DLC represented 16 clients in administrative hearings during FY 15. A few case examples include: 1) Client contacted the DLC seeking help/recourse for possible discrimination in termination. The DLC conducted a clinic consult to the client, which resulted in writing demand letter to his former employer. Those negotiations were ultimately unsuccessful, so the DLC filed a charge with the EEOC. After submitting relevant information to the EEOC, we agreed to mediate where a resolution was reached. The client accepted a settlement offer in an EEOC negotiated mediation. The check was delivered to the client and the settlement papers were accepted, so the DLC withdrew the Charge from the EEOC. 2) A client who has a significant visual impairment contacted the DLC seeking assistance for failure to accommodate and disability employment discrimination. The DLC submitted a demand letter and a reasonable accommodation request for a reassignment to the employer. The employer did not cooperate, so the DLC filed a complaint with EEOC. Through negotiations during the EEOC process, DLC was able to facilitate client's return to work at Pepsi as a service technician - the position for which the reassignment accommodation was originally requested.

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. 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, class actions were. 6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority. PAIR PRIORITY — Abuse and Neglect (AN) 1 ABUSE 1. Identify and describe priority. Investigate and seek remedies for complaints of serious abuse of people with disabilities with a focus on those living in or being treated in facilities. This includes Utah State Hospital, Utah State Developmental Center(USDC), Intermediate Care Facilities for Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities (ICFIDs), Youth Residential Treatment Facilities(YRTFs), Juvenile Justice Services, long term care/nursing facilities, community residential services, sheltered workshops, community mental health centers, day treatment programs, hospitals, emergency rooms and correctional facilities. 2. Identify the need, issue or barrier addressed by this priority. FY15 Needs Assessment Data Reports: Results from the 2015 Needs Assessment show that of those who responded either was or knew someone with a disability who had experience abuse and neglect. • 69% had experienced emotional or verbal abuse • 46% had experienced neglect • 41% had experienced physical abuse • 225 had experienced sexual abuse 36% of the respondents stated that keeping people free from abuse and neglect is their top priority. STAT continues to get a high volume of calls on A&N issues. 3. Identify and describe indicators PAIR used to determine successful outcome of activities pursued under this priority. By the end of FY15, the AN team will provide 1:1 advocacy to a total of 10 PAIR eligible individuals. By the end of FY15, the AN team will have finished the investigation into the provision of mental health services in county jails throughout Utah. This will be an in-depth look and a county by county survey of how county jails interact with their Local Mental Health Authorities (LMHA) to fulfill their obligation to treat people with mental illness. By the end of FY 15, the DLC will have concluded our FY14 investigation regarding the lack of active treatment for residents at USDC. By the end of FY15, the AN Team will have provided trainings to at least 12 groups (AN1 & AN2 combined). 4. Explain whether pursuing this priority involved collaborative efforts by other entities. If so, describe this collaboration. The DLC collaborates with many other agencies in Utah whose priorities are similar to ours in reducing and/or eliminating the abuse and neglect of people with disabilities living in facilities in Utah. Some of those agencies include; Adult Protective Services, Ombudsman, Long Term Care Planning Committee, Brain Injury Association of Utah, Utah Attorney General’s Office, Department of Aging and Adult Services, Office of Public Guardian, and Department of Health. 5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority. Indicate how many of these, if any, class actions were. Information and Referral — 13 Short term Assistance — 13 Abuse and Neglect Investigations — 2 Representation at Hearings- 0 Technical Assistance — 0 Litigation on behalf of clients —0 Class actions — 0 6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority. Case summary (PAIR): Our office received a referral from a long term care ombudsman regarding concerns she had with a facility limiting the rights of the residents there to come and go as they pleased. It was reported to us that several of the residents who used wheelchairs were not allowed to leave the parking lot because of the “danger” associated with going up and down the hill that the facility resides on. One of the residents had gone through the grievance process several times and was still not allowed to leave the premises. Our office conducted an investigation into the rights restrictions and found that they were indeed limiting the rights of patients. A meeting was held and concerns were discussed and resolved and now all residents have the freedom to leave the facility when they desire. Case summary (PAIR): A client with muscular dystrophy residing in a rehab and care center in Salt Lake City contacted the DLC with concerns about her medical care. The Client lost use of arms and legs and has been at facility since Feb 2015. She also has a heart condition. She is supposed to be on Zanex 1mg every 8 hours. For a while, the staff were very late with meds, and then reduced meds without telling her. She ended up having to go to the hospital because of this. She is also having multiple UTIs because her catheter is not being flushed 2X a day as required. The DLC worked with the facility staff, the client and the ombudsman. As a result of our intervention, her medical care got better. The client wants to move to a different facility and the facility is assisting her to transfer to another nursing home. Case summary: On September 8, 2015, the Disability Law Center and the law firm of Snell & Wilmer LLP filed a class action against the State of Utah for failing to provide court-ordered competency restoration services in a reasonably timely manner for criminal defendants deemed incompetent to stand trial. Specifically, the case presents the question whether the State of Utah is violating these individuals' substantive due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and Utah Constitution. Although these inmates are presumed innocent, and although they have been ordered to receive restorative treatment at the Utah State Hospital, they must wait months in county jails for a bed at the Utah State Hospital to become available. Utah’s county jails lack the resources to provide treatment to them, and Utah law does not even authorize the jails to provide competency restoration treatment. Since inmates with serious mental illness frequently present jails with management problems, they are often jailed in protective custody or solitary confinement, which only aggravates the inmates’ mental illness. These delays have created a mental health crisis for inmates and jails alike. They violate the inmates’ right to due process of the laws based on a fundamental liberty interest in freedom from incarceration and in restorative treatment. This litigation project is funded by a different federal grant (Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness). PAIR Priority - AN 2 -Neglect. 