In developing input to the process of reauthorizing the Rehabilitation Act, it may be helpful to read the annual report of the primary federal agency that implements the law. Unfortunately, I found that the latest report covers 1993. Still, I am distributing it for the background material it provides about the structure and function of VR programs. Since the report is about 320K in size, I've put "End of Document" at the bottom to indicate whether you received it completely. If not and you want it, let me know and I'll send it on disk. Jamal Mazrui National Council on Disability Email: 74444.1076@compuserve.com ---------- FOREWORD The Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) continues its strong commitment to leadership and effective administration of the programs and benefits for individuals with disabilities under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. The Act provides the legislative basis for programs and activities to assist individuals with disabilities in the pursuit of meaningful employment, independence and self-sufficiency, and full integration into community life. This report provides a comprehensive description of the activities of RSA and of the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), both components of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, U.S. Department of Education, during FY 1993 and describes our successes in meeting the intent and the mandates of the Act. The report also contains information on activities of the other Federal agencies responsible for administering certain sections of the Act. I would like to acknowledge the contributions by National Council on Disability; the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board; the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs; and the U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Civil Rights, in making this report a comprehensive summary of Federal accomplishments under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. RSA, along with the other Federal agencies with responsibilities under the Act, continues to strive for effective and efficient programs that provide opportunities for individuals with disabilities to participate in the mainstream of society through increased employment and independence. In working together, we hope to bring about significant changes in programs and services to enhance the lives of individuals with disabilities in our society. Fredric K. Schroeder Commissioner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report to the President and to the Congress is required by Section 13 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (the Act). The report describes activities under the Act from October 1, 1992 through September 30, 1993. The report is organized following the titles and sections in the Act. The appendices contain data from various reports required in the Act and regulations. Summaries of the data in the appendices and their impact are included in the body of the report where appropriate. The executive summary contains brief information about the programs reported on and some highlights of what will be found in the various sections of the report. GENERAL PROVISIONS Sections 3 and 12 Office of the Commissioner The Act makes the Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) the principal Federal official responsible for administering the State-Federal vocational rehabilitation system. RSA's central and ten regional offices provide technical assistance and leadership to assist States and other grantees in strengthening programs providing services to individuals with disabilities. During FY 1993, the Office of the Commissioner served as a focal point for the implementation of the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992 and 1993. This included: o The provision of training on the Amendments; o The establishment of an open process for the development of regulations to implement the Amendments; o The issuance of proposed and final regulations implementing many new and revised provisions of the Amendments; and o The implementation of several new funding authorities established by the Amendments. Section 12(a)(4) American Rehabilitation Magazine Publication of the RSA journal, American Rehabilitation (AR), is an ongoing activity under this section of the Act. Four issues, three focussing on one special area of rehabilitation, and one issue devoted to general rehabilitation subjects, were published in 1993 reaching at least 15,000 readers. It has been estimated that upwards of 45,000 people read articles reproduced from the magazine for training and other purposes. Section 14 Evaluation Federal Funds $1,810,000 Section 14 of the Act requires the Commissioner to evaluate all programs authorized by the Act, their effectiveness in relation to their cost, their impact on related programs, and their structure and mechanisms for delivery of services, using appropriate methodology and evaluative research design. It requires that standards be established and used for the evaluations and that the evaluations be conducted by persons not immediately involved in the administration of the program or project being evaluated. Four evaluation projects were completed in Fiscal Year 1993: 1) Evaluation of Quality Assurance in State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies; 2) Vocational Rehabilitation Services and Outcomes for Transitional Youth; 3) Evaluation of Procedures to Recruit and Retain Qualified Field Service Personnel in the State-Federal Rehabilitation Program; and, 4) Traumatic Brain Injury Effective Practices Study. Fiscal Year 1993 funds were used to continue three studies, including a major longitudinal study of the vocational rehabilitation program, and to initiate one new evaluation support activity. Section 15 The Clearinghouse on Disability Information The Clearinghouse on Disability Information responds to inquiries from individuals with disabilities, their families, agencies, information providers, and the general public. Major areas of emphasis are information on Federal funding, Federal legislation affecting persons with disabilities, and identification of other information resources. During FY 1993, the Clearinghouse responded to 9,199 written requests and 1,157 telephone inquiries. Section 21 Traditionally Underserved Populations Federal Funds $2,488,025 (one percent of funds authorized for titles II,III, VI, VII and VIII) Under Section 21 of the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992 (Act), the Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Admini- stration (RSA) is required to develop a policy statement and plan to mobilize the resources of the nation to prepare minorities for careers in vocational rehabilitation, independent living, and related services and to ensure that individuals with disabilities from minority backgrounds have equal access to services provided under these programs. Toward the accomplishment of these goals, RSA staff and representatives from the RCEPs convened numerous meetings with agencies and institutions. Among the kinds of organizations contacted were: State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies, Centers for Independent Living, Client Assistance Programs, Community Rehabilitation Programs, Research and Training Centers, Regional Offices, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic Serving Institutions, Minority Owned Agencies, and American Indian Section 130 Programs. In FY 1993, 1,115 such meetings and contacts took place. TITLE I Sections 100-111 The Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Services Program Federal Funds $1,873,476,000 The Act authorizes Federal allocations on a formula grant basis, with a State matching requirement. Except for the costs of constructing community rehabilitation programs, where the match is 50 percent, the FY 1993 matching requirements for Title I funds was 78.7 percent Federal and 21.3 percent State. Program emphasis in FY 1993 included: monitoring of all formula and discretionary grantees; continued emphasis on providing services to individuals with the most severe disabilities; and increased opportunities for consumer involvement, both in individual rehabilitation plans and in the administration and implementation of the Statewide rehabilitation programs. Section 103(b) Vending Facilities Program Federal Funds $34,200,000 (Section 110 funds at discretion of States) The purpose of this program is to provide services that promote integration and competitive employment for individuals with the most severe disabilities, notably through the operation of vending facilities on Federal and other property. The Randolph-Sheppard Act provides priority for individuals who are blind who are licensed by a state licensing agency to operate vending facilities, including cafeterias, on any Federal property. Section 112 Client Assistance Program (CAP) Federal Funds $9,296,000 CAP is a formula grant program that was authorized under the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1984 to provide support for programs that assist clients and client applicants to secure the benefits and services available to them under the Act. Each State is required to have a CAP as a condition for receiving vocational rehabilitation program funds under Title I of the Act. Section 130 American Indians with Disabilities Rehabilitation Services Projects Federal Funds $6,203,000 In FY 1993, RSA funded eleven new and eleven continuation projects. Of the eleven new grants, three were to projects that initiated new programs, and the remaining eight were to projects that had been funded in the past. Two of the three new programs are in geographical areas previously unserved by the Section 130 program. TITLE II Sections 200-204 The National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research Federal Funds $67,238,000 The National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) provides leadership and support for a national and international program of rehabilitation research and the utilization of the knowledge gained through this program. In addition, the Director of the Institute chairs the Interagency Committee on Disability Research (ICDR), which is charged with coordinating rehabilitation