From--

Patricia Leahy
Director of Governmental Affairs
National Rehabilitation Association

Visit our Web Site at :
www.nationalrehab.org


 

Date:  Thursday, June 22, 2006

Re:      House Committee Report on the Labor-HHS-Ed Bill Now Available

For those who read on the run, this Washington Wire deals solely with the filing and availability of the House Committee Report on the Labor-HHS-Ed Appropriations bill.

On Tuesday of this week, the House Committee on Appropriations filed its Report on the Labor-HHS-Ed bill.  The Report, which is 310 ages long, is numbered 109-515 and can be accessed by going to the House Appropriations Committee's website http:/thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/R?cp109:FLD010:@1(hr515)
and clicking on the number of the Report (109-515) or accessing
www.Thomas.gov.


For your convenience, we are attaching the section on Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research from the Committee Report which includes numbers, narrative and earmarks recommended in Title III of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.

The section of the Report on the programs administered under the Rehabilitation Act begins on page 281.

Although this Committee Report is 310 pages in length there is an enormous amount of information in the Report on many programs of reat interest to our community.

There is also narrative, beginning of page 6 of the Report on the Performance Accountability Rating Tool (PART) regarding its use nd restriction of funds 

There also appears to be a number of earmarks identified for Workforce Investment Act (WIA) projects.

There is talk about the Committee Report coming to the House Floor next week for a vote, but this has not been confirmed by reliable sources. We will keep you advised of developments in this regard as they become known to us.

If you have questions or cannot access this important Report, please e-mail me.

REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

The bill includes $3,244,247,000 for rehabilitation services and disability research. This amount is $63,833,000 above the budget request and $118,703,000
above the fiscal year 2006 level. The programs in this account are authorized by the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Helen Keller National Center Act,
and the Assistive Technology Act of 1998.

Vocational rehabilitation grants to States

For vocational rehabilitation state grants, the bill includes $2,837,160,000, the same as the budget request and $116,968,000 above fiscal year 2006. This
program supports basic vocational rehabilitation services through formula grants to the states. These grants support a wide range of services designed
to help persons with physical and mental disabilities prepare for and engage in gainful employment to the extent of their capabilities. Emphasis is placed
on providing vocational rehabilitation services to persons with the most significant disabilities.

Client assistance

The bill includes $11,782,000 for the client assistance program, the same as both the budget request and the fiscal year 2006 amount. A client assistance
program is required in each state as a condition of receipt of a basic state grant. State formula grants are used to help persons with disabilities overcome
problems with the service delivery system and improve their understanding of services available to them under the Rehabilitation Act.

Training

For training personnel to provide rehabilitation services to persons with disabilities, the bill includes $38,438,000, the same as both the budget request
and the fiscal year 2006 level. The program supports long-term and short-term training, in-service personnel training, and training of interpreters for
deaf persons. Projects in a broad array of disciplines are funded to ensure that skilled personnel are available to serve the vocational needs of persons
with disabilities.

Demonstration and training programs

The bill includes $8,246,000 for demonstration and training programs, $1,735,000 above both the budget request and the fiscal year 2006 level. These programs
authorize discretionary awards on a competitive basis to public and private organizations to support demonstrations, direct services, and related activities
for persons with disabilities.

Within the amounts provided for vocational rehabilitation demonstration programs, the Committee includes funding for the following activities:

Advocating Change Together, St. Paul, MN, for a disability rights training initiative

$150,000

Braille Institute of America, Los Angeles, CA, for replacement of a vehicle to provide mobile services to the visually impaired and/or for related services

100,000

Enable America, Inc., Tampa, FL for civic/citizenship demonstration project for disabled adults  500,000

IndependenceFirst, Milwaukee, WI, for its assistive technology program

60,000

Jewish Vocational and Career Counseling Service, San Francisco, CA, for a Transition Services Project to provide vocational training and job placement for
youth and adults with disabilities

400,000

South Bay Workforce Investment Board, Hawthorne, CA, for its Home Safety and Independence Program for disabled individuals

75,000

University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, for a demonstration program in orthotics/prosthetics

200,000

Vocational Guidance Services, Cleveland, OH, for equipment and technology in order to increase employment for persons with disabilities

250,000

Migrant and seasonal farm workers

For programs serving migrant and seasonal farm workers, the bill provides $2,279,000, which is the same as the fiscal year 2006 level. The Administration
did not request funding for the program. This program provides discretionary grants to make comprehensive vocational rehabilitation services available
to migrant and seasonal farm workers with vocational disabilities. Projects emphasize outreach activities, specialized bilingual rehabilitation counseling,
and coordination of vocational rehabilitation services with services from other sources.

Recreational programs

For recreational programs, the bill provides $2,518,000, the same as the fiscal year 2006 level. The Administration did not request funding for the program.
This program provides individuals with recreation and related activities to aid in their employment, mobility, independence, socialization, and community
integration. Discretionary grants are made on a competitive basis to states, public agencies, and nonprofit private organizations, including institutions
of higher education.

Protection and advocacy of individual rights

For protection and advocacy for persons with disabilities, the bill provides $16,489,000, the same as both the budget request and the fiscal year 2006 level.
Grants are awarded to entities that have the authority to pursue legal, administrative, and other appropriate remedies needed to protect and advocate the
rights of persons with disabilities.

Projects with industry

For projects with industry, the bill provides $19,538,000, the same as the fiscal year 2006 amount. The Administration did not request funding for the program.
This program promotes greater participation of business and industry in the rehabilitation process. The program provides placement and job development
services to assist persons with disabilities to prepare them for employment in the competitive labor market. Awards are made to a variety of agencies and
organizations, including business and industrial corporations, rehabilitation facilities, labor organizations, trade associations, and foundations.

Supported employment state grants

For supported employment state grants, the bill includes $29,700,000, which is the same as the fiscal year 2006 level. The Administration did not request
funding for the program. These formula grants assist states in developing collaborative programs with public agencies and nonprofit agencies for training
and post-employment services leading to supported employment. In supported employment programs, persons with the most significant disabilities are given
special supervision and assistance to enable them to work in an integrated setting.

Independent living: state grants

For state grants for independent living, the bill includes $22,588,000. This amount is the same as both the budget request and the fiscal year 2006 level.
This program supports formula grants to the states to provide services for independent living for persons with significant disabilities.

Independent living: centers

For centers for independent living, the bill provides $74,638,000, which is the same as both the budget request and the fiscal year 2006 level. A population-based
formula determines the total amount that is available for discretionary grants to centers in each state. These discretionary grants support a network of
consumer-controlled, nonresidential, community-based private nonprofit centers that provide a wide range of services to help persons with significant disabilities
live more independently in family and community settings. Centers provide information and referral services, independent living skills training, peer counseling, and individual and systems advocacy. Discretionary grants are made to private nonprofit organizations.

Independent living: services for older blind persons

For independent living services for older blind individuals, the bill provides $32,895,000. This amount is the same as both the fiscal year 2006 level and
the budget request. Funds are distributed to states according to a formula based on the population of individuals who are 55 or older, and grants support
services for persons 55 years old or over whose severe visual impairment makes gainful employment extremely difficult to obtain, but for whom independent
living goals are feasible.

Program improvement

For program improvement activities, the bill provides $835,000, which is the same as both the fiscal year 2006 level and the budget request. The program:
(1) provides technical assistance and consultative services to public and non-profit private agencies and organizations; (2) provides short-term training
and technical instruction; (3) conducts special demonstrations; (4) collects, prepares, publishes and disseminates educational or informational materials;
and (5) carries out monitoring and conducts evaluations.

Evaluation

The bill includes $1,473,000 for program evaluation, the same as both the budget request and the fiscal year 2006 level. These funds are used to evaluate
the impact and effectiveness of individual programs authorized under the Rehabilitation Act. Contracts are awarded on an annual basis for studies to be
conducted by persons not immediately involved in the administration of the programs authorized by the Act.

Helen Keller National Center

For the Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youth and Adults, the bill includes $8,511,000, the same as both the fiscal year 2006 level and the
budget request. These funds are used for the operation of a national center that provides intensive services for deaf-blind individuals and their families
at Sands Point, New York and a network of 10 regional offices that provide referral, counseling and transition services, and technical assistance to service
providers.

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

The bill includes $106,705,000 for the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, the same as both the budget request and the fiscal
year 2006 level. The Institute supports research, demonstration and training activities that are designed to maximize the employment and integration into
society of individuals with disabilities of all ages.