1. Identify and describe priority. Investigate and seek remedies for complaints of serious neglect of people with disabilities with a focus on those living in or being treated in facilities. This includes, USH, USDC, ICFIDs, YRTFs, JJS, long term care/nursing facilities, community residential services, sheltered workshops, community mental health centers, day treatment programs, hospitals, emergency rooms and correctional facilities. 2. Identify the need, issue or barrier addressed by this priority. Results from the 2015 Needs Assessment show that of those who responded either was or knew someone with a disability who had experience abuse and neglect. • 69% had experienced emotional or verbal abuse • 46% had experienced neglect • 41% had experienced physical abuse • 225 had experienced sexual abuse 36% of the respondents stated that keeping people free from abuse and neglect is their top priority. STAT continues to get a high volume of calls on A&N issues 3. Identify and describe indicators PAIR used to determine successful outcome of activities pursued under this priority. By the end of FY15, the AN team will provide 1:1 AN-2 advocacy to 5 PAIR eligible individuals. By the end of FY15, the AN team will implement focused monitoring at 3 facilities (AN1 & AN2 combined). By the end of FY15, the AN Team will have provided trainings to at least 6 groups (AN1 & AN2 combined). 4. Explain whether pursuing this priority involved collaborative efforts by other entities. If so, describe this collaboration. The DLC collaborates with many other agencies in Utah whose priorities are similar to ours in reducing and/or eliminating the abuse and neglect of people with disabilities living in facilities in Utah. Some of those agencies include; Adult Protective Services, Ombudsman, Long Term Care Planning Committee, Brain Injury Association of Utah, Utah Attorney General’s Office, Department of Aging and Adult Services, Office of Public Guardian, and Department of Health. 5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority. Indicate how many of these, if any, class actions were. Information and Referral — 21 Short term Assistance — 13 Abuse and Neglect Investigations — 6 Representation at Hearings- 0 Technical Assistance — 0 Litigation on behalf of clients —0 Class actions — 0 6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority. Case Summary (PAIR) - We recently assisted a client receiving rehabilitation services who was facing an imminent and fast approaching discharge from a nursing home. After working with facility administrators we clarified how the client was admitted to the facility and the facility's discharge and treatment obligations. On follow up, the facility was continuing to provide the client with rehabilitation services in accordance with its obligations and following the appropriate discharge procedures. Case summary (PAIR) - Client resides in a long term care facility and was concerned that he was not getting his medications as prescribed, he also reported that he was being left in his bed for 6 to 8 hours at a time. DLC advocate conducted an investigation and did substantiate several of his concerns. Because of the systemic nature of the concerns, a larger monitoring project was created to look into a wide variety of our concerns along with CMS concerns. The facility was already being watched by CMS and had to submit a plan of correction for many violations. Advocate met with facility director and addressed client’s concerns. Individual service request has been closed, however the AN team continues to monitor this facility. Project summary: After a multi-year investigation at the Utah State Developmental Center (USDC), and after numerous failed attempts to engage USDC/DSPD administration in meaningful reform discussions, the DLC submitted a twenty-nine (29) page report entitled, Complaint against the Utah State Developmental Center & request for CMS Assistance and Intervention to the Center for Medicaid Services in Denver, Colorado. The Complaint details the findings of numerous DLC investigations into a wide range of federal regulatory violations (e.g. lack of active treatment of residents, lack of staff training, lack of basic safety protocols, etc.), as well as serious and confirmed human rights threats such as multiple sexual assaults, physical abuse, preventable injuries, excessive and unreasonable use of restraints, and repeated elopements by vulnerable USDC residents. The Complaint paints a troubling, grim (but sadly accurate) picture of USDC operations, and requests that the CMS Region 8 office initiate a full-scale investigation into USDC’s programs, policies, and practices. Our hope is that CMS will ultimately require USDC to provide additional staffing, resources, and to provide specific, detailed plans of correction to address the persistent, systemic safety, security and treatment issues which our investigations have revealed. PAIR PRIORITY — Access and Rights (AR) 1 - Eliminate architectural barriers to public buildings, transportation and Post-Secondary Education 1. Identify and describe priority. Reduce or eliminate architectural, programmatic and transportation barriers faced by people with disabilities who use public buildings, public services, healthcare, transportation and post-secondary education. 2. Identify the need, issue or barrier addressed by this priority. Of those who responded to the 2015 DLC Needs Assessment Survey: • 43% reported that they or someone they knew had had difficulty accessing a public place or service - Of those who reported difficulty, 74% responded that they had encountered architectural barriers and 31% reported programmatic barriers • 22% reported access problems with private restaurants • 23% reported encountering barriers with public transportation • 10% reported difficulty receiving scholastic accommodations in post-secondary education 3. Identify and describe indicators PAIR used to determine successful outcome of activities pursued under this priority. By the end of FY15, the AR team will provide 1:1 AR-1 advocacy to 20 PAIR eligible individuals. 4. Explain whether pursuing this priority involved collaborative efforts by other entities. If so, describe this collaboration. The Regional Coordinating Council for Cache, Box Elder and Rich Counties is chaired by a member of the AR team. The purpose of the council is to preserve and increase the availability of public and private transportation services for underserved populations such as people with disabilities, the elderly and the poor. 5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority. Indicate how many of these, if any, class actions were. Information and Referral — 47 Short term Assistance — 48 Representations at Meetings — 17 Representation at Administrative Hearings — 0 Technical Assistance- 0 Litigation on behalf of clients - 0 Class actions — 0 6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority. Case summary (PAIR): Client did not receive appropriate academic accommodations, auxiliary aids and services from an institution of higher education. As a result client was struggling during testing periods in multiple classes. The DLC drafted and sent a formal written accommodation request/demand letter to the school and requested the accommodations necessary to accommodate Client’s short-term memory loss and retention. As a result Client was secured the requested accommodations and has been successful in her studies. Case summary (PAIR): Client