RSA-227 for FY-2016: Submission #892

Maine
9/30/2016
General Information
Designated Agency Identification
Bureau of Rehabilitation Services
150 State House Station
{Empty}
Augusta
ME
04330
http://www.maine.gov
(888) 755-0023
(888) 755-0023
Operating Agency (if different from Designated Agency)
Bureau of Rehabilitation Services
150 State House Station
{Empty}
Augusta
04330
{Empty}
http://www.maine.gov
(888) 755-0023
(888) 755-0023
Additional Information
Kathy Despres
Kathy Despres
(207) 377-7055
{Empty}
Part I. Non-case Services
A. Information and Referral Services (I&R)
123
10
0
1
36
71
241
B. Training Activities
5
138
In the past FY the Maine CAP has presented to stakeholders in the disability community, new staff employed by the DSU, Community Rehabilitation Providers, case managers, teachers, high school students and members of the Maine legislature. The topics we cover are as varied as the people presented too. The mainstay of any presentation given are the services the CAP can provide to individuals with disability, our knowledge of disabilities and how those disabilities can affect employment. We also always talk about and what the DSU can and should be doing to assist individuals with disability meet their goals of employment and independent living. <p><p>
C. Agency Outreach
This year we have done extensive outreach to the Older Blind individuals within the state being affected by the WIOA changes. We have done outreach within our role on the SILC to better assist people who need independent living services. <p><p>
D. Information Disseminated To The Public By Your Agency
1
2
21
69
2
{Empty}
<P><p>
E. Information Disseminated About Your Agency By External Media Coverage
NA <p><p>
Part II. Individual Case Services
A. Individuals served
32
67
99
3
26
B. Problem areas
101
87
62
12
4
54
2
0
C. Intervention Strategies for closed cases
23
15
35
0
0
0
73
D. Reasons for closing individuals' case files
55
4
11
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
{Empty}
<P><p>
E. Results achieved for individuals
19
4
5
1
28
11
5
0
0
{Empty}
<P><p>
Part III. Program Data
A. Age
2
8
29
50
10
99
B. Gender
50
49
99
C. Race/ethnicity of Individuals Served
2
0
0
2
0
94
1
0
D. Primary disabling condition of individuals served
3
2
0
0
1
4
5
0
1
3
1
2
3
5
1
2
0
0
0
8
26
0
1
2
9
5
1
0
0
7
1
0
0
6
99
E. Types of Individuals Served
11
3
83
2
3
0
Part IV. Systemic Activities and Litigation
A. Non-Litigation Systemic Activities
18
The Maine CAP has worked on many systemic activities this year in collaboration with the DSU. The Maine CAP is happy to report a very good working relationship with both DBVI and DVR. At our CAP Quarterly meetings we bring up issues that are reoccurring or variations of a theme thoughout the state. We also see action taken on all of topics that we present. Of course, some of the issues are slower to be fixed just by the nature of the problem. Below are the areas of concern that weve had within the last fiscal year. Post Secondary Policy: How the currently Post Secondary policy is applied to cases where the consumer is attending a private college with a comparable program offered within the public university system. An agreement of how this policy is applied was worked on with the DSU and the CAP. Consumer choice with regards to providers: there was a concern with the many changes that have occurred within DBVI over the past year that consumers within the central Maine area were not getting adequate consumer choice. This issue has been clarified and revolved. Prevocational services: the CAP was hearing from many counselors that DVR did not do prevocational services this issue was discussed with the Director and the CAP saw improvement in this area over the course of the year. The holding of applications: there were a couple of areas in the state that were having the client holding applications until they met with the VRC in order to better meet the 60 day deadline. This issue has been resolved. Mandatory watching of a Orientation video: again, some areas were not handing out applications unless the client watched an online orientation video. This issue has been resolved. Employment and education for consumers within the same IPE: some VRCs in different areas of the state were telling the CAP that the IPE had to be either employment or education, that DVR could not have both on the same plan. The CAP and DVR came to a mutual understanding on this issue. <P><p>Systematic Activities through meetings or committees: Division of Vocational Rehabilitation Services (DVR) oOrder of section(OOS) review and application of the implementation of the OOS. oTutoring Procedural Directive oCommunity Rehabilitation Provider Committee oThere was a large project put forth by DVR, Processing Mapping, which involved many systemic changes. The CAP was involved on many levels. ?Process Mapping Steering Committee ?Policy and Procedure Committee: how a current policies and procedures align with new regulation changes and proposed Process Mapping changes within DVR. ?Case Flow Committee: how a case gets processed thought the DVR system from start to finish. Division for the Blind and Visually Impaired(DBVI): oTransitioning homemakers to competitive employment or independent living services. oWorking with to assist with some fiscal realignment. oReview of all contracts to align with fiscal and