Assistive technology

For assistive technology activities, the bill provides $30,452,000, the same as the fiscal year 2006 amount and $8,063,000 above the budget request. Technology
assistance activities are authorized under the Assistive Technology Act of 1998. This Act authorizes population-based formula grants to the states to assist
them in supporting alternative financing programs and assistive technology device demonstrations, loan, and reutilization programs. In addition, protection
and advocacy services related to assistive technology and national technical assistance activities are supported. Of the funds provided, $25,058,000 is
for the state grant program, $4,341,000 is for the protection and advocacy program, and $1,053,000 is for national activities. Consistent with the authorizing
statute, the Committee does not provide separate funding for the alternative financing program. Instead, funds provided for alternative financing in 2006
are included in the 2007 state grant program, which is increased by an amount that is equal to the 2006 funding for alternative financing. The Committee
encourages the states to use these additional funds to create or expand state alternative financing programs under their state grant program.
 

SPECIAL INSTITUTIONS FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

AMERICAN PRINTING HOUSE FOR THE BLIND

The bill provides $18,000,000 for the American Printing House for the Blind, an increase of $428,000 above the fiscal year 2006 appropriation and $427,000
above the budget request. This appropriation subsidizes the production of educational materials for legally blind persons enrolled in pre-college programs.
The Printing House, which is chartered by the State of Kentucky, manufactures and maintains an inventory of educational materials in accessible formats
that is distributed free of charge to schools and states based on the number of blind students in each state. The Printing House also conducts research
and field activities to inform educators about the availability of materials and how to use them.

NATIONAL TECHNICAL INSTITUTE FOR THE DEAF

The bill provides $57,000,000 for the National Technical Institute for the Deaf (NTID), an increase of $859,000 above the fiscal year 2006 amount and $1,651,000
over the request. The NTID was established by Congress in 1965 to provide a residential facility for postsecondary technical training and education for
deaf persons with the purpose of promoting the employment of these individuals. The Institute also conducts applied research and provides training in various
aspects of deafness. The Secretary of Education administers these activities through a contract with the Rochester Institute of Technology in Rochester,
New York.

GALLAUDET UNIVERSITY

The bill provides $110,500,000 for Gallaudet University, an increase of $3,502,000 above the fiscal year 2006 appropriation and $2,902,000 over the budget
request. The Committee does not provide the $600,000 requested by the Administration for evaluation and has concerns about the validity of the PART review
conducted by the Office of Management and Budget in 2005 that rated Gallaudet `ineffective.' Gallaudet is a private, non-profit educational institution
Federally-chartered in 1864 providing elementary, secondary, undergraduate, and continuing education for deaf persons. In addition, the University offers
graduate programs in fields related to deafness for deaf and hearing students, conducts research on deafness, and provides public service programs for
deaf persons.

Patricia Leahy
Director of Governmental Affairs and Public Policy
National Rehabilitation Association

 

 

 

Date: Friday, June 16, 2006

Re: Republicans Pull Labor-HHS-Ed Bill From Floor and More



For those who read on the run, this Washington Wire addresses two issues of importance to the National Rehabilitation Association.

First, late yesterday House Republicans pulled the Labor-HHS-Ed Appropriations bill (hereinafter referred to as the Labor-H bill), which had been scheduled for Floor action sometime next week.

As House reports have it, there is now speculation on the Hill and elsewhere that some in Congress will try to keep this bill from coming to the Floor until after the November midterm elections.

Why is this important?  This delay -- should it occur long term -- is important because if the bill does not come to the Floor for a vote and successfully conferenced with the Senate version (which is unlikely) and signed by the President into law before September 30, 2006, the bill would be part of a Continuing Resolution (CR) at lower funding levels or possibly even an omnibus spending bill.

The Labor-H bill is always the most contentious of all of the Appropriations' bills and this year is no exception. In addition to the internal division among Members of Congress about how much to spend on what, one of the many issues surrounding this bill is the attachment this week of an amendment to raise  the hourly minimum wage by $2.10 which was adopted in Committee this week.

All programs authorized under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, were funded in the House at 2006 levels, including four programs (in Titles III and VI, respectively) that the President's 2007 budget had slated for elimination.  These programs, Supported Employment, Projects With Industry (PWIs), Migrants and Seasonal Farm workers and Recreation are important, non-duplicative programs which the National Rehabilitation Association
feels strongly must be discretely and adequately funded.

Title I of the Rehab Act is mandatorily funded and will receive the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA).

We will keep you advised as additional developments become known to us in this regard.

The second issue of importance is a Request for Comments from the Center for Mental Health Services, a component of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), on the Proposed National Outcome Measures for Consumers Receiving Mental Health Services.

We are attaching immediately below this important Notice for your information and input.

All information on the House Labor-H bill is deemed reliable as of this time and date and could change quickly.

Consumer Affairs News from the Center for Mental Health Services
http://www.mentalhealth.samhsa.gov/consumersurvivor/
______________________________________________________

CMHS Consumer Affairs E-News June 15, 2006  Vol. 06-68 ______________________________________________________

 SAMHSA REQUESTS COMMENTS ON PROPOSED NATIONAL OUTCOME MEASURES

On June 9th, SAMHSA published a Federal Register Notice to solicit comments on proposed National Outcome Measures (NOMs) for Consumers Receiving Mental
Health Services.

The purpose of this proposed data activity is to promote the use of consistent measures among Center for Mental Health Services grantees and contractors funded through the Program of Regional and National Significance (PRNS) and Children's Mental Health Initiative (CMHI) budget lines.

A separate data collection form will be used for adults and children but will be parallel in design. NOMs data will be collected at baseline with a periodic reassessment being conducted every six months as long as the client remains in treatment. The proposed data collection will cover eight of the ten domains in NOMs. The Cost-Effectiveness and Evidence-Based Practices domains are under development. Completion of these domains will require input from other sources and is anticipated for Summer 2007. The 8 proposed domains are: access/capacity, stability in housing, education and employment, crime and criminal justice, perception of care, social connectedness, and retention.  Data sources and burden estimates are also provided.

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection.

Written comments should be forwarded by August 8th to Summer King, SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer, Room 7-1044, One Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, MD 20857.

You can view the complete Federal Register notice by clicking on: http://origin.www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/
and searching the June 9th issue, Vol. 71, No. 111, for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration on pages 33476-7.

To request more information on the proposed projects or to obtain a copy of the information collection plans, call the SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer on (240) 276-1243.

The Center for Mental Health Services is a component of the Substance Abuse and Mental

NRA's Washington Wire: New Report on WIA
 
 
Re:            Center For Law and Social Policy's New WIA Report
 
Date:          Monday, February 27 2006
 
                  For those who read on the run, this Washington Wire deals with the Center for Law and Social Policy's (CLASP) February 16, 2006, report
on the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) entitled "Reform or Dismantling?  President's Workforce System Proposal Raises Serious Concerns."
 
                   Our next Washington Wire will have an updated program for NRA's 25th Annual Legislative Summit, which is being held on Sunday, March
12 through Tuesday, March 14, at the King Street Hilton Hotel in Old Town, Alexandria.
 
                  The Center for Law and Social Policy, a very well respected organization serving the underrepresented in our country, has issued an important,
new study.
 
                  This Study examines the President's proposal to consolidate funding and channel significantly diminished resources into individual training
vouchers which the Report states would reduce the ability of States and communities to respond flexibly to changing  labor market needs.
 
                   This Study examines the President's proposal and its potential impact on services to the needs of employers and job seekers, especially
low-income adults, hard-to-employ individuals and disadvantaged youth.
 
                  The CLASP Report, which is 5 pages long, follows immediately below.
 
ole0.bmp
 
Reform or Dismantling? President’s Workforce System Proposal
 
Raises Serious Concerns
 
By Abbey Frank and Evelyn Ganzglass
 
February 16, 2006
 
President Bush’s proposal for the fiscal year 2007 federal budget calls for major cuts in funding for the nation’s employment and training programs at a
time when workers and employers are facing unprecedented economic challenges. The President’s proposal would consolidate funding and channel significantly
diminished resources into individual training vouchers, thus reducing the ability of states and communities to respond flexibly to changing labor market
needs. This brief examines the proposal and its potential impact on services to the needs of employers and jobs seekers, especially low-income adults,
hard-to-employ individuals and disadvantaged youth.
 