is deaf and her primary form of communication is ASL. Client had an active case with the Division of Child and Family Services (‘DCFS”) and had requested the reasonable accommodation that a qualified ASL interpreter be present at her Family Team Meetings (foster parents, therapist, DCFS caseworker, daughter and Client) to ensure effective communication. Client’s DCFS caseworker refused to provide an interpreter and instead used Client’s daughter to communicate with Client. This was not only in violation of the ADA but also extremely inappropriate considering the nature of the proceedings. The DLC drafted and sent an accommodation request/demand letter to DCFS on Client’s behalf that outlined the necessity of a qualified interpreter and relevant ADA violations regarding effective communication. As a result, the accommodation was secured and Client was provided a qualified ASL interpreter during all future contact with DCFS. In addition, Liza Jones spoke with Brent Platt, Director of DCFS, regarding not only the inappropriate nature of using a child as an interpreter during DCFS proceedings but also that such use was in direct violation of the DOJ regulations. Mr. Platt was unaware that this had been a violation and assured the DLC that DCFS as a whole would stop this practice and provide qualified ASL interpreters for all future communication with clients who are deaf. Case summary (PAIR): The client is pursuing an English Teaching Certificate. He has completed coursework and in order to get the certificate must pass tests administered by the American Board Teacher Certification Program (ABCTE). He passed the multiple choice phase of the testing, but, failed the essay portion. The client then informed the ABCTE that he has been diagnosed with depression, has a health condition and has undergone surgery to address a herniated disc in his neck. The surgery resulted in partial paralysis affecting his ability to write. He requested that he be granted extra time to take the essay portion of the test and that the test be divided into two sessions. ABCTE granted his request for extra time, but, declined to administer the test in two sessions. The DLC advised the client about what medical documentation to obtain, then sent an accommodation request on behalf of the client to ABCTE. After some delays, ABCTE granted all the accommodations requested. The DLC also successfully advocated that ABCTE waive fees normally charged for repeating the test and for extending the time required to complete the program. We also advocated that the Utah State Office of Education extend the time period allowed for the client to obtain his certificate. The client successfully completed the first portion of the essay testing with the accommodations. Case summary (PAIR): The client is a disabled veteran who uses a service dog to assist him with activities due to his health conditions and hearing loss. He contacted the Disability Law Center (DLC) after he was refused service at a bakery. When the client entered the business with his service dog, the owner and manager as well as another employee pointed to a sign that said no animals under any circumstances were allowed. The employee also pointed to a sign that asserted the businesses right to refuse service to anyone. This action constituted a refusal to grant the client reasonable accommodations, in violation of his rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). After corresponding with the client and reviewing the facts surrounding his accommodation request, the DLC drafted and submitted a formal request for reasonable accommodations and ADA demand letter to the bakery, on his behalf. After a series of correspondence with both the business and the Public Health Department, the bakery acknowledged their obligations under the ADA and agreed to allow service animals into their facility from this date forward. Case Summary (PAIR): The client contacted the DLC when Weber State University excluded her from participating in a study abroad program. The client attended study abroad last year. During her travels, she was wearing a boot due to an injury sustained in a recent car accident. On the bus, she propped her foot up on a vacant seat. This year, the university insisted that she purchase a second seat (for $500). They also imposed physical performance requirements that the client be able to walk 1 hour 20 minutes at a time and up to 15 miles in one day. Then they completely denied her the opportunity to go. The client felt that she was being discriminated against because of her size. The DLC investigated and agreed to represent the client’s claim that she was unlawfully discriminated against when she was excluded from academic programs, in violation of her rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The DLC drafted and submitted a complaint to the Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights (OCR) on the client’s behalf. Through use of the OCR Early Complaint Resolution Process the DLC was able to facilitate a monetary settlement of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) for the client. Additionally Weber State agreed to make appropriate policy changes and to provide academic support in the client’s effort to expunge a previous grade related to the course. PAIR Priority - AR 2 - Improving healthcare for people with disabilities 1. Identify and describe priority Assist people with disabilities facing denial, reduction or termination of healthcare and/or assistive technology services. 2. Identify the need, issue or barrier addressed by this priority. FY15 Needs Assessment Data Reports: • 43% of 2014 survey respondents feel it is IMPORTANT to secure appropriate mobility aids, speech devices, medical equipment or other assistive technology for individuals with disabilities. 3. Identify and describe indicators PAIR used to determine successful outcome of activities pursued under this priority. By the end of FY15, 4 PAIR eligible individuals will receive healthcare /assistive technology services that have been denied or reduced. 4. Explain whether pursuing this priority involved collaborative efforts by other entities. If so, describe this collaboration. This priority did not involve collaborative efforts by other entities. 5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority. Indicate how many of these, if any, class actions were. Information and Referral — 26 Short term Assistance — 10 Abuse Investigations — 1 Representations at Meetings — 7 Fair/Administrative Hearings — 0 Technical Assistance — 0 Litigation on behalf of clients - 1 Class actions — 0 6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority. Case summary (PAIR): Client is deaf and her primary form of communication is ASL. Client had requested the reasonable accommodation of a qualified ASL interpreter to insure effective communication at her doctor appointments. Client’s physician refused and instead provided an inadequate accommodation which compromised Client’s privacy and prevented effective communication. The DLC drafted and sent a formal written accommodation request/demand letter to the practice and requested a qualified ASL interpreter in addition to providing materials regarding the ADA and necessity of effective communication in the workplace. As a result the Client was successfully provided with a qualified ASL interpreter at her future appointments. Case summary (PAIR) - DLC v. DOH A declaratory action filed in 2009 against the Department of Health and Division of Medicaid and Health Financing (DMHF), regarding DMHF’s policy limiting the availability of Medicaid reimbursed power wheelchairs to those designed solely for use in the home. This policy frustrated the ability of many individuals who need power wheelchairs to fully access their community. The two remaining plaintiffs are the DLC and Foundations for Independence. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss against both plaintiffs based on their standing. Over three years ago CMS published a proposed change to the definition of Medicaid home health services that, if made final in a form close to the proposed definition, would be determinative in favor of the plaintiffs. The regulation still is not final. We have not pushed the case forward because (1) a concern about the impact a finding that the DLC has no standing in other future cases would have; (2) discussions with wheelchair vendors indicating that vendors have, for the past two or three years, been able to get wheelchairs approved that give their customers adequate community access; (3) because of (2), and the lack of an individual plaintiff at this point, we would have a difficult time proving our position. In January of 2015 opposing counsel advised us that DMHF would be looking at revising its policies, recognizing that the law is against them. PAIR PRIORITY - Employment Discrimination (EM 3) EM 3 - Increase employment opportunities for people with disabilities 1. Identify and describe priority This goal will assist Utahns with disabilities that experience discrimination based on disability when applying for a job. The goal will also assist clients who are currently employed, but face losing their job due to a denial of reasonable accommodation or other discriminatory practices. Additionally, the Employment team is placing an emphasis on exploring avenues to help end segregated employment. 2. Identify the need, issue or barrier addressed by this priority • • 85% of respondents to the DLC’s 2015 Annual Needs Survey stated that it was important to help people with disabilities who have been discriminated against in work settings. • For those that responded that they had experienced discrimination in the workplace, 51% said that the discrimination was related to hiring or promotion, 45% to termination, and 38% to requests for reasonable accommodations. 3. Identify and describe indicators PAIR used to determine successful outcome of activities pursued under this priority. In FY15, the EM team will assist 80 people with disabilities on a one-to-one basis with issues relating to discrimination and other barriers to employment. In FY15, the team will conduct 30 events to educate and train consumers, service providers, and other employment-related agencies about the rights of people with disabilities in employment. 4. Explain whether pursuing this priority involved collaborative efforts by other entities. If so, describe this collaboration. This priority did not involve collaborative efforts by other entities. 5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority. Indicate how many of these, if any, class actions were. Information and Referral — 79 Short term assistance — 97 Representation at Meetings — 8 Fair/Administrative hearings — 5 Technical Assistance -21 Litigation on behalf of clients — 1 6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority. Case summary (PAIR) BA came to the DLC's because she had repeatedly requested reasonable accommodations in her work place, but had not received any answer from her employer. Additionally, she was beginning to encounter performance problems due to the lack of accommodations. The DLC's employment team met with her for an employment clinic and wrote a letter to the employer requesting a lateral transfer to a different department. Our request was granted, and BA was able to move to a new department where additional accommodations are unnecessary and she is much happier. Case summary (PAIR): BW came to the DLC because he had been terminated from his former job as a sales associate. During his employment, BW had made several requests to receive a specialized phone that would allow him to hear the person on the other end. BW is hard of hearing and utilizes hearing aids in addition to other technology to assist him during his day to day activities. BW felt that his performance decreased because he was supposed to make connections and close deals via phone, and that by failing to accommodate him the employer had not allowed him to perform to the best of his abilities. The DLC wrote a demand letter and negotiated a successful settlement with the employer. BW is now employed at a new job with the appropriate assistive technology to meet his needs. Case summary (PAIR): Client is 59 years old and came to the DLC because she wasn't being accommodated in her position as a Student Support Specialist at Western Governor's University. She had been diagnosed with urinary urge incontinence and stress incontinence, which are aggravated by stress and require that she use the restroom sometimes at a literal minute's notice. Client began working for WGU on July 14, 2014 as a fulltime Student Support Specialist in the Student Support Center. At this time, the Student Support Center had no Quality Department and the working environment was quite relaxed. Employees were allowed to take ten to fifteen minute breaks if needed. This meant that client had access to the restroom whenever she needed during her shift. In September 2014, two (2) months after her hire, the Student Support Center started becoming more like a call center. Now, instead of having unrestricted access to the restroom, client must remain available for calls seven (7) hours a day. This created some obvious complications with her disability. So, she requested unrestricted access to the restroom, a different, more private location for her desk, and a lateral transfer. WGU did move her desk and said that she could use the restroom more frequently, but, because of the pace of the workload, the accommodations were inadequate and unattainable. At this point, client contacted the DLC. We held an opening clinic with her and decided to write a demand letter explaining the situation and that the most fitting accommodation for client was a lateral transfer. We were asked to provide some additional information from her physicians, and, after a couple additional meetings on client’s part, WGU offered her pick of 3 new positions: Admissions Coordinator, Transcript Specialist, and Enrollment Councilor. Client is currently picking which will best fit her needs. Case summary (PAIR): Client had been employed with employer for twenty-five years, fifteen of which he worked as a field service technician in Price, UT. During his employment client disclosed that he has Type 1 Diabetes. Client was able to keep his blood sugar and diabetes under control due to the stability of his work schedule. In May 2013 Client was affirmatively forced to begin a new position as a bay truck delivery driver. This new position had a grave effect on Client’s ability to manage his blood sugar levels and Client became extremely ill. Client made multiple requests for reassignment as a reasonable accommodation, to no avail. Ultimately Client was place on long-term disability despite the fact that his doctor was willing to release him back to work if he were to return to the service tech position. It was under contention regarding the length of time that original position was vacant. The DLC first drafted a reasonable