4.2(c) Summary of Input and Activities

Cooperation and Coordination with the State Rehabilitation Council

Input from the DVR and DBVI SRCs regarding the proposed integration of the two divisions

DBVI SRC Input

On October 14, 2009 the State of Vermont announced plans to integrate DVR and DBVI. On October 22, 2009 Joan Senecal, the Commissioner of the Department of Disabilities, Aging and Independent Living (DAIL), Diane Dalmasse, Director of DVR and Fred Jones, Director of DBVI met with the DBVI SRC to discuss the proposed integration of the two divisions. Also in attendance were many current and previous DBVI consumers who expressed their concerns about the change, asked questions, and shared their appreciation of DBVI services.

There have been many calls and emails to the Governor’s office stating strong opposition to the loss of DBVI’s status as a Designated Sate Agency as recognized in the Rehabilitation Act. The following is a summary of the input from the October 22nd SRC meeting:

• A major concern was that a merger and loss of the Designated State Agency status would result in a dilution of services for people who are blind or visually impaired. SRC members stated that, historical experience indicates that over time, the services for people who are blind and visually impaired will be eroded. Several people shared such experiences from other states and pointed out the high quality services they received from DBVI in Vermont.

• SRC members were concerned that the proportion of state/federal funds assigned to DBVI (historically 12% of the federal award) would be reduced. As a result, the amount of funds available for services for people who are blind and visually impaired would be reduced. They also did not feel that a Memorandum of Understanding was a secure way to preserve these agreements because of future changes in leadership and personnel.

• An example was offered by referencing a letter from the DBVI SRC in 2003 and a meeting with the Secretary of the Agency of Human Services at that time. The letter requested the opportunity for input whenever any changes to the status of DBVI as a Designated State Agency were being considered. A meeting was held and a commitment from the AHS Secretary was made, however, this current merger is not consistent with that agreement.

• SRC members were unhappy that they had not been consulted about the merger before it was announced.

• SRC members were concerned that the DBVI Director would lose authority by becoming a unit within DVR. Members believe this will create an additional administrative layer between the DBVI Director and the Secretary of the Agency of Human Services.

• Several requests from the SRC were made to maintain the DBVI and Designated State Agency status by moving some of the administrative functions to other divisions.

• SRC members responded to the rationale to eliminate duplicate reporting and administrative tasks by requesting that some of these duties be absorbed by other divisions. They asked why DVR and the business office could not support some of the administrative functions and have DBVI continue to operate as a Designated State Agency.

• The current Director of DBVI was asked directly if it would be possible to run DBVI with two fewer staff. He stated that he believed it was possible and submitted such a proposal to the Secretary of Human Services on October 26, 2009.

• SRC members noted that DBVI had a high level of consumer satisfaction, 96% overall satisfaction according to the most recent survey. Therefore, why change a program that is currently performing so well. There was also concern about making this change when there are no additional cost savings and probably increased costs for training as a result of the merger.

• The DBVI SRC Chair stated that he had received no notice of the changes and no opportunity to comment. The SRC Chair cited the intent of congress was for the SRC to be an independent group to serve as partners with DBVI. He explained the DBVI SRC had organized to provide detailed input on the last state plan, needs assessment, and goals for DBVI. The Chair also explained that merging the DBVI SRC into a sub-committee within the DVR SRC will be a dilution of their current role. The DBVI SRC was intended by congress to serve an important function for blind services in Vermont and should not be eliminated. The statute does not allow for elimination of the DBVI SRC. The SRC should not be placed as a sub-committee within another SRC. The statute says there can be an SRC for the blind.

• The SRC Chair also expressed concern that the current DBVI State Plan approved by RSA includes goals and strategies that require direct involvement and assistance from the current DBVI SRC.

• The Vermont chapter of the American Council of the Blind (VCB), made a formal statement opposing the merger of the two divisions. They made the following three points:
1. First, we want to express our disappointment in the Commissioner’s decision to conduct these deliberations and make the resulting decisions without collaboration or even input from consumers directly affected, including members of the State Rehabilitation Council. We fervently hope that this exclusionary behavior does not represent future practice.
2. Second, we recognize that all of us, including our government, are living in difficult financial times. We understand that it is necessary to conserve resources and utilize limited funds with extraordinary care. Therefore, while we are deeply saddened by the decision to terminate the employment of several dedicated, long time DBVI employees, we will not contest the decision to terminate their employment.
3. Third, we believe strongly that blindness and visual impairment is a disability which has profound differences from all other handicapping conditions and people with that disability require discrete, highly targeted services and supports. Therefore, we request that you abandon your intention to eliminate the Vermont Division of the Blind and Visually Impaired, which is, after all, an agency created by statute (Title 33, Sec. 503 – Composition of Department of Disabilities, Aging, and Independent Living). Rather, we request that you staff the Division with its remaining employees, with Fred Jones as its director and that you continue the delivery of services to blind Vermonters without interruption or dilution.

In response, the DAIL Commissioner, DVR Director made the following responses to the above concerns:

• At a minimum, the AHS/DAIL/DVR will maintain the proportion of funds assigned for direct vocational rehabilitation services for consumers who are blind and visually impaired, at the same level it had been when DBVI was a separate Division (12% of the available state/federal funds). Additional funds could be added, but 12% proportionality may not be reduced.

• That AHS/DAIL/DVR will maintain a State Unit for the Blind and Visually Impaired (SUBVI) as a permanent part of the structure of DVR. This new SUBVI will be 100% dedicated to providing services for people who are blind and visually impaired.

• AHS/DAIL/DVR will have a unit director for services for people who are blind and visually impaired who will be part of the DAIL management team and who will have direct line supervisory authority over unit staff.

• As part of this unit, DVR will maintain specialized vocational counselors, rehabilitation associates, assistive technology (AT) trainer, and AT evaluator, who are dedicated 100% to providing services for consumers who are blind and visually impaired.

• With the merger of DVR and DBVI, federal statute requires there be a single SRC for the consolidated division. Therefore, AHS/DAIL/DVR will support the creation and ongoing maintenance of the permanent committee (the Committee) of the DVR SRC dedicated to services for consumers who are blind and visually impaired. Two key purposes of the Committee will be to ensure the ongoing integrity of services for consumers who are blind and visually impaired and to act in an advisory capacity to DVR. It is hoped that the membership of the current DBVI SRC will become the initial members of the Committee. The Director of the State Unit for the Blind and Visually Impaired will chair the Committee.

In addition to the above responses the DAIL Commissioner stated that AHS, DAIL, and DVR would sign off on a Memorandum of Agreement to address the concerns of the DBVI SRC and the blind and visually impaired community. The purpose of the MOA will be to ensure the integrity of services and funding provided by the Agency of Human Services to Vermonters who are blind and visually impaired. A draft version of this MOA will be reviewed and discussed with the DBVI SRC on November 10, 2009.

DVR SRC Input

On November 5, 2009 DVR and the DVR SRC will meet to discuss the proposed merger of DVR and DBVI. The input from the DVR SRC will be added after that date.

Return to Request for Comments Page