The Administration’s Proposal
 
President Bush’s 2007 federal budget proposal, released on February 6, 2006, recommends a complete restructuring of the workforce system and the consolidation
of funds for the WIA Adult Program, WIA Dislocated Worker Program, WIA Youth Program, and the Employment Service programs into a single block grant at
a substantially reduced funding level. The consolidated grants would be used to fund a new Career Advancement Accounts initiative that would provide vouchers
to individuals in need of employment assistance. According to the Administration’s description, these accounts could be used only to cover expenses related
to education and training and would be capped at $3,000 per year. Individuals may be able to renew their account for an additional year, for a maximum
amount of $6,000 over two years.
 
Under this proposal, the administration has allocated $5.2 billion for training and employment services. This is $680 million less than the total funding
for these programs for Fiscal Year 2006.  By far the greatest portion of this cut is in the block grant to states which would be reduced from $4 billion
to $3.4 billion.  States would be required to spend a minimum of 75 percent of their block grant on the Career Advancement Accounts. Administrative expenses
would be capped at 3 percent of the total grant; the remaining funds-about 22 percent-could be used to provide basic employment services to job seekers.
 
The Funding Cuts are Counterproductive
 
The proposed funding level for the block grant continues the steady erosion of federal support for employment and training. Between 1985 and 2003, funding
for WIA and its predecessor, the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA), was cut by 33 percent in inflation-adjusted terms, with a 53 percent decline in funding
for adult services and a 63 percent decrease in youth funding. From 2003 to 2006, funding for adult, youth, dislocated worker, and employment service programs
has continued to decline.  The Administration’s own estimates indicate a further funding cut of 20 percent by 2011.
 
The magnitude of these cuts cannot be absorbed through belt-tightening; states will be forced to make program design and delivery decisions that will further
reduce the workforce system’s ability serve both employers and job seekers. In addition, the reduction in administrative resources will diminish performance,
accountability, and efforts to coordinate workforce policies and programs with education, economic development and private sector activities.
 
A Greater Commitment to Training and Serving Target Populations is Needed
 
The President’s 2007 budget proposal emphasizes the need to expand training. This is a laudable goal because access to training has been declining over
the past years-at least in part the result of continuous under-funding of the system.  In program year 2003 of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), only
188,967 program exiters received training.  By comparison, 312,579 exiters received training in 1998, the final program year of the JTPA. Additionally,
while the number of adults receiving training has decreased over this period, there has also been a decline in the share of adults receiving training who
are low-income or disadvantaged. Between the final year of JTPA and WIA program year 2003, there was a 27.6 percentage point decline in the share of adults
receiving training who were low-income.  The share of adults receiving training with barriers to employment has also declined sharply since 1998. This
is a matter of some concern because individuals with barriers to employment are often the ones most in need of training in order to secure employment.
 
The President’s proposed policy changes, however, do not offer a sound solution to increasing training and employability overall, and particularly for low-skilled
individuals.
 
The proposed consolidation of funding streams doesn’t provide adequate safeguards for ensuring that disadvantaged populations, including low-income adults,
hard-to-employ individuals, and disadvantaged youth will have access to much-needed employment and training services
 
Reliance on Vouchers Alone is Problematic
 
While an increased investment in training is needed, exclusive reliance on vouchers for providing access to training is not warranted. The research evidence
on the effectiveness of using vouchers with disadvantaged adults has been negative, and evidence on effectiveness with dislocated workers has been mixed.
 
The sole reliance on vouchers would deprive the workforce investment system of two important training tools to increase the self sufficiency of individuals
and the economic development of communities:
 
§       customized training that supports local economic development and ties training directly to employment, resulting in job placement for trainees;
and
 
§       contract training that allows local areas to purchase training tailored to the needs of hard-to-serve customers.
 
The Workforce Investment Act mandates that all training is to be provided through individual training accounts (ITAs) except under special circumstances.
These ITAs are vouchers that customers can use to pay for the training of their choice, as long as it is approved by the state. States are required to
develop program approval criteria and lists of “eligible training providers” that meet these criteria. A 2002 study concluded that “ITAs are likely  to
be less effective [than other forms of training] in funding training for adult employed participants in need of training to reach self-sufficiency, in
meeting the needs of employers to retain quality workers, and in encouraging lifetime learning.  A 2004 evaluation of the U.S. Department of Labor’s Individual
Training Account/Eligible Training Provider demonstration (ITA/ETA) project found that one of the advantages of purchasing training on a classroom rather
than individual basis was the mutual support that dislocated workers enjoyed by participating in training in the same class with peers.
 
Furthermore, we are not aware of any experience in using vouchers to train out-of-school youth that would justify a wholesale shift in this direction. Studies
have consistently shown that older, out-of-school youth benefit most from interventions that combine education, work exposure, sustained relationships
with caring adults, and support. Such comprehensive approaches most often require leveraging multiple funding streams and community resources. Such coordination
and leveraging would be precluded if all youth funding is converted to a system of vouchers.
 
Another problem with exclusive reliance on vouchers is that in order for them to work, people have to have good information with which to compare providers.
States and communities have found it difficult to obtain consistent information on training provider performance and provide this information to consumers
under their WIA ITA programs.
 
The Proposed Funding Cap for Individual Career Advancement Accounts is Inadequate
 
The Administration’s proposed $3,000 cap on Career Advancement Accounts is insufficient to support needed training, much less the active monitoring of progress,
counseling, and placement services needed to enable disadvantaged students to succeed in training.  The President’s proposal claims that this amount is
sufficient to finance about one year of study at a community college. However, while the average cost of community college tuition was $2,191 in 2005-06,
this number masks a wide variation in community college tuition costs throughout the country and the fact that tuition and fees at other institutions are
often many times that amount.  The variation in costs is reflected in the dollar cap on ITAs, which, during the ITA/ETA demonstration, ranged from $1,700
to $10,000, with an average cost of about $5,000.
 
As proposed, the Career Advancement Accounts do not cover the additional costs of training to participants-for example, room, board, child care, and transportation.
These and other supports are often critical for successful program completion, yet many people in need of training lack the funds to cover these expenses.
While it is praiseworthy that the Administration’s proposal would allow for coordination of Career Advancement Accounts with Pell Grants and other student
aid to help pay for the true cost of participating in training, the lack of funding for costs other than the direct costs of education and training is
problematic.  Additional funding should be allocated to cover the costs of supportive services, as not everyone in need of such assistance is likely to
qualify for a Pell grant.
 
The Proposal Fails to Respond to Changing Labor Market Needs
 
Exclusive reliance on vouchers would make it more difficult to have a workforce system that is responsive to industry and local labor market needs. In order
to be successful, the system must be nimble and flexible enough to bring employers, job seekers, and training providers together to fashion “real-world”
solutions. It needs adequate resources to support local infrastructure for providing information, referral, and placement services to help employers recruit
skilled workers and job seekers find a job, stay employed and advance to a better job.
 
In addition, relying exclusively on vouchers would make it more difficult for states and localities to change and adapt relevant institutional policies
and practices in order to help the country meet the competitive challenges of the global economy. Decades of state and local experience have demonstrated
the important role that local workforce intermediaries such as Workforce Investment Boards can play in facilitating institutional change and forging sustainable
public-private partnerships in support of regional economic development.  This function should be maintained and encouraged. The most effective state and
local workforce boards are engaged in efforts to build career ladders for low-income workers stuck in jobs with few advancement opportunities, and in efforts
to make education and training curricula more relevant to regional economic needs; a voucher structure cannot accomplish these goals.
 
Patricia Leahy
Director of Governmental Affairs
National Rehabilitation Association
633 S. Washington Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
1-888-258-4295
(703) 836-0850
(703) 836-0848 FAX
(703) 836-0849 TDD
http://www.nationalrehab.org

 

 

Re: Today's National Journal's Article on the Closing of RSA's Regional Offices

Date: Wednesday, April 27, 2005

Today's National Journal, a very well-respected and well-read publication which most Members and Hill staff read, carries an article, which is attached, on the proposed closing of RSA's Regional Offices.

This article states in part, the following:

"It can sometimes feel to longtime employees that the pendulum of centralization/decentralization is always swinging and that such decisions have more to do with the disposition of the boss than with any objective criteria that might be applied to decision-making."

This begs the question: So, who's the boss?

This gives the National Rehabilitation Association no solace to say but we know that the present Assistant Secretary, John Hager, of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, (OSERS) was not part of the decision-making to close RSA's Regional Offices. Mr. Hager arrived in OSERS after the decision was made to close the Regional Offices.