accommodation request and demand letter to employer on behalf of Client, seeking reassignment to Client’s original position as a service technician. When employer refused to grant the accommodation request, the DLC filed a Charge of Discrimination with UALD on Client’s behalf alleging that employer failed to reasonable accommodate a medical disability by declining to reassign client in violations of the ADA and Utah Antidiscrimination Act of 1965. During that process Client’s LTD ran out and he was officially terminated. The DLC actively participated in the UALD process, including interviews and filing a rebuttal. However, via information negotiations throughout the process, the DLC was able to negotiate a favorable settlement agreement on behalf of Client. In exchange for withdrawing his Charge from UALD, Client was reinstated on 12/8/14 as a service technician in Salt Lake City, UT with the same seniority and benefits he had earned prior to his leave and in addition to the time during the UALD process. The DLC negotiated additional time prior to Client’s start date to allow him to complete his academic studies in Price before moving to SLC. Client self-reports that he was satisfied with this resolution and enjoys his new employment here in SLC. Presentations and Outreach examples: Huntsman Cancer Institute Training Q&A session to address employment discrimination and other employment-related questions by HCI staff and volunteers. 15 people attended the training AIDS Foundation of Utah A DLC attorney met with AIDS Foundation staff to discuss DLC employment discrimination work, process, and how to make appropriate referrals. 4 staff members attended the training. Workability Job Fair The objective of this project was to reach out to the disability community — including the deaf and hard of hearing community — who are looking at integrated employment opportunities. We operated an information booth to share information on ADA Title I Reasonable Accommodations and Discrimination. We also shared information on how to access advocacy programs such as CAP, PABSS, and other DLC services. 100 people attended the event. PAIR PRIORITY -Short Term Assistance for people with disabilities contacting DLC for assistance 1. Identify and describe priority. Annually, the DLC expects to offer assistance to 4000 people with disabilities by answering questions, helping with self-advocacy skills, referrals to appropriate community agencies, information and referral services, short term assistance and case level assignment services. 2. Identify the need, issue or barrier addressed by this priority. - 92% of the DLC’s 2015 survey respondents reported knowing about the DLC from a friend, family member or another organization. - 68% of survey respondents have visited the DLC website - 42% of survey respondents visit the website for information on disability programs. Information about disability related programs is the largest reason reported for what people visit the website. - 34% of survey respondents were referred by a partner/another agency - 25% of the survey respondents reported having a learning disability - 79% of survey respondents reported themselves or a family member facing mental illness - 42% of the survey respondents reported having trouble with physical access to a public place. Architectural barrier were the largest reported 3. Identify and describe indicators PAIR used to determine successful outcome of activities pursued under this priority. • Provide Information and Referral for 150 PAIR eligible callers and those contacting the DLC electronically. • Provide Short term assistance to 50 PAIR people with disabilities in areas of DLC goals. 4. Explain whether pursuing this priority involved collaborative efforts by other entities. If so, describe this collaboration. STAT team works collaboratively with all DLC teams to provide timely and competent short term assistance to all DLC callers. 5. Provide the number of cases handled under the priority. Indicate how many of these, if any, class actions were. Information and Referral — 579 Short Term Assistance — 54 6. Provide at least one case summary that demonstrates the impact of the priority. Caller is a 39-year-old woman with physical disabilities and a seizure disorder. She contacted STAT because she was having multiple problems at her job, and wanted to know how to ask for an accommodation based on her disability needs. STAT was able to forward a packet of employment information to her, including information on how to request an accommodation in the work place. She called back to say the request she was able to make a request that worked for her. Caller is a 61-year -old man with physical disabilities. He contacted DLC for some information on what to do about his medical bills. He had been approved for Medicare, but had a number of high cost medical services before his Medicare went into effect. He was on a fixed income and could not pay the bills. STAT suggested contacting the institution involved and requesting information on how to apply for their charity care assistance program.

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.

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 priority; 2. the need addressed by each priority; and; 3. a description of the activities to be carried out under each priority. Priorities and Objectives for the Current Fiscal Year (2016) Abuse and Neglect Goal 1: Eliminate Abuse and Neglect of People with Disabilities People with disabilities, with a focus on those living in or being treated in facilities, will be free from abuse and neglect and will receive appropriate services. 1. Area of Focus 1: Investigating Abuse and Neglect of Individuals with Mental Illness in County Jails and at the Utah State Prison. DLC will conduct investigations into the provision of mental health services in county jails throughout Utah; DLC will provide legally based advocacy to inmates at the Utah State Prison who are allegedly being abused or neglected. 2. Area of Focus 2: Monitoring Facilities and Services. DLC will monitor the following types of facilities for safety and compliance issues and will provide legally-based advocacy to residents of such facilities: a. Residential Care Facilities for Individuals with Mental Illness b. Intermediate Care Facilities for Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities c. Segregated Employment Settings 3. Area of Focus 3: Individual Advocacy. Although focusing primarily on systemic work during FY16, DLC will also conduct investigations of alleged or suspected abuse or neglect 1) where there appears to be a pattern or recurrence of significant abuse or neglect, 2) where there has been a death or life-threatening injury, or 3) where the alleged abuse or neglect is particularly egregious, with a focus on those living in or being treated in facilities. By the end of FY 16, the DLC will provide 1:1 advocacy to 5 PAIR eligible clients who have experienced serious abuse or neglect. 4. Area of Focus 4: Self-Advocacy Trainings. DLC will continue collaboration with Utah Developmental Disability Council (UDDC), Utah Coalition against Sexual Assault (UCASA), and Utah Domestic Violence Council (UDVC) to provide training and education for people with disabilities and their caregivers regarding recognizing and reporting abuse and neglect. ________________________________________ Results from the 2015 Needs Assessment show that of those who responded either was or knew someone with a disability who had experience abuse and neglect. 