research efforts across the Federal Government. NIDRR also administers the Technology Assistance program and projects to assist in implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In fiscal year 1993, the NIDRR program budget was $67,238,000. These funds supported peer review of new applications and other support activities, and the following research, demonstration, dissemination, and training projects: 44 Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers ($24,919,000), 15 Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers ($11,202,000), 60 Field-Initiated Research Projects ($7,708,000), 29 Research and Demonstration Projects ($5,190,000), 28 Knowledge Dissemination and Utilization Programs (including ADA related projects) ($8,658,000), 12 Research Training and Career Development grants ($1,999,000), 10 Outreach to Minority Colleges and Universities Grants ($673,000) 4 Mary E. Switzer Fellowships ($155,000), 7 Small Business Innovative Research grants ($551,000) and; Peer review and other activities ($1,183,000). In addition, NIDRR administers programs funding: 52 Technology Assistance State grants ($34,068,000) Technology Assistance grant funds are appropriated under the Technology Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act, which is administered by NIDRR. TITLE III Section 302 Rehabilitation Training Federal Funds $39,628,608 Under the Rehabilitation Training program, grants and contracts may be made to States and public or nonprofit agencies and organizations, including institutions of higher education, to pay part of the costs of projects for scholarship/training awards, traineeships, and related activities designed to assist in increasing the numbers of qualified personnel trained in providing services to individuals with disabilities. In FY 1993, funds were awarded to 370 projects. Among the grants awarded were long-term training projects in rehabilitation technology, rehabilitation medicine, rehabilitation nursing, speech pathology and audiology, rehabilitation counseling, and other rehabilitation fields necessary to provide qualified personnel for the Federal-State vocational rehabilitation (VR) program. Other grants were made for continuing education to provide training on implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, specialized training in assisting individuals with significant disabilities to secure competitive employment, and training on the improved use of rehabilitation technology. Grants were also made for in-service training and short-term training projects to increase the knowledge and effectiveness of VR professionals. Section 311(a)(1) Special Projects and Demonstrations for Providing Vocational Rehabilitation Services to Individuals with Disabilities. Federal Funds $19,942,000 This program provides financial assistance to States and other public and private agencies and organizations for expanding and improving vocational rehabilitation services to individuals with disabilities (especially those with the most severe disabilities), including individuals who are members of populations that are unserved or underserved, irrespective of age or vocational potential who can benefit from comprehensive services. Under this program, 36 continuation projects and 36 new projects were funded in FY 1993. Section 311(c)(1)(A) Special Projects and Demonstrations for Providing Supported Employment Services to Individuals with the Most Severe Disabilities--(Statewide Demonstration and Community-Based Projects) Federal Funds $10,616,000 Under this authority, funding is provided for statewide demonstration projects and community-based projects. In fiscal year 1993, 16 statewide systems change demonstration projects were awarded their third and final year of funding to stimulate the development and provision of supported employment services on a statewide basis to individuals with the most severe disabilities, including assisting States in addressing the most difficult developmental issues in supported employment. In addition, 14 community-based projects were awarded their second year of funding and 13 awards were made to new community-based projects. All of these community-based projects are funded to stimulate the development of innovative approaches for improving and expanding the provision of supported employment services to individuals with the most severe disabilities and to enhance local capacity to provide these services. Section 312 Projects for Migratory Agricultural Workers and Seasonal Farmworkers with Disabilities Federal Funds $1,171,000 This discretionary grant program authorizes projects to provide vocational rehabilitation services to migratory agricultural workers and seasonal farmworkers with disabilities, including maintenance and transportation for individuals with disabilities and members of their families whether or not such family members are disabled. Project activities are coordinated with other Federal programs serving the target population. In FY 1993, a Federal Interagency Committee on Migrants held two national meetings that provided a forum for participants to share information and coordinate activities in order to improve services to migratory agricultural workers and seasonal farmworkers. With the passage of the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992, grants under this authority may now be awarded to nonprofit agencies working in collaboration with State VR agencies, as well as State vocational rehabilitation agencies. In FY 1993, four new projects were awarded and five projects received continuation funding. Section 316 Projects for Initiating Recreational Programs for Individuals with Disabilities Federal Funds $2,596,000 This discretionary grant program authorizes special service projects to initiate recreation programs for individuals with disabilities and related recreational activities designed: (1) to aid in employment; and (2) to maximize mobility, socialization, independence and community integration. To the maximum extent possible, these programs and activities are to be provided in settings with peers who are not individuals with disabilities. In FY 1993, 25 new recreation projects were funded. These projects were located in independent living centers, universities, public and private rehabilitation facilities, county agencies, school districts, and small community-based service organizations in eighteen States across the nation. These projects will serve over 22,346 individuals with disabilities. Seven of the 25 projects are giving special attention to specific populations, including persons with hearing impairments, persons with traumatic brain injury, and persons with mental illness. Among the recreational activities provided by various projects are the following: arts, music, camping, dance, river rafting, scuba diving, scouting, vocational skills development, physical education and sports, leisure education and leisure networking. TITLE IV Section 400 National Council on Disability Federal Funds $1,541,000 The National Council on Disability is an independent Federal agency composed of 15 members appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. The overall purpose of the National Council is to promote policies, programs, practices, and procedures that guarantee equal opportunity for all individuals with disabilities, regardless of the nature or severity of the disability; and to empower individuals with disabilities to achieve economic self sufficiency, independent living, and inclusion and integration into all aspects of society. Among the activities & accomplishments of the National Council during FY 1993 were: conducting hearings, forums and seminars throughout the country on ADA, culminating in the release of the Council's first- year report on the implementation of ADA; providing studies on the financing of assistive technology, on ensuring access to health insurances and health-related services for persons with disabilities, and other issues. The National Council met on a quarterly basis during FY 1993. TITLE V Section 501 Employment of People with Disabilities in the Federal Government The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has responsibility for enforcing the nondiscrimination and affirmative employment provisions of laws and regulations concerning Federal employment of people with disabilities. During FY 1993, EEOC monitored Federal affirmative employment programs by combining the evaluation of affirmative employment programs for minorities, women, and people with disabilities. As part of EEOC's oversight responsibilities, EEOC staff also conducted onsite reviews of the affirmative employment programs for minorities, women, and people with disabilities at selected field installations of various Federal agencies. The Interagency Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities (ICEPD), has responsibility for cooperating with and assisting the EEOC in its efforts to ensure that Federal agencies in the Executive Branch are in compliance with Federal laws and regulations for the hiring, placement, and advancement of people with disabilities. A subcommittee of ICEPD met several times, conducted a survey among member agencies and recommended special resources be provided to assess smaller agencies in fulfilling their affirmative action goals related to persons with disabilities. Section 502 Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) Federal Funds $3,303,000 The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board is an independent Federal regulatory agency. Under the Architectural Barriers Act (ABA), the Board is responsible for ensuring accessibility of federally funded buildings and transportation facilities to people with disabilities. The agency sets accessibility guidelines for the ABA and the Americans with Disabilities Act and provides technical assistance and information on removal of architectural, transportation, and communication barriers. Section 503 Office of Federal Contracts Compliance Programs The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) in the U.S. Department of Labor is responsible for implementing and enforcing Section 503 of the Act. Section 503 requires employers with Federal contracts in excess of $10,000 to take affirmative action