We know that neither the recently-resigned Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA), Dr. Joanne Wilson, nor any of her staff, was consulted on this decision.

We know that Acting Commissioner of RSA, Dr. Troy Justesen, who is taking responsibility for making the decision to close RSA's Regional Offices, may not be staying on in OSERS, or in the Department of Education, for that matter, to shepherd the new plan -- which has yet to be unveiled -- through to fruition. Dr. Justesen mentioned this possibility in response to a question he received at CSAVR's Spring Conference about his plans for the future.

The recently-established Steering Committee, comprised of advocates from the disability community, is charged with advising OSERS/RSA on the programmatic and administrative direction of the monitoring/ technical assistance restructuring, but was not consulted, to the best of our knowledge, until after the decision to close RSA's Regional Offices was made. Neither the Steering Committee -- nor anyone else --has had the benefit of an impact study of the proposed closing of RSA's Regional Offices because an impact study was not done.

So, who is left with the primary responsibility for shepherding through whatever plan may be proposed?

Here's the article in its entirety.

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0405/042705mm.htm

It's a Big Country

By Brian Friel, National Journal <http://nationaljournal.com>

The Rehabilitation Services Administration, part of the Education Department, is closing its regional offices and consolidating operations in Washington.

Meanwhile, the independent Office of Special Counsel is opening a regional office and, as the office notes, "powering down from a D.C.-centric based operation."

Education officials say the rehabilitation agency's oversight is uneven and inconsistent, so centralizing will create more uniform enforcement of federal rules over state programs. Office of Special Counsel leaders say decentralizing operations will allow more flexibility in dealing with problems on the ground and even foster healthy competition among offices to keep cases moving.

Education says centralization will make operations more efficient. Savings could reach $7 million a year by reducing overhead. OSC says decentralization will make operations more efficient by easing the backlog of cases.

The question of geographic centralization versus decentralization has long posed a dilemma for federal managers. On the one hand, it's a big country, and it's useful to have employees out in the field, whether they are providing services or enforcing federal laws and rules through monitoring and inspections. Regional offices can keep agencies from developing

inside-the- Beltway, Washington-knows-best mentalities. On the other hand, regional offices can become mini-fiefdoms, doing their own thing.

Centralization can ensure that everyone in the country is treated the same.

As the Education Department and the Office of Special Counsel examples show, the decision can go either way using the same rationale. There's no clear answer.

It can sometimes feel to longtime employees that the pendulum of centralization and decentralization is always swinging and that such decisions have more to do with the disposition of the boss than with any objective criteria that might be applied to decision-making.

Communications technologies - including telephone, e-mail, the Web, fax, videoconferencing - don't make the decision easier. Yes, people can communicate in real time over distance, so it's easier than ever to provide national services from a single location. What's the difference if a state official in Sacramento, Calif., picks up the phone and calls a federal overseer in San Francisco or in Washington? But a boss in Washington is just as likely to e-mail his subordinate down the hall as he is to email his subordinate in Boise, Idaho. So the argument can be made that communications technologies makes it easier than ever to decentralize. If you're communicating electronically, does it matter where your employees are?

Mao Zedong often is quoted as saying that a leader should "centralize strategically, but decentralize tactically."

His exhortation is more about assigning power up and down the chain of command, rather than about assigning power geographically. But it suggests that the question is a balancing act, not an either/or action.

Indeed, it is helpful to think in the extreme. Would we want a country in which the federal workforce is scattered without a central set of leaders coordinating it? Would we want a country with the entire workforce inside the Beltway, with no federal presence in New York or Anchorage, Alaska? The answer to both is no. But figuring out where to fall in between is no easy task.

 

Re: Today's Washington Post Article on the Dismantling of RSA

Date: Monday, April 25, 2005

Immediately following below is an article that appears in today's Washington Post on the dismantling of RSA, entitled "Disabled Program Changes Decried: Former RSA Chief Faults Consolidation."   The former Commissioner of RSA, The Honorable Joanne Wilson, is quoted as saying:  "Programs for people with disabilities are being dismantled, and nobody is crying out and saying 'Look what's happening,'" said Wilson, who, as RSA Commissioner, was one of the government's highest-ranking disabled officials."

 

The National Rehabilitation Association has sent out at least one alert in this regard and will be sending out another alert on this and related issues very shortly.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/24/AR2005042401

 

Disabled Program Changes Decried
Former RSA Chief Faults Consolidation
By Brian Faler

 

Special to The Washington Post  Monday, April 25, 2005; A17

The woman who, until recently, led the federal government effort to get the nation's disabled into the workforce is lashing out at the Bush administration, saying it is quietly attempting to "dismantle" programs critical to helping the blind, deaf and otherwise disabled find jobs.  Joanne Wilson, who left her job as commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration on March 1, now says she quit in protest of what she said were the administration's largely unnoticed efforts to gut the office's funding and staffing.  "Programs for people with disabilities are being dismantled, and nobody is crying out and saying, 'Look what's happening,' " said Wilson, who, as RSA commissioner, was one of the government's highest-ranking disabled officials.

Wilson said the Department of Education, which has jurisdiction over the office, is pushing to allow governors to combine RSA programs with a number of other job placement programs that serve both the disabled and the able-bodied. The net result of such a move, she said, would be less money and fewer services dedicated to helping those with disabilities. Wilson said the agency is also cutting RSA staffing by about half while pushing to  downgrade the authority of the commissioner who runs it.

The agency defended the proposal, saying the consolidation would make the program more efficient and flexible and would not affect the government's vocational services for the disabled.  "Even though you combine it with other programs, it's going to be the responsibility of the states to use it responsibly and to generate the results that they are going to be required to have in order to qualify for the money," said John Hager, assistant secretary for special education and rehabilitative services.  Hager said the staffing cuts -- expected to slice the RSA's personnel to about 70, from 138 -- are coming at the expense of its regional offices, which the agency has deemed unnecessary thanks, in part, to advances in technology. "This is something most parts of the Department of Education did years ago," he said. The reorganization, which the administration proposed in its 2006 budget plan, would have to be approved by Congress.

The RSA provides money, technical assistance and oversight to state agencies that, in turn, provide rehabilitative and vocational services for those who are blind, deaf, paralyzed or intellectually disabled. Such services may include training on how to live independently, navigate communities and develop marketable skills.

The program serves about 1.2 million people at an annual cost of about $2.9 billion. Those who enroll in the programs participate for a few months to several years. Hager said that the RSA places about 215,000 each year and that two-thirds of those who enter the program come out with jobs.

Fredric K. Schroeder, who ran the office for much of the Clinton administration and is teaming up with Wilson to draw attention to her criticisms, said the proposed consolidated job program would not be able to provide the same range of the often expensive and extensive services RSA offers. "The way you rehabilitate a person with a severe disability is very different than the way you help a dislocated worker return to the workforce," he said. Moreover, they said, the disabled would probably get lost in the mix of a combined program because many state agencies are pressured to place as many people in jobs as possible. That would often lead them, Wilson said, to focus on those easiest to place.

Hager, the education official, called those warnings "speculative" and said the administration has proposed increasing the RSA's funding. It has proposed expanding the office's state grant programs by slightly more than 3 percent. The overall RSA budget would remain essentially unchanged, however. The president of one of the major advocacy groups for the disabled, the American Association of People with Disabilities, said the organization has not taken a position on the proposal. Andrew Imparato said the group is waiting for more details to emerge.

"There's an ongoing dilemma within disability policy," he said. "Do we want separate programs that we can then try to hold accountable? Or do we want to hold the generic programs accountable? Or do we want a little bit of both?" Wilson, who was named to the post in 2001, is herself the beneficiary of a job placement program designed for the disabled. She became blind as a child and was illiterate for much of her childhood, she said. Wilson entered a program in Iowa at age 19. She went on to become a public school teacher  before running the Louisiana Center for the Blind and, later, the RSA. She is now a director at the advocacy group National Federation of the Blind. "The system invested money in me, and they invested a lot of time in me," Wilson said. " . . . But as a result I've been employed for how many years now? That was when I was 19. I'm now 58. I was employed for 40 years and paid a lot of taxes back into the system with that. I couldn't have gotten that if I had walked into a generic job placement program."
C 2005 The Washington Post Company  

Patricia Leahy
Director of Governmental Affairs
National Rehabilitation Association
633 S. Washington Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
1-888-258-4295
(703) 836-0850
(703) 836-0848 FAX
(703) 836-0849 TDD

http://www.nationalrehab.org

"The National Rehabilitation Association (NRA) is a member organization whose mission is to promote ethical and excellent practice in rehabilitation"

Re: A CALL TO ACTION:  Senate WIA Bill

Date: Wednesday, April 13, 2005

The National Rehabilitation Association is asking for your assistance and advocacy once again in asking you to call your respective SENATORS and asking them to OPPOSE any attempt to incorporate the WIA PLUS BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL in the soon-to-be-introduced Senate WIA bill.