69% had experienced emotional or verbal abuse 46% had experienced neglect 41% had experienced physical abuse 225 had experienced sexual abuse 36% of the respondents stated that keeping people free from abuse and neglect is their top priority. Access and Rights Goal 1: Reduce or eliminate architectural and programmatic barriers faced by people with disabilities using public buildings, public accommodations, transportation, and Post-Secondary Education. • Area of Focus 1: Government, Public Services and Public Accommodations. DLC will continue to take individual cases with a focus on places of public accommodation in counties where the DLC has built relationships with community officials through the voting program, or encountered pervasive accessibility violations. DLC will continue to survey and address ADA/ADAAG compliance in Salt Lake City for public or private businesses, filing DOJ complaints where noncompliance is not remedied after notification. • Area of Focus 2: Higher Education. DLC will determine appropriate methods to reach higher education students regarding available accommodations, procedures, and DRC resources. • Area of Focus 3: Transportation. DLC will engage in systemic advocacy efforts to ensure that people with disabilities can use safe, reliable, and accessible transportation and that public transportation authorities, para-transit systems, and private transportation companies are in full compliance with federal and state discrimination laws and policies. Goal 2: Utahns with disabilities will be free from housing discrimination. • Area of Focus 1: Housing Advocacy. DLC housing program will 1) conduct testing and outreach, 2) mediate cases and file administrative complaints, 3) orient testers and 4) survey design and construction of new apartment construction sites to ensure compliance with the Fair Housing Act (FHA). No PAIR funds will be used to support this objective. Goal 3: Create systemic impact in participation in the electoral process and inform the public, the media, and policy-makers about the rights Utahns of all abilities to vote privately and independently. Ni PAIR funds will be used to support this objective. • Area of Focus 1: Full Electoral Participation. Ensuring full participation in the electoral process for individuals with disabilities, including: registering to vote, casting a vote, and accessing polling locations. • Area of Focus 2: Accessible Voting Experience. Facilitating an accessible voting experience by working with election officials to ensure polling locations are 1) physically accessible, 2) poll workers/volunteers understand how to provide an accessible voting experience, and 3) state policies/practices are consistent with the Help America Vote Act (HAVA)________________________________________ Of those who responded to the 2015 DLC Needs Assessment Survey: 43% reported that they or someone they knew had had difficulty accessing a public place or service - Of those who reported difficulty, 74% responded that they had encountered architectural barriers and 31% reported programmatic barriers 22% reported access problems with private restaurants 23% reported encountering barriers with public transportation 10% reported difficulty receiving scholastic accommodations in post-secondary education Community Integration — Areas of Focus Goal 1: Utahns with disabilities have the right to live in the most integrated and least restrictive settings appropriate to their choice and needs. • Area of Focus 1: Services and Supports in the Most Integrated Settings. DLC will provide systemic, legally-based advocacy to ensure that individuals with disabilities are being served in the most integrated settings appropriate to their needs and preferences. • Area of Focus 2: Implementation of CMS’s Home and Community Based Settings Rule. DLC will conduct systemic advocacy to insure that the Utah Department of Human Services will develop and implement a transition plan to become fully compliant with CMS HCBS Settings. • Area of Focus 3: Outreach. DLC will focus on outreach and trainings to consumer groups, professionals, those living in and/or working in ICFIDs/USDC, DSPD residential programs, and sheltered workshops; with an added focus on rural areas. Goal 2: People with disabilities facing denial, reduction, or termination of healthcare and/or assistive technology services will receive appropriate healthcare services. • Area of Focus 1: Access to Healthcare. DLC will develop a clinic model for intake of individual cases to more efficiently serve individuals who have received reduced, or been denied, healthcare/assistive technology services. 12 PAIR eligible clients will receive 1:1 advocacy services during FY 16. Of the respondents in our FY 2015 Needs Assessment survey, 14% reported currently living in a nursing home or intermediate care facility. Nearly 48% reported that they were in need of housing, and funding for staff, in order to be able to move out of the facility into the community. Additionally, in order to move out, 30 % reported needing DSPD services, 35% reported needing funding for family supports, and 18% reported needing a job. Of those who responded to the 2015 survey in general: • 43% of survey respondents feel it is IMPORTANT to secure appropriate mobility aids, speech devices, medical equipment or other assistive technology for individuals with disabilities. Education — Areas of Focus Goal 1: Utah students with disabilities that are the most vulnerable, of highest need, and least able to advocate for themselves will be assessed, evaluated, and provided special education as outlined in the Individuals with Disabilities Idea Act (IDEA). • Area of Focus 1: Systemic Advocacy. DLC will meet quarterly with the Utah State Office of Education (USOE) to discuss systemic issues related to students with disabilities and support. A representative of the DLC will serve on the Utah State Special Education Advisory Panel. Additionally, DLC will meet quarterly with the Utah Parent Center (UPC) to discuss systemic issues related to students with disabilities and collaboration efforts between the agencies. • Area of Focus 2: Youth in Custody (YIC) Advocacy. A DLC representative will serve on the Disproportionate Minority Contact Workgroup to educate minority leaders in JJS of the disability impact. • Area of Focus 3: Investigations. DLC will continue to investigate JJS and court-ordered facilities in special education eligibility and appropriate services. • Area of Focus 4: Monitoring. DLC will continue to monitor transition programs that pipeline to sheltered workshops and will determine the need for filing systemic complaints. DLC will also monitor educational services at the Utah State Hospital (USH) and at one long term juvenile detention facility. • Area of Focus 5: Trainings. DLC will provide training to JJS judges, JJS defenders, guardian ad litem, Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) case managers, student, parents and foster parents on child find, eligibility, and services in special education. • Area of Focus 6: Advocacy. DLC will advocate for students, with a specific focus on youth in state custody, who are seeking eligibility, with IEPs that are wholly or substantially inadequate or whose substantial lack of implementation by their local school districts keeps the student from benefiting from special education. Advocacy will be provided through clinics, investigations, and representation. 