to employ, and advance in employment, qualified individuals with disabilities and to make reasonable accommodations to their physical or mental limitations. Individuals with disabilities, or organizations or representatives on their behalf, may file complaints if they believe they have been discriminated against by Federal contractors or subcontractors. Among the accomplishments of OFCCP during FY 1993 were: performance of 4,456 compliance reviews, and investigation of 676 complaints under Section 503. Section 504 Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted and Federally Conducted Programs and Activities The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice coordinates enforcement by Executive agencies of the cross-cutting civil rights statutes, including section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of l973, as amended. Executive Order l2250 charges the Attorney General with this responsibility. The Division reviews proposed civil rights regulations and assists Federal agencies in the development of appropriate regulations. The Division annually reviews the civil rights implementation plans of each Federal agency as required by section l-403 of Executive Order l2250, and offers technical assistance to agencies to improve their civil rights enforcement procedures and programs. The Division promotes interagency information sharing and cooperation through delegation agreements. The Department of Justice enforces the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act in three areas: title I (employment practices by units of State and local government), title II (programs, services, and activities of State and local government), and title III (public accommodations and commercial facilities). Entities covered by each of these titles also may be covered by section 504. The Division is responsible for coordinating the overlapping obligations. Section 507 Interagency Disability Coordinating Council Section 507 of the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992 renamed the Interagency Coordinating Council as the Interagency Disability Coordinating Council (IDCC) and added the Secretaries of Housing and Urban Development and Transportation as members. On November 1, 1993, the Attorney General sent letters to the heads of the Federal agencies designated as members of the IDCC, formally notifying them of the new establishment, asking each to designate a representative, and delegating the position of Chairperson to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. Section 508 Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Guidelines Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Act), requires that the Secretary of the Department of Education, through the Director of the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research and the Administrator of the General Services Administration, develop and establish guidelines to ensure accessibility to electronic office equipment by individuals with disabilities. The language of Section 508, revised in the 1992 Amendments to the Act, changes the focus of accessibility to the access and use of the information rather than to the equipment used to create and obtain information. Because of its long-standing experience in and authority over much of the procurement activity within the Federal government, the General Services Administration has taken the initiative in implementing this section of the Act. During FY 1993, the General Services Administration reviewed 12 agencies under its Delegation of Procurement Authority program, finding that more than half of the agencies adequately addressed accessibility requirements; conducted a broader review of the information resources management systems at another 9 Federal agencies, and found that while most agencies were attempting to satisfy the need for access to information by persons with disabilities, that there were agencies that had not yet established formal, agency wide programs for information accessibility. Finally, in the same fiscal year, GSA conducted a survey of 26 of the agencies with the largest information resource management budgets and 22 of the smaller agencies. More than half of the larger agencies had incorporated accessibility into their five year strategic IRM plans or included information access in draft versions of their strategic plans. Section 509 Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights (PAIR) Federal Funds $2,480,000 The PAIR program, which was a discretionary grant program in FY 1993, was authorized by the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992 to support a system in each State to protect the legal and human rights of individuals with disabilities. These individuals need services that are beyond the scope of services authorized to be provided by the client assistance program under section 112, and are ineligible for protection and advocacy programs under part C of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act and the Protection and Advocacy for Mentally Ill Individuals Act of 1986. Twelve new PAIR projects were awarded in FY 1993; the average grant award was $96,300. During FY 1993, approximately 5,500 individuals received information/referral or case sevices. Among the activities funded during this fiscal year were education, compliance, and litigation initiatives related to implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 in various States. TITLE VI Part B Section 621 Projects With Industry (PWI) Federal Funds $21,571,000 PWI is a partnership between private industry, labor, and the rehabilitation community. The primary goal of this discretionary grant program is to expand job and career advancement opportunities for individuals with disabilities in the competitive labor market. In FY 1993, 127 continuation grants were funded and no new projects were awarded. As required by the Act, 15 percent of the continuation projects were randomly selected for on-site compliance reviews. After one year of funding, projects are required to report compliance indicator data measuring nine critical performance areas. Each project must receive a minimum score of 70 points in order to qualify for continuation funding for the third or any subsequent year of the grant. Part C Sections 631-638 The State Supported Employment Services Program Federal Funds $32,273,000 This formula grant program provides State VR agencies with financial assistance to develop and implement collaborative programs with appropriate public and private nonprofit organizations leading to supported employment for individuals with the most severe disabilities. As a condition for receipt of VR services program funds, State VR agencies must assure that the State has an acceptable plan to provide supported employment services. A total of 25,869 were served in FY 1993 under this program. Title VII Chapter 1, parts B and C The purpose of Chapter 1 of Title VII, parts B and C, is to promote a philosophy of independent living (IL), including a philosophy of consumer control, peer support, self-help, self- determination, equal access, and individual and system advocacy, in order to maximize the leadership, empowerment, independence, and productivity of individuals with significant disabilities, and the integration and full inclusion of individuals with significant disabilities into the mainstream of American society. Sections 711-714 State Independent Living Services Program, Chapter 1, part B of Title VII of the Act Federal Funds $15,376,000 In FY 1993, the Comprehensive Services for Independent Living program in Part A of Title VII of the Act was replaced by the State Independent Living Services program in Chapter 1, new part B of Title VII of the Act by the 1992 Rehabilitation Act Amendments. The State Independent Living Services program authorizes formula grants to designated State units (DSUs). Activities are either conducted by the DSUs or through subgrants or contracts. Sections 721-727 Centers for Independent Living (CIL) program, Chapter 1, part C of Title VII of the Act Federal Funds $31,446,000 Title VII, Chapter 1, part C provides for financial assistance to develop and support statewide networks of centers for independent living. Centers provide independent living services designed to meet the current and future needs of individuals with significant disabilities whose ability to function independently in the family or community or whose ability to obtain, maintain, or advance in employment is substantially limited and for whom the delivery of independent living services will improve the ability to function independently in the family or community or to continue in employment. One VR agency, American Samoa, was funded under section 724 of the Act, which permits funding of State VR agency operated centers when no private non-profit agency submits an application and the State VR agency is currently operating a "center". In FY 1993, there was a total of 153 centers being funded directly by RSA, and 23 new centers were funded for a total of 176. Chapter 2 Sections 751-753 Independent Living Services for Older Individuals who are Blind, Title VII, Chapter 2 Federal Funds $6,944,000 In FY 1993 this program authorized discretionary grants to State VR agencies to provide independent living services for individuals who have severe visual impairments and who are aged 55 and older. In FY 1993, 31 grantees received continuation awards and two new projects were funded for the operation of a wide variety of demonstration programs. Title VIII Section 802(a)and(g) Demonstration Activities Federal Funds $7,607,152 of Title III Special Projects and Demonstrations funds As provided in Title VIII of the Rehabilitation Act, as amended, this program is to provide financial assistance to States and other public and private agencies for implementing specific demonstration projects. In FY 1993, 14 Transportation Services Grants were awarded under Section 802(a) to provide transportation services in geographic areas that do not have fixed-route transportation or comparable paratransit services for individuals who employed or seeking employment, or who are receiving vocational rehabilitation services. Under Section 802(g), seven Demonstration Projects to Increase Client Choice