The WIA PLUS BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL would block grant the Vocational Rehabilitation Program (VR), Veterans Employment and Training, Adult Education and other vitally important workforce programs.

As you are aware, the Senate introduced a WIA "placeholder" bill, S. 9, earlier this year. That bill will serve as the foundation from which the Senate will introduce its WIA bill, which we anticipate to be introduced by next week.

The markup on the yet-to-be-introduced WIA bill is presently scheduled for April 27.

Tomorrow, Thursday, April 14, 2005, the Senate HELP Committee will hold a hearing, the purpose of which is to hear testimony from: The Secretary of Labor, The Honorable Elaine Chao; The Secretary of Education, The Honorable Margaret Spellings, both of whom we anticipate will speak favorably on the WIA PLUS BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL.

There will be a second panel comprised of Governor Ernie Fletcher (R), from Kentucky; the Governor Kathleen Sebelius, of Kansas; former Member of Congress from Wisconsin, Steve Gunderson, now the Managing Director of Greystone Group; and William H. Swenson, the Chief Executive Officer of Raytheon.

Rumors are rampant that Members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee may try to include in the Senate WIA bill the WIA PLUS BLOCK GRANT proposal, which would divert VR funds and destroy the identity of the Public/Private VR Partnership. The House Education and the Workforce Committee refused to incorporate the WIA PLUS BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL in its version of the House WIA bill, H.R. 27.

The U.S. Department of Labor is doing a full-court-press with Members of Congress, Governors and Mayors in all States to encourage them to support the WIA PLUS BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL which will dismantle the Public/Private Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Partnership, a partnership that has enjoyed BIPARTISAN support for all of its 85 years.

What can you do to make a difference? Exactly what you did during the House deliberations on H.R. 27, the House WIA bill: CALL YOUR SENATORS -- BOTH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS -- AND ASK THEM NOT TO SUPPORT THE WIA PLUS BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL being made a part of the Senate WIA bill.

When calling your Senator(s), please remember to thank them for their continuing support of the Public/Private VR Partnership, which has enjoyed bipartisan support for over 8 decades and is one of the most successful job training partnerships in the history of the workforce world.

Please advise your Senator(s) the multiple challenges that individuals with disABILITIES when entering or re-entering the world of work require specialized individualized services which the VR program with its network of public and private providers continues to provide to eligible individuals with disabilities.

Please advise your Senator(s) that if the Public/Private VR Partnership were to be block-granted, funds specifically earmarked for individuals with disabilities who seek economic independence, would be diverted for other purposes and other populations.

PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU ADVISE YOUR SENATOR(s) THAT THE PUBLIC/PRIVATE VR PARTNERSHIP IS NOT DUPLICATIVE ON ANY OTHER WORK FORCE PROGRAM AND THAT THE VR PROGRAM EMBODIES THE ABC'S OF EXCELLENT VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION

PRACTICE: VR IS ACCOUNTABLE, BIPARTISAN, COST-EFFECTIVE AND COMPREHENSIVE.

Please advise your Senator(s) that there are approximately 54 million individuals with disabilities in the United States, which accounts for approximately 20 percent of the population. Please further advise your Senators that many people acquire or develop disabilities later in life. As people survive medical traumas, illness and life-threatening accidents, and as the U.S. population ages, disability is impacting an increasing number of Americans and their families.

When calling your Senator(s), please identify yourself as a constituent, assuming you are a constituent. If you voted for the Senator, please make sure you advise the person to whom you are speaking.

Please follow up with a fax to your Senator(s) offices.

We are providing a link to a list of  the Senate HELP Committee Members http://help.senate.gov/committee_members.html

If you are unsure of who your representative is, visit the NRA website here:

http://www.nationalrehab.org/website/govt/index.html

Type your Zip code in the "Write to Congress" box at the bottom of the page and click the "Go" button.

OR

Visit http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm for a full list of Senators by State.

Please call NOW AND ASK YOUR SENATOR(S) NOT TO SUPPORT THE INCLUSION OF THE WIA PLUS BLOCK GRANT AMENDMENT IN THE SENATE WIA BILL.

Please make sure you follow up with a thank you note, that should be faxed, to your respective Senators. AND PLEASE REMEMBER; ONE PERSON CAN AND HAS MADE A DIFFERENCE. ALL POLITICS IS LOCAL. ALL POLITICS IS LOCAL. ALL POLITICS IS LOCAL. FIGHT ON VR, FIGHT ON.


Re: WIA PLUS

Date: Monday, March 28, 2005

We are attaching Dr. Fredric Schroeder's Policy Notes regarding the WIA PLUS BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL which the U.S. Department of Labor continues to promote as it's number one priority in the reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA). The Workforce Investment Act includes, as you know, VR in Title IV. Dr. Schroeder is a former Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA).
 

As Deputy Assistant Secretary Mason Bishop advised at NRA's 24th Annual Legislation Summit held on March 13-15, the Administration (DOL) is continuing to do a full-court-press on WIA PLUS to ensure that it becomes a part of the WIA reauthorization.

All National Rehabilitation Association Members must continue to be mindful of the fact that the WIA PLUS BLOCK GRANT PROPOSAL/AMENDMENT could raise its ugly head in any vehicle (bill) in the Senate and on almost any vehicle in the House, which has a germaneness rule. This also includes in the Conference Committee, where differences between the House WIA bill (H.R. 27) and the yet-to-be-introduced Senate WIA Reauthorization bill will be reconciled.

Indeed, Conference Committee deliberations are almost always held behind closed doors and that protected environment could provide a friendlier forum in which to introduce the WIA PLUS BLOCK GRANT AMENDMENT. AND, REMEMBER, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN IN CONFERENCE.

The National Rehabilitation Association continues to monitor closely all developments in this and related regards and will keep you advised via the Washington Wire of any and all information on WIA reauthorization, as well as the proposed closing of RSA's Regional Offices.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Policy Notes

Fredric K. Schroeder, Ph.D.
Saturday, March 26, 2005
Volume II, No. 6

Re:  Department of Labor Promotion of WIA Plus

Issue:  Even though the Administration's WIA Plus super waiver authority was not added during the reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act in the House of Representatives, Dr. Roy Grizzard, Assistant Secretary for the Department of Labor, Office of Disability Employment Policy, is spending the month of April touring the country seeking support for the Administration's WIA Plus proposal.  What has prompted this action and what does it mean for the Rehabilitation Act as the reauthorization process moves to the Senate? 

Response:  Dr. Grizzard's tour of the states is part of an administration strategy to push for consolidation of job training programs, including vocational rehabilitation (VR).  When the Administration announced its intention to seek super waiver authority known as WIA Plus, giving states the ability to consolidate a number of job training programs, the idea was that the House would include WIA Plus language in its reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act.

Although the Administration pushed hard for the House of Representatives to include the super waiver authority, the WIA Plus language was not added.  Advocates overwhelmed the House with calls and visits making WIA Plus politically untenable.  Nevertheless, those who thought the battle was over and that WIA Plus was dead are sadly mistaken. 

Shortly after the House passed its bill reauthorizing the Workforce Investment Act, Emily DeRocco, Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training within the Department of Labor issued a statement making it clear that the Administration did not consider the WIA Plus issue to be over.  Specifically, she stated, "The Administration looks forward to working with the Congress to incorporate the President's 'WIA Plus reforms in the final bill."  Assistant Secretary DeRocco was signaling that the Administration plans to press WIA Plus as the reauthorization process continues.  While it is unclear whether the Administration will be successful in getting the Senate interested in pushing WIA Plus as it takes up reauthorization, it appears that the Administration does have the support of a number of key House leaders.