10 PAIR eligible clients will receive 1:1 assistance from the DLC in the area of special education during FY 16. Agency Needs Assessment: • 168 people responded to special education questions. • 71% had problems getting special education services. • 38% had problems knowing what services are available for students preparing to transition from high school. • 21% had a student restrained, isolated, and referred to law enforcement due to behaviors related to the student disability. • Surveyors ranked the following most important to least important: Special education services provided in schools 37%; positive behavior interventions and supports 21%; transition from high school 17%; Services for youth in custody 10%; restraint and seclusion 5%; and suspension and expulsion 3%. Focus Groups • ED team conducted focus groups with the PAIMI council, Duchesne, and Davis, Counties. Findings included: • Parent education for self-advocacy. • Problems receiving appropriate services. • Schools focused on discipline first. • Greater efforts to reach the rural population. • Eligibility and child find issues. • Concerns about stigma and bullying. • Dual diagnosis. • Mental health services in school. • School placement that is appropriate. • Transition and graduation. Employment — Areas of Focus Goal 1: People with disabilities will have equal employment opportunities and be free from discrimination. • Area of Focus 1: Client Assistance Program. DLC will assist individuals with disabilities who are clients or applicants of VR and ILCs achieve high-quality employment outcomes consistent with primary employment factors through the Client Assistance Program (CAP). No PAIR funds will be used to support this objective. • Area of Focus 2: Beneficiaries of Social Security. DLC will provide high-quality advocacy to ensure that people who are receiving Social Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)—who either wish to return to work or are struggling to maintain current employment—have the information they need to do so, and are not penalized in the process by unfair or incorrect overpayment with the Social Security Administration (SSA). No PAIR funds will be used to support this objective. • Area of Focus 3: Employment Discrimination. Advocating for people with disabilities on a one-to-one basis with issues related to discrimination and other barriers to employment, while providing education/training to consumers, service providers, and other employment-related agencies about the rights of people with disabilities in employment. During FY 16, 80 PAIR eligible clients will receive 1:1 advocacy services under this goal. For those that responded that they had experienced discrimination in the workplace, 51% said that the discrimination was related to hiring or promotion, 45% to termination, and 38% to requests for reasonable accommodations. ________________________________________ Short Term Assistance — Areas of Focus Goal 1: Utahns will have access to information and/or referrals regarding disability programs available in Utah as well as access to protection and advocacy services and/or referrals to agencies/resources for legal issues not covered under DLC funding and goals . The DLC will offer assistance to 500 PAIR eligible individuals living in Utah contacting the Disability Law Center for answers to legal concerns and service questions. Of those, 400 will receive information and referral and 100 callers receive be short-term/technical assistance. The following assessment needs data is relevant: - 92% of survey respondents reported knowing about the DLC from a friend, family member or another organization. - 68% of survey respondents have visited the DLC website - 42% of survey respondents visit the website for information on disability programs. Information about disability related programs is the largest reason reported for what people visit the website. - 34% of survey respondents were referred by a partner/another agency - 25% of the survey respondents reported having a learning disability - 79% of survey respondents reported themselves or a family member facing mental illness - 42% of the survey respondents reported having trouble with physical access to a public place. Architectural barrier were the largest reported - (75%) barrier faced by people with disabilities.

Part VI. 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
  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

A. Sources of funds received and expended Federal Funds received: 171,598 Federal Funds expended: 171,598 State Funds Received & expended: 0 All other funds received: 82,237 All other funds expended: 82,237 Total funds received: 253,835 Total funds expended: 253,835 B. Budget for the fiscal year covered by this report Wages & Salaries: 171,598 (2015 actual); 101,866 (2016 budget) Fringe Benefits: 37,870 (2015 actual); 22,547 (2016 budget) Materials/Supplies: 4,564 (2015 actual); 3,870(2016 budget) Postage: 708 (2015 actual); 427 (2016 budget) Telephone: 1,507 (2015 actual); 939 (2016 budget) Rent: 7,272 (2015 actual); 4,252 (2016 budget) Travel: 3,417 (2015 actual); 4,373 (2016 budget) Copying: 1,775 (2015 actual); 1,557 (2016 budget) Bonding/Insurance: 891 (2015 actual); 505 (2016 budget) Equipment Rental/Purchase: 598 (2015 actual); 202 (2016 budget) Legal Services: 28,368 (2015 actual); 152 (2016 budget) Indirect Cost: 0 Miscellaneous: 6,336 (2015 actual); 3,789 (2016 budget) Total: 253,835 (2015 actual); 144,478 (2016 budget) C. Dan Anderson-Director of Finance: Responsible for creating and maintaining financial records and protecting the financial integrity of the organization and personnel management. He oversees the DLC budget, financial statements, payroll, and other financial related duties. He also manages and coordinates all human resource functions for the DLC. Dan has worked for the DLC for eleven years. Lindsay Boerens-Advocate: Has worked as the Employment Team Leader to help people with disabilities remove barriers to employment. The Employment Team addresses issues on behalf of clients of Vocational Rehabilitation, Social Security beneficiaries, and people with disabilities who face discrimination in the workplace. She also has extensive experience working on the DLC’s Abuse & Neglect Team, which assists individuals facing serious abuse and neglect issues in institutions, nursing homes, and other residential and non-residential settings. Lindsay has worked at the DLC for seven and half years. Laura Boswell-Supervisory Attorney: Is responsible for providing legal advocacy and representation to eligible individuals in selected cases. She provides and coordinates legally based advocacy services to individuals seeking assistance through the Abuse and Neglect and Employment Issue Teams. Laura has worked for the DLC for nine years. Camille Coon-Issue Team Leader, Abuse and Neglect (AN) Team: The Abuse and Neglect team conducts investigations involving allegations of abuse and neglect against individuals with disabilities, including developmental, physical and mental health needs. The AN Team also monitors State agencies, nursing homes, community living residential programs and ICFID’s to safeguard the rights of people with disabilities. The AN team also assists clients who have been denied assistive technology and/or medically necessary services by Medicaid or insurance. Rob Denton-Senior Attorney: Provides legal representation in complex Medicaid cases. Rob has worked with the DLC for 27 years. LauraLee Gillespie-Staff Attorney: Primary advocate for students in public school systems with disabilities. Working