were awarded to provide greater opportunities for individuals with disabilities to exercise choice in their vocational goals, services provided, and in the providers of those services. Section 803(a)(b)(c) Rehabilitation Training Federal Funds $1,880,111 Under Title VIII of the Act, this program is to provide financial assistance to States and other public and private agencies for implementing specific training projects. In FY 1993, awards were made under the following categories: three 36 month awards for Distance Learning through Telecommunications; four 12 month awards for Braille Training; and six 36 month awards for Parent Information and Training. REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Office of the Commissioner Sections 3 and 12 Office of the Commissioner The Act makes the Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) the principal Federal official responsible for administering the State-Federal vocational rehabilitation system, evaluating the programs funded under the Act, and monitoring discretionary grant programs and the State Vocational Rehabilitation agencies' execution of their responsibilities under the Act. RSA's central and ten regional offices provide technical assistance and leadership to assist States and other grantees in strengthening programs providing services to individuals with disabilities, especially individuals with severe disabilities. During FY 1993, the Office of the Commissioner served as a focal point for the implementation of the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992 and 1993 (Pub. L. 102-569 and Pub. L. 103-73). The following activities were undertaken to assure full implementation of the Amendments in a timely manner: Training on the Amendments RSA conducted a five-step training effort to increase awareness and understanding of the Amendments to the Rehabilitation Act. The training included: o Training of RSA Central Office staff o Ten regional training sessions for State VR agency staff o Ten regional training sessions for grantees and other interested parties o Training via an interactive satellite broadcast to over 150 locations o Training for Client Assistance Program staff Established an Open Process for the Development of Regulations to Implement the Amendments In order to be responsive to the various constituencies interested in the implementation of the Amendments, RSA instituted an open process for the development of regulations for the various programs under the Act. Activities in this regard included: o Publication of two Notices of Intent to Regulate, one concerning the overall Amendments, and another related to the specific requirements for the establishment of Standards and Indicators for the State VR Services Program o Conduct of two public meetings on the implementation of the Amendments o Meetings with various constituent groups to discuss the development of regulations Issued Final Regulations for Several Programs During FY 1993, RSA promulgated final regulations for two programs significantly revised by the Amendments and for one new program established by the Amendments. The programs are: o Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights (revised) o Projects for Initiating Recreational Programs for Individuals with Disabilities (revised) o Demonstration Projects to Increase Client Choice (new) Issued Proposed Regulations for Several Programs The process for promulgating regulations is lengthy, given the scope of changes made by the 1992 and 1993 Amendments to the Rehabilitation Act. During FY 1993, RSA published, for public comment, proposed regulations for the following programs and program areas: o Client Assistance Program o Vocational Rehabilitation -- Order of Selection o Centers for Independent Living -- Performance Indicators Implementation of New Funding Authorities The 1992 Amendments contain provisions for many new program authorities. RSA adopted the principles contained in the Amendments, and implemented the following new program funding authorities during FY 1993: o Demonstration Projects to Increase Client Choice o Transportation Demonstration Projects o Braille Training Projects o Distance Learning/Telecommunication Training Projects o Parent Training and Information Projects Contact Person: Beverlee Stafford, (202) 205-5482 Section 12(a)(4) American Rehabilitation Magazine American Rehabilitation (AR), RSA's quarterly professional rehabilitation journal, is designed to disseminate information on rehabilitation programs funded by RSA and other Federal agencies, as well as any material relevant to the performance of professional duties related to RSA interest. Therefore, any topic related to rehabilitation, such as innovative programs, agency administrative practices, research, and technique, is considered. Recently, entire issues have been devoted to one area of disability or to a specific approach to rehabilitation. The ideal article describes a new and successful approach to providing services for people with disabilities that can and should be replicated. AR also uses separate sections, or "departments," of the magazine to feature reviews of books, films, and other resources on disability and rehabilitation; to present materials on what individual states are doing; to announce conferences and events; and to disseminate other items of interest to rehabilitation professionals. In 1993, 31 articles, written by professionals in the field of rehabilitation, were published. The spring 1993 issue, the only recent issue that did not have a central theme but was devoted to general AR rehabilitation subjects, featured 7 articles. These included "Training Programs for Working With Older American Indians Who Are Visually Impaired;" "Who Are They: Some Answers from a Survey of Javits-Wagner-O'Day Employees;" "Screening for Undetected Substance Abuse Among Vocational Rehabilitation Clients;" "Adaptive Driver Training: a Pathway to Transition;" "Careers in Rehabilitation: With an Undergraduate Degree in Rehabilitation;" "Supported Employment: Working Ideals;" and "Rehabilitation in Vermont." The Summer 1993 issue featured 10 articles on "Traumatic Brain Injury." Among the articles in this important issue were an "Introduction to the RSA Regional Brain Injury Centers," "Maximizing the Continuum of Care Through Prevention," "Traumatic Brain Injury: a public policy analysis from a state perspective," "Promoting Self-Direction: Consumer Involvement in RSA Regional Centers," "A Model Systems Approach to the Rehabilitation of People with Traumatic Brain Injury," "Vocational Rehabilitation Following Traumatic Brain Injury," "Outreach from the Regional Centers to Improve Services for Brain Injury Survivors in the Community," "RSA Regional Head Injury Centers: a Resource List" "Mail and Telephone Surveys of Services for People with TBI," and "The Price of Emotion," a reprint from the January-February issue of Mouth. The Autumn issue featured 6 articles on "HIV/AIDS," with the following articles: "Self-Help Groups for HIV Seropositive People," "AIDS: the Physical Therapist's Role in Rehabilitation," "AIDS Policies and Education: What are Vocational and Residential Providers Doing?" "Understanding and Counseling Special Populations with HIV Seropositive Disease," "AIDS: A Continuing Challenge for Rehabilitation Professionals," and "HIV and Rehabilitation Management." The Winter AR contained 9 articles on the various manifestations of "Communicative Disorders." Topics included "Historical Overview of Services to Traditionally Underserved Persons Who Are Deaf," "Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992: Implications for Consumers with Hearing Loss," "VR and People Who are Hard of Hearing: Where Do We Go From Here," "Aging, Hearing Loss, and Hearing Aids: Myths Revisited," "Meeting the Needs of Late-Deafened Adults," "Computer- Aided Realtime Translation (CART) Technology," "Recognizing and Treating Speech and Language Disorders," "Communication Disorders and Rehabilitation of Persons with Stroke," and "Speech Pathologists and Rehabilitation Services." Future issues of American Rehabilitation will focus on "Independent Living," "Deaf-Blind Rehabilitation," "Special Projects," "Severe Mental Illness," " and others yet to be determined. Authors interested in submitting their manuscripts to AR should contact: Frank Romano, Editor, Room 3212 Switzer Building, 330 C Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20202-2531. Telephone: (202) 205- 8296. FAX: (202) 205-9874. REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Planning, Policy and Evaluation Staff Section 14 Evaluation Federal Funds $1,810,000 Section 14 of the Act requires that the Secretary, in consultation with the Commissioner of RSA, evaluate all programs authorized by the Act, their effectiveness in relation to their cost, their impact on related programs, and their structure and mechanisms for delivery of services, using appropriate methodology and evaluative research design. It requires that standards be established and used for the evaluations, and that the evaluations be conducted by persons not immediately involved in the administration of the program or project evaluated. Projects Completed in FY 1993 Evaluation of Quality Assurance (QA) Systems in State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Agencies - Completed March 1993. This study's findings included: o State VR agencies seem most motivated by concerns for ensuring compliance with law and regulation (99 percent of respondents) and for ensuring adequately-sized caseloads that included quantitative goals (98%). o As criteria for program quality, two-thirds of respondents identified non-counseling aspects of a counselor's job (eg., networking in the community) as quality criteria, three-fifths cited staff satisfaction criteria, but only two-fifths cited employer satisfaction criteria. o A large majority of respondents (85%) indicated their agencies use customer satisfaction criteria to evaluate program and service quality, but less than half (45%) reported establishing performance standards for staff regarding consumer satisfaction. Comparisons regarding quality assurance systems were made between agencies that had been trained by the Management Control Project (MCP), (a management