The latest step to push WIA Plus is again coming from the Department of Labor, which has been the lead for the Administration on the super waiver issue.  Dr. Roy Grizzard, Assistant Secretary for the Office of Disability Employment Policy in the Department of Labor will be spending the month of April traveling from state to state promoting the Administration's WIA Plus super waiver proposal.  He is scheduling meetings with governors, state vocational rehabilitation (VR) agency directors, and disability leaders and organizations.  The stated purpose of the meetings is to discuss the Workforce Investment Act and how it affects the disability community; however, Dr. Grizzard's visits could be better described as a campaign intended to gin up local and state support for WIA Plus. 

It is no accident that Dr. Grizzard has been selected to represent the Administration in its promotion of WIA Plus.  Dr. Grizzard runs the federal agency that was created to be the Administration's lead on disability employment policy.  Beyond that, Dr. Grizzard is a person with a disability (he is blind) and previously directed the VR program for the blind in Virginia.  I believe that it is hoped that, as a blind person, Dr. Grizzard will have credibility with the disability community and that his VR state agency background will give him credibility with VR agency directors.  Of course, the Department of Labor knows that winning over state VR agency directors will be a hard sell, but they also know that most VR agencies are under the executive branch of government and, therefore, must support the Governor's policy decisions, even if that means supporting WIA Plus.  I believe this is why Dr. Grizzard is trying so hard to meet with governors as he travels around the country. 

Even if the Administration is successful in winning over the governors, it will need to garner the support of the disability community.  A recent Department of Labor publication gives us some insight into the arguments that the Administration plans to use in seeking support for WIA Plus from the disability community.  For some time, the Department of Labor has been releasing notices known as the "WIA Fact of the Day."

These notices provide information and address questions related to the workforce system and, of course, put the Administration's spin on the information provided.  On March 17, 2005, the Department of Labor issued a WIA Fact of the Day describing the WIA Plus super waiver authority as "job training reform" leading to improved services for all people, and in particular, services for people with disabilities.  While the notice is short on specifics, relying instead on general references to collaboration and flexibility, it does give some indication of the direction the Administration is taking as it relates to disability employment policy.  One statement in the March 17 WIA Fact of the Day is particularly revealing and troubling: ". individuals with disabilities will be trained for jobs that are in-demand and require highly skilled-workers." 

Of course, who could object to people with disabilities being trained for high skilled jobs, but the promise of good jobs is conditioned by the job being in an area with a labor shortage (in-demand jobs).  The publication ignores the fact that the most prevalent jobs, the jobs hardest to fill, the in-demand jobs are not the high wage jobs but the dead-end jobs no one wants.  In addition to the promise of good jobs, the WIA Fact of the Day publication goes on to claim that there are countless employers eager to hire people with disabilities, and somehow, WIA Plus will facilitate the connection between people with disabilities and employers.  The document says,

In conversations with thousands of business executives nationwide about their workforce needs, the Department of Labor has continuously heard that businesses want to hire individuals with disabilities ...  A consolidated approach to workforce investment . offers the opportunity to develop and implement new and creative solutions to ensure businesses make that connection and individuals with disabilities have the greatest opportunities to get the skills and services they need for good jobs with good pay and career pathways in the 21st century economy.

Of course, the VR program is already a mandatory partner in the one-stop workforce system.  So, where are these employers and what are these high skilled, high wage jobs, and what is keeping people with disabilities from gaining access to them right now?  How will WIA Plus change things?

How will it increase access to jobs for people with disabilities?  And what about training?  The generic one-stop system does not invest large sums of money in job training, certainly nothing like the investment VR agencies routinely make. 

While the WIA Fact of the Day document paints a picture of a workforce system abundant with employers anxious to hire people with disabilities for high skilled, high wage jobs, I am left with the inevitable conclusion that WIA Plus is mostly smoke and mirrors, a way of diverting funds from employment services for people with disabilities in exchange for empty promises.  The reality is that the preponderance of jobs available through the one-stop system are not the high end, high tech, good paying jobs  the WIA Fact of the Day promises but just the opposite-low wage, low skilled jobs that employers have trouble keeping filled.  Pretending otherwise is disingenuous at best.  The idea that we would promise good jobs, with no plan for making it happen, is unconscionable.  Training people with disabilities for "in-demand" jobs means relegating them to some of the poorest jobs in our society.  The idea of tracking people with disabilities into demand side jobs, while promising something we have no plan to achieve and no interest in providing, is a step backward, not a step forward in disability employment policy.   It is a statement that good enough is good enough for the disabled--forget interests and abilities; forget justice and fairness; forget dignity and choice; forget all the progress we have made in opening new jobs and new opportunities; and forget the individual's hopes and dreams.  The Administration is determined.  To keep WIA Plus from becoming a reality, advocates will have to be even more determined. 

Patricia Leahy

Director of Governmental Affairs

National Rehabilitation Association

633 S. Washington Street

Alexandria, VA 22314

1-888-258-4295

(703) 836-0850

(703) 836-0848 FAX

(703) 836-0849 TDD

http://www.nationalrehab.org

"The National Rehabilitation Association (NRA) is a member organization whose mission is to promote ethical and excellent practice in rehabilitation

 

Re: THE RESIGNATION OF COMMISSIONER WILSON

Date: Tuesday, February 8, 2005

The National Rehabilitation Association has been advised that the
Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA), The
Honorable Joanne Wilson, has just announced her resignation, effective March
1, 2005.
Commissioner Wilson sent the following message upon the announcement of her
resignation:
"It has been my distinct pleasure to work with all of you as the
Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration. The time has
come, however, for me to submit my resignation, effective March 1, 2005.
"I want to express my sincere gratitude for your support and commitment on
behalf of our Nation's citizens with disabilities. I look forward to
continuing the journey to change the lives of individuals with disabilities
through new avenues in the future. I feel so very fortunate to have worked
with such dedicated, loyal and hardworking individuals who share my passion
for the empowerment of persons with disabilities.

Again, thank you for the privilege and the opportunity to work with all of you.

With best regards and affection,

Joanne Wilson"

Patricia Leahy

Director of Governmental Affairs
National Rehabilitation Association
633 S. Washington Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
1-888-258-4295
(703) 836-0850
(703) 836-0848 FAX
(703) 836-0849 TDD

 

Re: THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET SEEMS TO BE REVIVING THE CAREERS BILL

Date: Tuesday, February 8, 2005

In yesterday's Washington Wire you may recall that we referenced language that was included in the President's budget that called for supplemental consolidation (BLOCK GRANTING) of certain job training programs at the discretion of the Governor, which we referenced as possibly including the programs administered under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (hereinafter referred to as VR).

The National Rehabilitation Association is on record AS OPPOSING any authority by the Governors to waive the requirements of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. From what I am reading and being advised, this new, proposed RECOMMENDATION to the Congress in the President's Budget appears also to revive a version of the superwaiver, which we all remember was first spotted in the reauthorization of TANF.

Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Employment and Training Administration (ETA) held a Budget briefing and provided the following information to advocates who attended that briefing.

Under the Title of "Job Training Reform" is referenced the WIA PLUS Consolidated Grant Program which is proposing IN THE PRESIDENT'S 2006 Budget to give governors flexibility to meet local needs by allowing them to CONSOLIDATE any of 9 job training program into one State Plan. Programs eligible for consolidation include: The four DOL programs proposed to be consolidated; Adult Training, Dislocated Workers, Youth Employment Services, Veterans Employment, VR, Adult Ed, Food Stamps and Trade Adjustment.

In DOL's Budget briefing, we are told, these programs (including VR) were described as MICRO-MANAGED FROM WASHINGTON. Further, that the combined overhead costs were DUPLICATIVE and inefficient and program requirements were referred to as ARCHAIC.

ETA is proposing to allow the governors to submit one plan, with minimized program requirements in exchange for increased accountability. The accountability is that they work for the goal (they emphasized it was goal, not requirement) of 100% placement at the end of 10 years. Also, drops in participant levels for targeted populations -- and disability was specifically mentioned -- will not be allowable.

This approach, we are told by the advocates that attended this briefing, was described s "RESTRUCTURE FOR RESULTS." DOL/ETA state:

'This option will empower Governors and local officials to design a streamlined workforce system that reduces administrative overhead, achieve better results, and trains more workers for the jobs for the 21st Century.

They stated that they would work with Congress to ensure the final WIA reauthorization would contain the components to achieve these goals.

Regarding Assistive Technology, I was advised yesterday that the President's Budget did not request any funds to support the State AT Programs and the AT Protection and Advocacy Service. The President's Budget, however, has recommended $15 million to support the Alternative Financing Programs.

