RSA-227 for FY-2025: Submission #29

Provide some examples of some interesting cases during the past fiscal year. 1) In the summer of 2024, a client faced a major delay in getting her updated Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE) approved. The plan included funding to repair her electric vehicle, which she needed to travel to multiple job sites each day. CAP stepped in and spoke with the Regional Director, who was hesitant about approving the repairs because of the high cost. CAP explained that the cost was within policy, since it didn’t go over the value of the vehicle. CAP also pointed out how the delay hurt the client’s ability to keep her job and stay financially stable. After several weeks of steady follow-up and advocacy, the repair was finally approved and added to her IPE. This approval helped the client maintain employment. CAP continued to check in to make sure the repair was completed quickly and properly.

2) In December 2023, a client approached CAP seeking assistance with funding for college education, which the client had initially expected to be covered by DORS. Despite efforts by the DORS counselor and supervisor to advocate for approval, the Regional Director denied the request, citing that the client’s psychological evaluation did not support educational services. CAP promptly reviewed the client’s records and confirmed that while the Regional Director had denied the initial request, there was an opportunity for the client to resubmit their grades after the semester for reconsideration. CAP advised the client to share his academic performance, which was then submitted to the Regional Director. However, the request was again delayed, with the director stating that additional steps in the process were still required. To ensure all necessary documentation was in place, CAP verified the entries in the computer system and collaborated with the supervisor to confirm that all required materials had been submitted. When the client expressed concern about the risk of losing school funding and potentially being sent to collections, CAP escalated the matter. The advocate made it clear that if a resolution could not be reached, the case would be referred to CAP’s lawyer. CAP emphasized that the client’s strong academic performance demonstrated their capability and that a trial semester could be considered if needed. Education was important for the client’s goal of becoming a Social and Human Service Assistant. Thanks to CAP’s persistent advocacy, the Regional Director ultimately approved the client’s continued enrollment in college. The case was successfully closed in February 2024. In April 2025, the DORS supervisor contacted CAP with exciting news: the client had graduated and received the “Highest GPA in Major” award. CAP was thrilled to hear of the client’s success and appreciated the supervisor’s acknowledgment that CAP’s involvement had been instrumental in enabling the client to pursue his education—an opportunity that might have otherwise been lost.

3) In the summer of 2025, a client’s parent contacted CAP seeking assistance in appealing DORS denial of funding for an in-home elevator. During the initial review, CAP identified discrepancies between the elevator and shaft dimensions in the DORS documents and those used by the parent during construction. DORS had provided two different sets of measurements, while the father’s design followed a third, unrelated set of dimensions. CAP found multiple inconsistencies in messaging to the client and client’s parent. Because of these inconsistencies, CAP determined that the case had merit and, after consulting with the CAP attorney, agreed to move forward to obtain more information and a final decision for next steps from DORS. The client and parent worked to submit an appeal for the denial of services. This led to several weeks of consistent communication and follow-up from DORS to work to update the client’s plan to add funding for elevator, which led to the appeal being able to be withdrawn.

4) CAP was contacted by the parent of a client with a physical impairment who was seeking assistance in obtaining essential equipment to support their child’s participation in educational activities. The parent had encountered challenges in reaching the assigned DORS counselor and required additional support to move the process forward. CAP intervened to facilitate communication with the DORS and engaged the Program Manager to ensure the client’s needs were appropriately addressed. As a result of this collaborative effort, the equipment request was reviewed, approved, and incorporated into the client’s Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE). The client then received the necessary equipment, to allow him to participate in the school program. The parent expressed their appreciation to CAP for the advocacy and support that contributed to continued educational success.

5) Following the discontinuation of DORS’s partnership with its previous self-employment provider and the implementation of a new financial contribution policy, a client contacted CAP with concerns about how the updated policy was being applied to their self-employment plan. The client received an approved business plan recommendation from the former self-employment partner in February 2025. Between March and April, the client and their DORS Counselor worked collaboratively to finalize the remaining figures for inclusion in the Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE). The client signed the initial draft of the IPE in April 2025, prior to the effective date of the new financial contribution policy, which was implemented on May 7, 2025. When the client followed up in late May, the IPE was still under supervisory review. In early June, the supervisor amended the plan to remove a previously discussed item, and the counselor sent an updated version for signature, resulting in additional delays. Due to this delay, the new financial contribution policy was applied to the plan. CAP raised the issue with the Regional Director and Supervisor, emphasizing that the client’s IPE had been developed and submitted prior to the policy’s effective date. After review, it was determined that the client’s current plan would not be subject to the new financial contribution requirements. The client would only be required to sign a Financial Statement for any future amendments or additional services, which would fall under the updated policy.

6) In July 2025, a consumer contacted CAP after their request for funding to complete a master’s degree was denied. The individual explained that their goal was to pursue employment with the federal government, where a master’s degree would significantly enhance their competitiveness for higher-level positions. The Regional Director initially noted that the consumer’s existing bachelor’s degree qualified them for entry-level federal roles. However, upon reviewing the case file, CAP confirmed that the consumer not only held a bachelor’s degree but also possessed substantial work experience. CAP further emphasized that a master’s degree would make the consumer eligible for specific federal positions, particularly those listed on USAJobs, where a master’s degree is often required for GS-9 roles and a Doctoral degree for GS-11 positions. During negotiations with the Director of the Office of Field Services (OFS), CAP highlighted that the consumer was nearing completion of their master’s program and required funding for only three remaining semesters. CAP argued that completing the degree would significantly strengthen the consumer’s qualifications and immediate job readiness. Although the OFS Director initially suggested the Golden ID program—a Maryland initiative that allows residents aged 60 and older to take courses tuition-free—CAP noted that the consumer was several years away from eligibility and that this option would not support their current employment objectives. Following these discussions, the OFS Director agreed to fund the remaining semesters of the consumer’s program, enabling them to complete their education and enhance their prospects for federal employment.