approach that stresses holding staff accountable for achieving mutually-negotiated, measurable, process and outcome objectives while giving them significant autonomy) and agencies who had not. o MCP agencies included client satisfaction and employer satisfaction among their criteria of quality more frequently than non-MCP agencies but were less likely than non-MCP agencies (51% versus 31%) to establish performance standards for counselors regarding customer satisfaction. o MCP agencies were more likely to establish performance standards for counselors, supervisors and field office managers than non-MCP agencies. o MCP agencies were more likely than non-MCP agencies to provide staff with reports from the agencies' management information systems, client surveys and from meetings with constituents. In addition, the study produced examples of useful quality assurance practices in VR agencies as well as a Quality Assurance Manual that could be used to evaluate, and assist in the improvement of, VR agency QA systems. Contact Person: Harold B. Kay, (202) 205-9883 Vocational Rehabilitation Services and Outcomes for Transitional Youth - Completed June, 1993. This was an RSA substudy of a five- year longitudinal study conduced by the Office of Special Education Programs. This study's findings included: o The criteria schools used to make referrals for VR services tended to be highly consistent with State VR agency eligibility requirements. o Two primary factors tended to influence the likelihood that youth would apply to VR for services: 1) assignment of VR counselors as liaisons to the school, and 2) referral to VR by the school. o Relative to all VR clients, youth clients (students who transitioned from school to VR) were more likely to receive some form of postsecondary education, required a greater proportion of vocational services and were less likely to choose a vocational goal in professional fields, more likely to choose a goal in clerical or sales occupations and about equally likely to choose a goal in service occupations. o A large percentage of youth clients were successfully rehabilitated following receipt of VR services; of youth successfully rehabilitated, the majority worked in full or part-time competitive jobs. o As compared to youth in schools who did not apply for VR services, more youth who received services were working and more were enrolled in two- and four-year college programs. Contact Person: Harold B. Kay, (202) 205-9883 Evaluation of Procedures to Recruit and Retain Qualified Field Service Delivery Personnel in the State-Federal Rehabilitation Program - Completed April, 1993. This study's findings included: o Traditionally underrepresented groups are better represented in State VR service delivery positions than they are in the population at large considering the educational requirements of those positions. o Approximately half of the counselors have a master's degree of some kind, but only a third of all VR counselors have a master's degree in rehabilitation. o Turnover can be greatly reduced by providing staff with significant autonomy and emphasizing the more professional and challenging aspects of the job. o The more highly educated and skilled staff are more difficult to retain. o Hiring VR staff takes considerably longer than is common in the private sector. o State personnel offices often present VR agencies with employment candidates whom the agencies judge to be insufficiently trained and qualified. o Students in RSA-supported preservice training programs were racially and ethnically diverse. o The vast majority of students who receive scholarships from RSA choose employment in VR agencies or organizations. Some recommendations included: o Enhance the autonomy and professionalism of VR staff in order to minimize turnover. o Provide job applicants with a clear, accurate picture of the job. o State VR agencies should work closely with State personnel units to identify procedures and criteria that might speed the hiring of qualified personnel. Contact Person: Harold B. Kay, (202) 205-9883 Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Effective Practices Study - Completed September 1993. This study's findings included: o Clients with TBI achieve success in the VR system at the same rate as other VR clients, but the duration of their services is longer and the cost is greater. o A majority of former clients with TBI reported improvements in their quality of life as a result of VR services. o While clients with TBI account for less than two percent of all VR case closures, most VR agencies have given special attention to implementing a continuum of rehabilitation services for these individuals. o VR counselors who serve clients with TBI are generally knowledgeable about the nature of TBI and the associated implications for effective rehabilitation practice. o The role of the VR program in the overall treatment and rehabilitation of persons with TBI is, by the nature of the system, narrow in purpose and relatively brief in duration. Some recommendations were: o State VR agencies in association with their Rehabilitation Advisory Councils should ensure that TBI survivors are included in outreach plans. o RSA should revise and improve the codes for identifying clients with TBI so they might be better tracked and services planned for them improved. o RSA should encourage VR agencies to utilize TBI resource counselors wherever specialty TBI caseloads are unfeasible. o Some VR agencies should, when setting quantitative expectations for counselor performance (eg. client time in service, percent of closures that are Status 26), make greater allowances for serving clients with TBI. o RSA should promote interagency collaboration at Federal, State and local levels to develop systematic sources of long-term funding for clients with TBI in supported employment. Projects continued in FY 1993 from prior year An Assessment of Client Information Systems - To be completed April 1994. The purpose of this study is to document and provide a balanced assessment of potential improvements to RSA's R300/R911 client information system including: o data elements obtained from the Ohio Rehabilitation Services Commission (RSC), that exist in a database accompanying the publication, "Excellence Through Information Management, a Decision Support System"; o earnings data from the Social Security Data Link and R911/SSA Interface; and o the Client Employability Index (CEI) and the Economic Environment Index (EEI) that were developed in the RSA Program Performance Indicators project. Contact Person: Harold B. Kay (202) 205-9883 A Longitudinal Study of the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Services Program - Expected completion: 1998. The overall purpose of the study is to examine the success of the State-Federal VR Services Program in assisting individuals with disabilities to achieve sustainable improvements in employment, earnings, independence, and quality of life including: o investigating application and acceptance rates; o developing a model of VR client flow from application to closure; o analyzing the costs of eligibility determination and VR services; o developing a comprehensive model of client outcomes to determine the relationships between VR services and rehabilitation success; o analyzing the long-term effects of VR services on client outcomes; o preparing tools to support future research on the VR program; o developing recommendations on appropriate methods for future studies; and o providing information for use in the 1997 reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Act through the release of Interim Reports. Contact Person: Harold B. Kay, (202) 205-9883 Evaluation of the Impact of VR Funding of Purchased Services - Expected completion: early in 1995. The purpose of the study is to identify and evaluate current State VR agency practices regarding purchasing VR services from rehabilitation facilities including: o identifying the types and models of purchase of services (POS) agreements (including their range and scope) that currently exist between State VR agencies and rehabilitation facilities; o documenting the frequency of use and examine the rationale for use of the various types of POS agreements; o determining the impact that various types of POS agreements have on the kinds and extensiveness of services provided to VR clients; o assessing the trends, strengths and weaknesses of current practices relative to POS agreements; and o identifying POS agreements that foster a desirable client flow, and develop recommendations for promoting the wider use of these effective POS agreements. Contact Person: Harold B. Kay, (202) 205-9883 Projects Started in FY 1993 Technical Support for Development of Performance Standards and Indicators for the Vocational Rehabilitation Service Program - Expected completion October, 1994. The purpose of this project is to provide technical support to the Department of Education's Regulations Policy Group (RPG) for developing performance standards and indicators for the VR service program as required by the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992. Technical support activities include: o a review and summary of previous work, o development of issue papers, o development of alternative performance levels for consideration by the RPG, and o simulations and other types of analyses based on the RSA data system. Contact Person: Robert Barnes, (202) 401-3630 OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES Section 15 The Clearinghouse on Disability Information The Clearinghouse on Disability Information responds to inquiries from individuals with disabilities, their families, national organizations, Federal and State agencies, information providers, legislators, the news media, and the general public. Major areas of emphasis are information on Federal funding, Federal legislation affecting persons with disabilities, OSERS' programs and policies, and identification of and referral to other information resources. ACTIVITIES During FY 1993, the Clearinghouse responded to 9,199 written requests and 1,157 telephone inquiries and issued the following publications or fact sheets. o OSERS News in Print (four issues published and distributed to 22,000 