directly with parents to be sure that schools are providing students with appropriate specialized instruction and related services required under IDEIA and occasionally under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. LauraLee is the CAP Program legal supervisor. LauraLee has worked for the DLC for six years. Evelyn Owen -Advocate: Serves primarily as the CAP advocate for the State’s Vocational Rehabilitation program; also serves on the Education team, working on cases in which students are not receiving appropriate special education services. Aaron Kinikini-Legal Director: he provides legally based advocacy services to individuals who face discrimination in core areas—housing, employment, voting and transportation. Aaron supervises all legal work in our agency. Aaron has worked for the DLC for five years. Vard McGuire - Issue Team Leader, Access and Rights (AR) Team: The Access and Rights team helps to ensure people with disabilities have access to accessible, affordable, safe and clean housing; as well as working to eliminate architectural barriers to public buildings, transportation and post-secondary education. Selva Bailey-Receptionist: Answers all calls for Community Legal Center (CLC) (Disability Law Center, Legal Aid Society, and Utah Legal Services), checks voicemails for CLC, receive clients, staff and volunteers into the building, stamp and distribute all mail and packages, keeping building roster current, maintain security using video system, unlock front and back doors. Selva has worked for the DLC for three months. Diana Ballesteros is the afternoon receptionist. She has been at the DLC for two months. Teo Popa is the DLC’s new Executive Assistant. She works primarily with the Community Relations team, with a focus on our public relations and media. She has been at the DLC for one and half years. LauraLee Gillespie-Supervisory Attorney for the Short Term Assistance Team, Special Education Team and the Client Assistance Program: Job duties include legal review and case assignment as appropriate for all incoming calls and on-line assistance requests received by the Disability Law Center. Duties also include coordination of legal work with DLC issue teams, and other duties as assigned by the Executive Director. LauraLee has worked for the DLC for six years. Sheri Newton-Community Relations Director: is responsible for directing the DLC’s PAVA program and coordinates rural outreach efforts for the DLC. She has worked for the DLC for fourteen years. Tim Hurty -Support Staff: Proofreads outgoing letters, keeps employee’s information up to date, sends out satisfaction surveys after cases are closed, orders office supplies, opens and closes cases, does payroll, and helps out Attorneys and Advocates when they need the help. Tim has worked the DLC for just over two years. Andrew Riggle-Public Policy Advocate: is responsible for coordinating the DLC’s legislative and policy advocacy initiatives across teams and ensuring that these strategies reflect the values of the DLC. The Public Policy Advocate works with a variety of DLC staff, Utah State Legislature, Utah’s congressional delegation, state agencies, advocacy groups and the broader community to enhance this area of the DLC’s mission. Andrew has worked with the DLC for seven years. Melissa Gilbert-STAT Advocate: provides information, referrals, and short-term assistance to individuals seeking assistance from the Disability Law Center. The STAT Advocate reviews requests for assistance received by phone, in writing or in person, to determine compliance with DLC goals, priorities and funding. The position requires individuals to develop broad knowledge in all disability content areas that correspond with all established DLC teams, and develop in-depth expertise that correspond with two or three DLC teams as assigned, in order to provide input and support to the DLC teams. Maree has worked at the DLC for just under one years. Maree Webb-STAT Advocate: provides information, referrals, and short-term assistance to individuals seeking assistance from the Disability Law Center. The STAT Advocate reviews requests for assistance received by phone, in writing or in person, to determine compliance with DLC goals, priorities and funding. The position requires individuals to develop broad knowledge in all disability content areas that correspond with all established DLC teams, and develop in-depth expertise that correspond with two or three DLC teams as assigned, in order to provide input and support to the DLC teams. Maree has worked at the DLC for thirteen years. Sean Umipig is the DLC’s new paralegal. He has worked at the DLC for almost two years. Adina Zahradnikova-Chief Executive Officer: Executive Officer of the Disability Law Center and assumed responsibility for the statewide operation of the agency. Responsibilities are both managerial and representational and include program planning, strategic budgeting, evaluation and reporting, financial planning and monitoring, organizational development and human resources, legislative advocacy, fundraising, public affairs, and public relations. Adina has worked for the DLC for fourteen years. The FTEs in the PAIR program for FY15 were as follows : Professional Full-time 1.91 Professional Part-time 0.26 Clerical Full-time 0.55 Clerical Part-time 0.16 Total 2.89 D. Involvement with advisory boards: DLC PAIR staff is an active member of the Wasatch Regional Coordination Council for Community Transportation, RCC. DLC PAIR staff has been elected as chair of the RCC. The goal of the RCC is to manage mobility of the transportation dependent in a five county region including: Davis, Morgan, Salt Lake, Tooele, and Weber DLC . PAIR staff is an active member of the Utah Parent Center Board of Trustees. The Utah Parent Center Board addresses coordination of resources for training, outreach and presentations to parents of students with disabilities attending public school in Utah. By participating on the board the DLC and the Utah Parent Center have increased their understanding of each agency’s role and have collaborated on projects. The Utah Parent Center work in collaboration with the DLC positively affects 65,000 students with disabilities. DLC PAIR staff is a member of the Mayor’s Accessibility Council to ensure we are aware of the issues in our capitol city. Through this council, we were able to work with the city on van accessible parking along the newly installed protected bike lanes throughout the city. We received assurances from the city that they were already implementing the standards from the proposed right of way regulations from the United States Access Board. E. No PAIR grievances this year. F. The DLC is the CAP Agency for Utah. We coordinate our programs through internal planning, needs assessment and public comment activities and by cooperating on specific projects as reflected in the annual objectives and priorities.The Disability Law Center (DLC) and the Long Term Care/Survey Section of the Dept of Health (UDOH) collaborate through the sharing of information and survey data. The DLC receives copies of all the surveys that are completed at skilled nursing facilities and Intermediate Care facilities throughout Utah and we use this data to gather information for our monitoring projects and facilities.The DLC also refers to and works with the UDOH on complaints in areas that would fall under their enforcement authority.

Certification

Signed?Yes
Signed ByAdina Zahradnikova
TitleExecutive Director
Signed Date12/17/2015