Watch in the next few days for an ALERT, complete with a list of Members of Congress to contact regarding what all must consider to be a back-door approach to reviving the CAREERS BILL of 1995, which you may recall, was an attempt in H.R. 1617, the so-called CAREERS bill, to block grant the VR Program.

This attempt to BLOCK GRANT VR, which we all know is a BIPARTISAN program, was resoundingly rejected by a vote on the Floor of the U.S. House of Representatives on September 19, 1995.

We will continue to fight for the integrity of the Public/Private VR Partnership and for all individuals with disabilities who want the dignity of a career and a more independent life.

Patricia Leahy

Director of Governmental Affairs
National Rehabilitation Association
633 S. Washington Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
1-888-258-4295
(703) 836-0850
(703) 836-0848 FAX
(703) 836-0849 TDD

 

Re: Correction on PWIs, Supported Employment, Migrants and Seasonal
      Farmworkers, Recreation

Date: Monday, February 7, 2005

Upon a closer examination of the President's budget, we have discovered that
the President's Budget recommends NO FUNDING in Title VI for Supported
Employment, Projects With Industry (PWIs), Migrants and Seasonal Farmworkers
and Recreation.
The National Rehabilitation Association reported earlier that these programs
had been consolidated into Title I of VR. That is not the case.
Moreover, Special Projects (which funds a number of issues, including
mentoring) has been recommended in the President's Budget not to be been
funded at all or is so minimally funded as not to be effective.
Once again, these are RECOMMENDATIONS that are made in the President's
Budget, which the Congress will take under consideration.
We will continue to keep you advised of additional on the President's budget
as that information becomes known to us.

Patricia Leahy

Director of Governmental Affairs

National Rehabilitation Association
633 S. Washington Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
1-888-258-4295
(703) 836-0850
(703) 836-0848 FAX
(703) 836-0849 TDD

 

Re: The President's 2006 Federal Budget

Date: Monday, February 7, 2005

As you may be aware, the President's 2006 Budget was released today.

We are attaching for your information the links to access the entire President's Budget, as well as links to the U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Labor's respective Budgets.

Entire Budget:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/

Department Budgets:

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy06/browse.html

The President's Budget recommends that Title I of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, continue to be funded mandatorily and, accordingly, to receive the Cost of Living Allowance (COLA), which is also referenced as the Consumer Price Index, Adjusted for Urban Areas (CPIU).
The President's budget once again recommends consolidating Supported Employment, Projects with Industry (PWIs), Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers and Recreation into Title I of the Rehab Act. The National Rehabilitation Association has opposed this consolidation past and continues to oppose this consolidation.
The President's budget does NOT recommend that the American Indian Programs be consolidated into Title I of the Rehab Act.
We have also been advised that the President's Budget recommends $7 million for transitional services to children and young adults, $2 million of which will come from VR funds.
Once again, the Public/Private VR Partnership has received an adequate rating in the Performance section of the Budget.
Regarding the elimination/consolidation of the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) Regional Offices, while this is NOT referenced in the President's Budget, we have been told that this consolidation/elimination can be done administratively by the U.S. Department of Education WITHOUT THE ADVICE AND CONSENT OF THE CONGRESS. The National Rehabilitation Association has been monitoring this situation very closely, knows that the U.S.
Department of Education is expediting this elimination/consolidation and will report more substantively on this issue in a forthcoming Washington Wire.
The National Rehabilitation Association is strongly opposed to the consolidation/elimination of RSA's Regional Offices.
One section of the Budget that we think is ALSO enormously significant and want to share with you immediately is this:
In the Budget where there is discussion about the four Department of Labor programs that are recommended for consolidation into a BLOCK GRANT, the President's Budget also stated: "In addition, Governors would be able to supplement the consolidated grant with their State's resources from a 'menu' of several other Federal job training and employment programs," which begs the question: What other 'Federal job training and employment programs" will SUPPLEMENT the DOL consolidated block grant at the Governors' discretion?
Today's Wall Street Journal reports that the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Block Grant will include adults, dislocated workers and youth (which I believe is new) into a $3.9 billion block grant (down from $4.1 billion).
It is also reported that the President's Budget will consolidate Trade Adjustment Assistance, Veterans training, Agriculture, food stamps, employment and training, VOC REHAB, and adult education into a single 3.6 billion block grant (down from $3.9 billion).
We will keep you advised of developments in this and related regards as those developments become known to us.
Information referenced within is current as of this time and date and will be supplemented and/or could change.

 

Patricia Leahy

Director of Governmental Affairs
National Rehabilitation Association
633 S. Washington Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
1-888-258-4295
(703) 836-0850
(703) 836-0848 FAX
(703) 836-0849 TDD

 

Re: Is RSA and the Public/Private VR Program in Harm's Way?

Date: Monday, January 31, 2005

Rumors are rampant in Washington and well beyond that significant staffing cuts may be proposed in the President's forthcoming Budget for the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) in the U.S. Department of Education. The President's budget is scheduled to be released on February 7, 2005.

Indeed, one advocacy organization issued an Alert this morning saying that as many as 55 FTEs could be eliminated from the Salaries and Expenses (S&E) Budget of RSA. As it turns out -- if this in fact is the case -- this number of FTEs coincides closely with the number of FTEs in RSA's Regional Offices, which among many other important responsibilities, have major responsibility for monitoring compliance with the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

Once again, the National Rehabilitation Association has not been able to confirm with anyone whether this information is accurate.

By way of background, Regional offices have primary responsibility for providing technical assistance (TA) and monitoring the State VR Agencies.

Regional offices also monitor the in-service training and support employment programs managed by the State VR Agencies.

Regional offices provide TA, review grants and monitor the performance of a variety of other discretionary grantees -- well over 200 -- under the Rehabilitation Act. Those grantees include -- but are not limited to -- Centers for Independent Living (CILs), Projects With Industry (PWIs), training programs and the American Indian Rehabilitation programs.

Regional offices also serve as national specialists in a variety of areas including employment and business relations, transition from school-to-work, the Comprehensive System of Personnel Development (CSPD), supports and services to consumers who are blind, deaf, hard-of-hearing and deaf-blind, among many other consumers of the Public/Private VR Partnership.

The Regional staff provide support to the programs funded under the Randolph-Sheppard Act, the Helen Keller National Center, interpreter training and the State and regional network of Community Rehabilitation Programs (CRPs).

Regional offices also respond to questions and concerns from program consumers, parents and other stakeholders at the State level.

The Regional Office staff work closely with the Regional Rehabilitation Continuing Education Programs (RRCEPs) on the development and implementation of a regional plan that provides continuing education to staff of the VR programs, the State Rehabilitation Councils (SRCs), the American Indian Rehabilitation Programs, the Client Assistant Programs (CAP), Migrant and Seasonal Farm Worker Programs, Independent Living Centers, Community Rehabilitation Providers and other grantees funded under the Rehabilitation Act.

Moreover, Regional offices work as part of the team to implement RSA's Operational Plan. The annual Operational Plan includes RSA's program objectives which have been compiled and prioritized based on input from the various constituency groups across the country.

The National Rehabilitation Association is monitoring this situation very closely and will keep you advised as developments become known to us in this particular regard and related budgetary regards.

 

Patricia Leahy

Director of Governmental Affairs
National Rehabilitation Association
633 S. Washington Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
1-888-258-4295
(703) 836-0850
(703) 836-0848 FAX
(703) 836-0849 TDD

 