individuals per issue) o Pocket Guide to Federal Help for Individuals with Disabilities o Summary of Existing Legislation Affecting People with Disabilities o ED Facts: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services o Clearinghouse on Disability Information Fact Sheet o InfoPac (employment guide for people with disabilities) o OSERS News Update (a quarterly newsletter distributed to 700 heads of disability organizations, legislators, chief state school officers, and heads of state special education and vocational rehabilitation) Contact Person: Carolyn Corlett, (202) 205-8241 (Voice and TDD) REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Office of Developmental Programs Section 21 Traditionally Underserved Populations Federal Funds $2,488,025 (one percent of funds authorized for titles II, III, VI, and VIII) MISSION, PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND Section 21 of the Rehabilitation Act, as amended (Act) cites findings which suggest that the racial profile of America is rapidly changing and the rate of sustaining disabling conditions among racial and ethnic minorities continues to increase at a disproportionately high rate. The Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) is required, under Section 21, to develop a policy statement and plan to mobilize the resources of the nation to prepare minorities for careers in vocational rehabilitation, independent living, and related services and to ensure that individuals with disabilities from minority backgrounds have equal access to services provided under these programs. This policy is to focus on the recruitment of minorities into the field of vocational rehabilitation counseling and related disciplines; and, financially assisting Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Hispanic-serving institutions of higher education, and other institutions of higher education whose minority enrollment is at least 50 percent to prepare students for vocational rehabilitation and related service careers. The plan already stated is to provide outreach services and other related activities to: a) HBCU's, Hispanic-serving institutions of higher education, and other institutions of higher education whose minority student enrollment is at least 50 percent; b) nonprofit and for-profit agencies at least 51 percent owned or controlled by one or more minority individuals; and, c) underrepresented populations in order to enhance their capacity and increase their participation in competitions for grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements. In order to implement this mandate, the Act authorizes the Commissioner to expend one percent (1%) of funds appropriated for fiscal years 1993 through 1997 for programs under Titles II through VIII, with the exception of Titles IV and V, to be used to support these activities. Section 21 further requires that applicants for grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements under Titles I, II, III, VI, VII and VIII demonstrate how they will address the needs of individuals with disabilities from minority backgrounds. Under Title II, the National Institute of Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) made supplemental grant awards to current NIDRR-funded Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers(RRTCs) and to Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) for the purpose of conducting collaborative research projects with Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). Nine projects were funded in fiscal year 1993 whose purpose was two-fold: 1) to increase the research capabilities of HBCUs to participate in and apply for funds available under NIDRR administered programs; 2) to increase the number of minority individuals available with skills and experience in rehabilitation research; and 3) to foster rehabilitation research and training with appropriate relevance to the needs of multi-cultured populations. Implementation Strategy RSA through the Strategic Planning Committee and its Senior Management Team developed and adopted an outreach to minority policy. This policy affirms RSA's commitment to actively promote and support agencies, organizations and institutions of higher education, including community colleges, to create partnerships with minority institutions and organizations to assure accessible services, opportunities for careers and competition for financial supporting programs authorized by the Rehabilitation Act, as amended. As a direct result of the successful implementation of this policy, RSA will: o Increase the number of minority professionals in the rehabilitation service delivery system; o Increase the number of minority institutions of higher education and other minority institutions that successfully compete for grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements in rehabilitation; o Increase the number of minority individuals with disabilities who are served, are employed, and achieve independent living; and, o Promote relevant and useful research and conduct service demonstrations that lead to increased and improved services to minority individuals with disabilities. The RSA FY 1993 Strategic Plan incorporated five major objectives to specifically address section 21. The following objectives represent RSA's broad interpretation of the purpose and intent of the legislation to: o Increase the number of minority individuals with disabilities who are served and rehabilitated into employment; o Increase the number of minority individuals with disabilities who are served by independent living centers and programs, and achieve greater independence in their communities; o Increase the number of minority professionals employed in the rehabilitation service delivery system; o Increase the number of minority institutions of higher education and other minority institutions that successfully compete for grants, contracts and cooperative agreements in rehabilitation; and, o Promote relevant and useful research and conduct service demonstrations that lead to increased and improved services to minority individuals with disabilities. To facilitate the implementation of its strategic plan, RSA decided to supplement the eleven Rehabilitation Continuing Education Programs (RCEPs), one in each region (two in Region IV). San Diego State University (SDSU) RCEP was assigned the administrative responsibility to coordinate the activities related to this effort, particularly since it had been involved in providing training and technical assistance throughout one of the most culturally diverse regions. During this performance period $1,815,645 million was divided among the eleven RCEPs as follows: (1) SDSU RCEP received $265,000 since it had greater administrative and coordination responsibilities than the other RCEPs; and, (2) the other ten RCEPs each received $155,000. The existing cooperative agreements were amended. Each RCEP agreed to assign a lead specialist as a liaison with the SDSU RCEP and to established a (1) Focus Group and (2) National Advisory Committee. Representation on these included minorities who were in business/industry, parents or family members of disabled individuals, consumers, educators, researchers. Accomplishments During the performance period from December 1992 through January 1994 RSA staff and representatives from the RCEPs convened numerous meetings with agencies and institutions. The following list includes by number the organizations and programs contacted throughout the year: Number of Type of Organization Contacts State Agencies 246 Centers for Independent Living 122 Client Assistance Programs 55 Community Rehabilitation Programs 49 Research and Training Centers 54 Regional Offices 191 Historically Black Colleges and Universities 152 Hispanic Serving Institutions 11 Other Minority Institutions of Higher Education 32 51 percent Minority Owned Agencies 36 American Indian Section 130 Programs 37 Other 130 Total 1,115 Highlights of activities completed for organizations participating in the initiative are as follows: a. State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies: o Conducted orientation and training on cultural diversity state directors, area management teams, and field administrators; o Convened conference calls with regional Human Resource Development Specialists; and, o Conducted a needs assessment and collected base line data. b. Centers for Independent Living (CIL): o Held Bi-Regional meetings of Northeast CIL's and Transition Planning Committee; o Met with State Independent Living Council Chairs seeking their endorsement on cultural diversity initiative for staff, board members and consumers; and, c. Research and Training Centers (R&TC): o Participated in Howard University Mini-Conference and "Rehabilitation and Diversity" satellite teleconference; o Collaborated with the Pacific Basin R&TC on research and training efforts on Asian/Pacific Island Americans; and, o Established liaison with American Indians R&TC. d. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU): o Established list of minority faculty currently teaching in rehabilitation fields; o Participated in technical assistance "Opportunities in Rehabilitation" Conference for 15 HBCU's and 1 Institute of Higher Education with a minority enrollment of at 50 percent; o Initiated planning activities with HBCU's regarding implementation of Rehabilitation Counseling Education programs; and, o Met with Lincoln University Extension Office to implement a project in minority health in conjunction with the R&TC whose core area of research is Arthritis. e. Minority Owned Agencies: o Met with representatives from the Small Business Administration; o Provided orientation for minority owned business owners; and, o Conducted a data search to determine the number of minority business owners are people with disabilities. f. American Indians with Disabilities Grant Program (section 130 projects): o Developed Native American Disabilities Planning Council to increase involvement of Native Americans in disabilities services including community education and awareness through training; o Served as liaison with New York State Native-American Education Association, American Indian Community House, and Native-American Services Director; o Developed plans for new Native-American (130 projects) in two regions; o Formed a Council of Administrators for Native-American Rehabilitation (CANAR); and, o Served as liaison with Navajo Nations VR and the University of Arizona to develop work study model of rehabilitation education. Regional Accomplishments The following is a compilation of significant activities completed by each regional RCEP during FY 1993: Region I - Assumption College, Worcester, Massachusetts o Provided technical assistance on cultural diversity for Services for the Blind Planning Committee meetings; developed a presentation on cultural diversity as it pertains to services for the Blind; and, o Developed a unit on cultural diversity for the area of assessment entitled "Introduction to Assessment and Appraisal" that was incorporated into a graduate course in rehabilitation counseling. Region II - State University of New York, Buffalo, New York o Co-sponsored a conference entitled "Onkwehonewe: Native American Education and Career Opportunities" to assist Native American teenagers to explore career opportunities, plan for higher education, locate resources available, and discover academic career and financial aid possibilities; o Worked to develop a plan to increase the involvement of Native Americans in rehabilitation as both professionals and clients; o Held an annual Independent Living Conference, in Queens, that was devoted to cultural diversity which discussed minority cultures in both the rehabilitation and corporate worlds; and, o Presented at the Western New York Fall Conference on AIDS, the Counseling People of Hispanic Heritage Conference, AIDS Issues in the Latino Culture, Multi-cultural Issues and the Culture Competence Conference. Region III - George Washington University, Washington, D.C. o Conducted the "Opportunities in Rehabilitation" Conference for 15 HBCU's and minority owned businesses; o Initiated a plan to deliver technical assistance to the University of Maryland, Eastern Shore, to assist them with grant development and preparation for an undergraduate rehabilitation program; o Began a data search on the number of 51 percent minority-owned business owners with disabilities, and conducted a minority- owned business owners orientation; and, o Developed a script for contact with focus groups and conducted three focus groups. Region IV - Georgia State University & The University of Tennessee o Conducted site visits to eight State Rehabilitation Agencies to meet with directors and leadership and management teams to discuss the rehabilitation cultural diversity initiative in the region/state and to develop a list of training needs for the state agency; o Convened and participated in five planning activities with HBCU personnel regarding implementation of Rehabilitation Counselor Education programs; o Initiated meetings with representatives from Clark Atlanta University and Talladega College in Alabama to discuss technical assistance needs related to discretionary grants within RSA; and, Region V - Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois o Participated in Graduate and Professional Recruitment Day at Atlanta University Center to promote careers in rehabilitation and to recruit master's and doctoral level students for Southern Illinois University; o Participated in bi-regional program sponsored by Howard University Research and Training Center on cultural diversity; and, o Conducted focus groups with representatives from institutions of higher education to provide information about secondary programs (Upward Bound, TRIO, Talent Search) and to market such programs to junior colleges and high schools. Region VI - University of Arkansas, Little Rock, Arkansas o Conducted a focus group session with representatives from RSA, State VR agencies, CIL's, Client Assistance projects, Community Rehabilitation programs, HBCU's, minority owned businesses, rehabilitation and the private sector to outline issues and areas of concern, develop goals, objectives and strategies related to cultural diversity; and, o Conducted numerous training sessions for the Department of Rehabilitation, University of Arkansas; convened the Regional Conference on Careers in Rehabilitation at Southern University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; the Oklahoma Area Directors meeting; the Region VI Community Rehabilitation Conference, and the Arkansas Office of Deaf & Hearing Impaired Area meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas. Region VII - University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri o Discussed collaboration with Penn Valley Community College; Missouri Rehabilitation Services for the Blind, Mid-Missouri Chapter of the Missouri Rehabilitation Association; Assistive Technology Advisory Committee, Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa; Missouri Division of VR; Iowa Services for the Blind; Haskell University (Indian College); Kansas State VR agency; Kansas State University; Nebraska Indian Community College and the Nebraska State VR agency; and, o Met with two of the four VR training programs in rehabilitation counseling located at an HBCU. Region VIII - University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado o Established the Consortia of Administrators for Native American Rehabilitation Project (CANAR), with the assistance of Regions IX and X; Region VII assisted in establishing the CANAR organizational by-laws, board members and conducting meetings; o Collaborated with the American Indian Higher Education Council on Rehabilitation regarding a core curriculum for all member institutions; and, received a roster of 29 colleges and community colleges on reservations that are eligible to submit proposals for funding of tribal rehabilitation projects; o Collaborated on rehabilitation education-graduate level training with the University of Montana Rural Rehabilitation Research and Training Center and the Utah State University to establish a Regional Rehabilitation Education Task Force with assistance from the Rehabilitation Information Exchange Project, the University of Northern Arizona Rehabilitation Research and Training Center, and the Region VIII RSA office; and, o Conducted a teleconference with Services De La Raza to develop collaboration strategies that will increase the number of persons from minority groups accessing the rehabilitation system in communities where there are large pockets of underserved persons. Region IX - San Diego State University, San Diego, California o As administrative agent for the combined efforts of all of the RCEPs, SDSU was responsible for coordinating training activities and disseminating reports of diversity initiative activities from all ten RCEPs; o Hosted a Regional Symposium with provider and potential employer participants from state agencies, Projects With Industry grantees, and CIL's from Arizona, Nevada and California; o Worked with the University of Arizona to develop a work study model of rehabilitation education with the Navajo Nation; o Established a Regional Advisory committee and conducted a meeting for all other RCEP's on issues related to baseline data collection, needs assessment and career advancement, developed strategies to involve community programs in embracing cultural diversity; and specific issue identification for Pacific Insular areas; o Initiated a Bachelors of Vocational Education program for Palau; and, o Provided technical assistance to the Office of Civil Rights and the California Department of Rehabilitation Mid-City District in developing interview protocol and conducting interviews with counselors and supervisors regarding disparity of services to persons with disabilities who are members of minority groups. Region X - Western Washington University, Bellevue, Washington o Initiated joint efforts with Regions VIII & IX in establishing the Consortia of Administrators for Native American Rehabilitation (CANAR); o Convened a Native American National Conference for section 130 projects; o Conducted a training workshop and rehabilitation cultural diversity initiative orientation for the Colville Confederated Tribes that yielded a list of eleven agencies and contact persons to identify candidates for a rehabilitation Master's program established for minority individuals. Contact Person: Thomas E. Finch, (202) 205-9796 REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Office of Program Operations Sections 100-111 The Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Services Program Federal Funds $1,873,475,876 The purpose of the State VR Services Program is to assist States in operating a comprehensive, coordinated, effective, efficient, and accountable program of vocational rehabilitation that is designed to assess, plan, develop, and provide vocational rehabilitation services for individuals with disabilities consistent with their strengths, resources, priorities, concerns, abilities, and capabilities so that such individuals may prepare for and engage in gainful employment. In FY 1993, States received approximately $1.9 billion in Federal funds under the State VR Services Program. Federal funds were allocated on a formula basis with a State match requirement of 21.3 percent. In FY 1993 States contributed approximately $507 million in State and local funds to the State VR Services Program. See Appendix B, pages B-1 and B-2. VR SERVICES PROGRAM ACTIVITIES Program emphasis for FY 1993 was strongly determined by the amendments to the Rehabilitation Act that were enacted in October 1992. There was continued emphasis on providing services to individuals with the most severe disabilities as well as increased opportunities for consumer involvement, both in individual rehabilitation plans and in the administration and implementation of the statewide rehabilitation programs. In FY 1993, a total of eighty-one State agencies operated VR services programs in fifty States and the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, Republic of Palau, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Twenty-four States operated two separate agencies, one for individuals in the State who are blind, and one for individuals with all other disabilities. Twenty-six of the 81 agencies were independent vocational rehabilitation agencies