B. Litigation
0
0
0
NA <P><p>
Part V. Agency Information
A. Designated Agency
External-all other private agencies
C.A.R.E.S. Inc.
Yes
C.A.R.E.S. Inc.
B. Staff Employed
The CAP-Maine employees 2.2 FTEs <P><p>1. Program Director 1.0 FTE, this position had no vacancies within the past year. 2. Advocate 1.0 FTE, this position had no vacancies within the past year. 3. Executive Director .2 FTE, this position had no vacancies within the past year. <P><p>
Part VI. Case Examples
Case Examples
Jay applied for VR services and was determined OOS3, for which a wait list had been established. Jay was determined eligible based solely on his hearing impairment. Upon contacting the CAP, it was quickly determined that Jay had other challenges affecting his mental health, speech and cognition. CAP staff assisted the client in obtaining the necessary documentation to substantiate the existence of additional disability related barriers to Jays employment. Jay was then found to be in OOS 1 and began receiving the services necessary to maintain his employment. <P><p>Gloria has been a client of VR for some time. She was enrolled in school to become a Registered Nurse. Gloria contacted CAP because she had been trying to reach her VR Counselor for many months with no response. CAP staff reviewed the case file and found that in fact, there had been no meaningful contact with the client for almost 2 years. The case file supported the clients assertion that she had attempted contacting the VRC many times with no response. CAP staff advocated for a change of counselor, which was granted. Once the case was transferred, the new counselor and client immediately wrote a new IPE, which had been expired for over a year. <P><p>Phil had been successfully closed with VR for 2 years. He contacted the CAP when his request for a new VR application was denied. CAP staff intervened and the client received the requested application. When the application was submitted, the client was denied eligibility after a 10-minute intake meeting and no request for medical documentation, even though Phil disclosed new disabling information. The CAP advocated for a new, more thoughtful evaluation of his eligibility determination as well as a new counselor. Both were granted and Phil was determined eligible. <P><p>Mitchell is a fourth-year Nursing student attending a private school, who has been working with VR since high school. Over the three years of college, VR had been calculating the students unmet need based on the private school tuition rates, which is substantially higher than the state university rates. Due to staff turnover, Mitchell was assigned a new VR Counselor. Upon completing his third year of school, the VRC informed him that VR had made a mistake over the past three years and were calculating the unmet need incorrectly. VR made the decision to stop calculating the unmet need based on the actual private school rates and would be using the state university rates. This decision was going to create a financial hardship and undue stress on him. Mitchell contacted the CAP; staff attempted to resolve the issue through informal means. When these attempts were unsuccessful, CAP staff submitted a request for a due process hearing on the clients behalf. Through several rounds of discussion and negotiation, VR agreed to recognize the private school tuition rates without going to hearing. Haley has muscular dystrophy and thus uses an electric wheelchair. Haley also is a b
Certification
Approved
Kathy Despres
Program Director
2016-12-15
OMB Notice

OMB Control Number: 1820-0528, approved for use through 07/31/2023

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 16 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The obligation to respond to this collection is required to obtain or retain a benefit (Section 13 of the Rehabilitation Act, as amended). Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. 20202-4537 or email ICDocketMgr@ed.gov and reference the OMB Control Number 1820-0528. Note: Please do not return the completed form to this address.