Subject: NRA's Washington Wire: Legislative Update on WIA/VR and TANF

Date: Wednesday, January 26, 2005

 
The National Rehabilitation Association received word yesterday from the
Hill that markup of the newly-introduced House WIA/VR bill, H.R. 27, The Job
Training Improvement Act of 2005, will be marked up at the Subcommittee
level on Wednesday, February 9, 2005, at 10:30 a.m. in Room 2175 of the
Rayburn House Office Building.
The Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness is chaired by Congressman
Howard "Buck" McKeon (R.CA.). The full (or parent) Committee on the House
Education and the Workforce, is Chaired by Congressman John Boehner (R.OH.)
(pronounced Baynor), will follow with a full Committee markup shortly
thereafter.
The Committee on Education and the Workforce has not yet been organized in
the 109th Congress, but that organization is expected to occur sometime next
week, at which time we will know and share with you the Membership of both
the full Committee and the Subcommittees.
The National Rehabilitation Association is aware that the President may be
proposing additional reforms to the reauthorization of the Workforce
Investment Act (beyond what has been proposed in H.R. 27) in 2006 Budget
which is scheduled to be released on February 7, 2005. Included among these
proposed reforms will be, we are told, consolidation of funding streams,
increased flexibility for Governors, proposals that result in more resources
going towards training, increased accountability, movement toward common
measures for all, continued focus n a demand-driven workforce development
system and better integration of the partner programs.
Moreover, we are told that the U.S. Department of Labor's Employment and
Training Administration (ETA) has announced a WIA Reform Proposal which we
understand will be released very shortly in its entirety in a Training and
Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL).
In addition to the TEGL, ETA will be requesting emergency approval of this
planning guidance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This means
that there will be a 30-day comment period. All States, we are advised, will
be required to submit new, two- year State plans for the forthcoming
planning year, which begins on July 1, 2005.
The National Governors Association (NGA) has prepared a side-by-side of this
year's House WIA bill and last year's House WIA bill and that side-by-side
is attached.
Turning to the Senate, we were advised yesterday that the Senate Republicans
WIA reauthorization bill is part of a massive "Lifetime of Education
Opportunities Act (S. 9) designed to encompass education needs from 'early
school to retirement," according to Senator Mike Enzi (R.WY.), Chairman of
the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee. Senator
Enzi (R.WY.) introduced, along with others, S. 9 on Tuesday, January 25.
But, unlike the House's plans for WIA reauthorization, Senator Enzi's bill
will be similar to the bipartisan measure that passed the Senate unanimously
in the previous Congress with a few fixes, we are told. The Senator's
spokesperson said the WIA reauthorization portion of the bill will contain
'substantially the same components' as the Senate WIA bill that passed in
2003. That means, we believe, the Senate WIA bill will NOT include the
controversial provisions in the House bill (H.R. 27) that create personal
re-employment accounts for workers who agree not to use other Federal job
training programs, will not expand the availability of Federal funds for
faith-based groups and will not consolidate three separate funding streams
into single state block grants.
The National Rehabilitation Association just received the Senate WIA bill,
S. 9, in pdf format and will report on its contents in much greater detail,
once the bill has been read and this bill is a placeholder bill for a number
of things.
Senator Enzi also announced he has created four new Subcommittees on the
full HELP Committee, doing away with the Subcommittee structure from the
previous Congress. Senator Enzi said "I reorganized the Subcommittees so
that we have an Education and Early Childhood Subcommittee." "We have one
[Subcommittee] that handles the health package. We have one [Subcommittee]
that handles the labor package. We have one [Subcommittee] that handles the pension package."
Senator Lamar Alexander (R.TN.), a former U.S. Secretary of Education, will
chair the Education Subcommittee, but other Subcommittee Chairpersons have
not been finalized, Senator Enzi's spokesperson said.
The spokesperson said that Senator Enzi expects his Subcommittee
Chairpersons to be actively engaged in the Republican agenda by 'vetting
some of these issues' before they are addressed by the full Committee.
We will keep you advised of additional developments on workforce issues, as
they become known to us.
Turning now to the reauthorization of the Temporary Assistance To Needy
Families (TANF) bill, the reauthorization which is included in the
wide-ranging "Marriage, Opportunity, Relief and Empowerment Act (S. 6), is a
five-year reauthorization which contains proposals to increase the child tax
credit and creates a 25 percent tax credit for employer-provided child care.
Like WIA, the Senate's TANF reauthorization bill is less controversial than
the House TANF bill (H.R. 240) which includes a provision requiring welfare
participants to engage in a 40-hour work week, 24 hours of which must be
'direct work.' The Senate bill would increase weekly work hours for welfare
recipients from 30 to 34 hours per week for families with children who are
at least six years old.
Both the House and Senate TANF bills would increase required work
participation from 50 percent to 70 percent over 5 years.
The Senate did not pass companion [to the House] TANF legislation in the
last Congress and consequently the program has been funded through a series
of short-term extensions, the most recent of which is through March 31,
2005.
 
As we mentioned earlier, the President's budget is due to be released on
February 7, 2005 and we are anticipating funding cuts in both discretionary
and entitlement programs.
Moreover, the House and Budget Committee provide, as you may know, a budget
blueprint which is intended to be followed by the House and Senate
Appropriators to instill fiscal discipline. Rumors are rampant that these
blueprints (which are not binding) will recommend massive funding cuts in
all human services programs, in both discretionary and entitlement programs.

The National Rehabilitation Association is monitoring the budget situation
very closely and will keep you advised of developments, as they become known
to us.
All information within is current as of this time and date.

Patricia Leahy

Director of Governmental Affairs
National Rehabilitation Association
633 S. Washington Street
Alexandria, VA 22314

1-888-258-4295
(703) 836-0850
(703) 836-0848 FAx
(703) 836-0849 TDD

http://www.nationalrehab.org

"The National Rehabilitation Association (NRA) is a member organization
whose mission is to promote ethical and excellent practice in
rehabilitation"

 

NGA Center for Best Practices

Side-by-Side Comparison of Titles I and III State and Local Provisions

in the Workforce Investment Act Reauthorization Bills

 

(Note: Based on House-Introduced Bill compared to Current Law. 

Comparison to Senate Bill will be added when Senate Bill is introduced.)

 

Current Law

Workforce Investment Act

of 1998

H.R. 27 (as introduced)

Job Training Improvement Act

of 2005

Senate Bill (not introduced yet)

Governance

State Workforce Investment Board Membership: The State board includes the Governor, 2 members of each chamber of the state legislature, business representatives, chief elected officials, labor representatives, lead state agency officials responsible for one-stop partner programs, representatives of organizations with experience in delivery of youth and workforce services, plus such others as the Governor may designate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A majority must consist of business representatives and the chair must be a business member.

 

Same as current law, but drops representatives of organizations with experience in delivery of youth and other workforce activities. Adds the head of state vocational rehabilitation unit (if not head of a state agency) and state economic development officials. Governors may still expand board membership.

 

Also adds as permissible partners, which, if made mandatory by the governor, would be required partners of the state board:

Ø   Employment and training programs administered by the Social Security Administration, including the Ticket-to-Work program;

Ø   Employment and training programs administered by the Small Business Administration;

Ø   Programs under the IV-D Child Support program; and,

Ø   Programs carried out in the local areas for individuals with disabilities, including programs carried out by state agencies relating to mental health, mental retardation, and developmental disabilities, state Medicaid agencies; State Independent Living Councils; and Independent Living Centers.

 

Same as current law.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

State Board Functions: The state board must assist the Governor in development of a state plan, designation of local areas, development and continuous improvement of state performance measures, preparation of annual report, among other functions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

State board must comment on state vocational education (Perkins) performance measures.

 

Adds function of developing and reviewing statewide policies affecting provision of integrated services through one-stop system. Policies would include development of criteria for certifying one-stop centers and the board would issue certification of centers. Board also sets criteria for allocation of one-stop infrastructure funding which would go to certified centers.

 

Adds development of criteria for appointment and certification of local boards.

 

Explicitly authorizes state board to hire staff.

 

Removes requirement to review state vocational education performance measures.

 

 

 

Alternative Entity: Governors have broad authority to grandfather state boards that were in existence prior to WIA.

Eliminates this grandfathering provision.

 

 

 

Local Area Designation: Governor must designate local areas after taking into account a number of considerations, such as consistency with labor market areas and available resources.

 

Governors must approve a request for designation from any single jurisdiction with a population of 500,000 or more, a rural concentrated employment program and local areas in Rhode Island.

 

A jurisdiction with a population of 200,000 or more that was a service delivery area under JTPA could win 2-year designation and continued designation if it performed successfully and sustained fiscal integrity.

 

Jurisdictions may appeal to the state board and to the Secretary of Labor.

 

States that were single state areas under JTPA as of July 1, 1998 may be designated as single state local areas under WIA.

 

 

 

States may require local boards in a region to participate in a regional planning process that results in regional performance measures.

Adds a new consideration for designating an area:  efficiency in administration and provision of services.

 

 

 

 

Same as current law, but drops automatic designation for local areas in Rhode Island. Designation can be denied for substandard performance in previous two years.

 

 

Same as current law.

 

 

 

 

 

Same as current law.

 

 

Does not allow additional states to designate single state local areas.

 

 

 

 

Authorizes states to require local boards to prepare a single regional plan that incorporates elements of local plans and is submitted in lieu of separate plans.

 

 

Local Workforce Boards: Local boards must include representatives of busin