responsible to the governor; fourteen were located in a department of education; and forty-one were located in a multi-program agency housing at least two other agencies administering major programs of public health, public welfare, public education, or labor. The 1992 and 1993 Amendments to the Act In 1993, RSA undertook a variety of activities to assist States, community rehabilitation programs, service providers, advocates, consumers and other individuals interested in rehabilitation to become better acquainted with the 1992 and 1993 Amendments. These activities, in addition to the development of implementing regulations, included the: o compilation of the Act integrating both the 1992 and 1993 Amendments; o development of a trainers' manual and a comprehensive summary of the key provisions of the amendments; o conduct of 2 training sessions in each of the 10 RSA Regional Offices; o provision of training and information through an interactive National satellite telecast reaching nearly 15,000 individuals in all of the 50 States; o presentations by RSA staff at National and Regional meetings; o communication through formal RSA issuances of policy requirements, technical assistance guidance, and information; o outreach to the public through meetings, teleconferences and notices in the FEDERAL REGISTER to receive input on implementation issues; and o production of a technical assistance/monitoring guide to assist in the appropriate implementation of the amendments. Monitoring Section 107 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended in 1992, mandates RSA to conduct annual reviews and periodic on-site monitoring of programs administered under Title I. RSA's formula grant monitoring system was revised to reflect additional and/or revised requirements. Monitoring activities continued to be conducted by the ten regional offices and the central office in Washington. The major areas for on-site monitoring reviews include State agency compliance with its State plan, eligibility and casework documentation, and fiscal requirements. RSA's FY 1993 Annual Monitoring Report indicated that approximately twenty-five percent of the State agencies were monitored during the year. RSA reviews of State plan assurances show most State agencies operate their programs within the requirements of the law and regulations. Reviews of casework documentation indicate the State agencies are meeting the minimum standards of compliance for most requirements. The most frequent deficiencies were related to the requirements for individualized written rehabilitation programs especially those concerning client involvement and post-employment assessments. Agencies were required to develop and implement corrective action plans. The corrective action activities typically included additional training for agency staff. The most significant non-compliance findings in the area of financial management concern reporting, time distribution, and program income requirements. Contact Person: David Ziskind, (202) 205-5474 CASELOAD TRENDS I. INTRODUCTION The caseload data demonstrate that the new Rehabilitation Act provisions related to eligibility have accomplished what Congress intended. The eligibility process has been expedited, determinations are made quicker, and more individuals, particularly individuals with severe disabilities, are being accepted into the program. The caseload differences observed in FY 1993 resulted from (a) the requirement, with very limited exceptions, to determine eligibility for rehabilitation services within 60 days and (b) the presumption that individuals with a physical or mental impairment that results in a substantial impedment to employment, can benefit from vocational rehabilitation services in terms of an employment outcome, unless the State rehabilitation agency can demonstrate that there is clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. The 60-day requirement led to a decline in the number of persons held in an applicant status waiting for an eligibility determination or an extended evaluation. The presumption of being able to benefit led to higher numbers and proportions of applicants being accepted for VR services and entering the active statuses. However some of the individuals accepted for VR services may never receive them. Such persons may not meet a State agency's order of selection priorities at a time when the agency does not have sufficient resources to serve all eligible persons. Current reporting practices do not separately identify eligible persons who are served from eligible persons who are waiting to be served. All are presently classified as "served". This means that certain comparisons between FY 1993 and earlier years cannot be made. II. SUMMARY Large increases occurred in the number of applicant cases processed for eligibility, and in the rate at which these individuals were determined to be eligible for services. This meant a rapid expansion in the number of individuals entering the active (eligible) statuses increasing the number of persons served to more than one million (1,048,527), a 10.5 percent increase over FY 1992. The number remaining in the eligible statuses at the end of FY 1993 increased to just under 700,000 (699,991), a 13.3 increase over FY 1992. The increase in the number remaining in eligible statuses and not being served is due to an increase in the number of persons affected by order of selection. The rehabilitation rate among cases closed after acceptance for services showed a decrease to 55.7 percent from 63.0 percent. The rehabilitation rate for persons with severe disabilities (55.1 percent) showed a similar declining pattern during the same period. Two sets of seemingly contradictory patterns were in operation in FY 1993. The number of persons counted as "served" rose considerably by nearly 100,000, yet the total workload of applicants and clients in State agency caseloads expanded by only 20,000. Similarly, despite the very large increase in the carryover of active cases in State agency caseloads at the end of FY 1993 (up 82,000 from the same date a year earlier), the total number of cases at all stages of the VR process actually declined by 13,000. These unusual patterns are explained by the shift of a large number of cases from the applicant status to the statuses where individuals are to receive the full scope of rehabilitation services (the active statuses). The number of persons who were successfully rehabilitated increased slightly from FY 1992 (193,994). Rehabilitations of persons with severe disabilities increased to a total of 139,088, the first increase in four years. Persons with severe disabilities who were served increased to the highest number ever (766,628), while those accepted to receive VR services exceeded 300,000 for the first time (325,222). Also, persons with severe disabilities accounted for more than seventy percent of all persons in State agency caseloads, setting new record highs (e.g., 73.1 percent of all persons served). The foregoing trends are described more fully in the analysis below containing references to the 13 tables in Appendix C. All figures cited are a National summary of caseloads in the State- Federal Program. As such, they represent the net effects of differing trends in the various State VR agencies in operation in FY 1993. III. REHABILITATIONS All Persons Rehabilitated (Tables 1, 2 and 6) State agencies rehabilitated 193,994 persons in FY 1993, a 1.1 percent increase from the number rehabilitated in FY 1992 (191,890). The number of non-rehabilitations in FY 1993 was 154,542 persons, an increase of 11.1 percent from FY 1992. The Rehabilitation Rate (Table 2) The rehabilitation rate was 55.7 percent in FY 1993 as compared to 58.0 percent in the previous year. The rehabilitation rate was calculated by dividing the number of rehabilitations (193,994) by the sum of rehabilitations and non-rehabilitations (348,536) and multiplying the result by 100. FY 1993's rehabilitation rate was influenced by an increase in rehabilitations of only 2,100 persons from FY 1992 compared to an increase in persons not rehabilitated of 15,400. Nearly two-thirds of the rise in non-rehabilitations were accounted for by eligible persons not receiving any services beyond assessment, a group that traditionally accounts for only 20 percent of all individuals who cannot be rehabilitated. This finding may reflect the closure of cases of individuals who previously would not have been deemed eligible for services. Of those individuals whose cases were closed in 1993 after receiving services, 62.6 percent were successfully rehabilitated compared to 63.5 percent in the previous year. Severely Disabled Persons Rehabilitated (Tables 3, 4 and 12) Successful rehabilitations among persons with severe disabilities totaled 138,290 in FY 1993, 3.4 percent more than in FY 1992. Overall, 71.7 percent of all persons rehabilitated in FY 1993 were severely disabled, the highest percentage ever observed. The FY 1992 percentage was 69.7 percent. The Rehabilitation Rate: Persons with Severe Disabilities (Table 4) The rehabilitation rate for persons with severe disabilities in FY 1993 was 55.1 percent, i.e., 55.1 percent of individuals with severe disabilities whose cases were closed from the active statuses were rehabilitated and 44.9 percent were not. This was a decrease from the 57.3 percent rate that occurred in FY 1992. The rehabilitation rate among individuals classified as non- severely disabled was 57.0 percent in FY 1993 compared to 59.6 percent in FY 1992. It would appear that factors making it more difficult for State agencies to effect successful rehabilitations have impacted about equally on clients, regardless of the severity of their disabilities. IV. PERSONS SERVED All Persons Served (Tables 1, 5, 6 and 11) The number of persons served increased dramatically in FY 1993 to 1,048,527 persons, a 10.5 percent increase from the 949,053 persons served one year earlier. "Persons served" is defined as the number of persons eligible for VR services whose cases were open at some time during the year. However, the definition includes eligible individuals whose delivery of services will be delayed because the State agency is on an order of selection and those individuals do not meet the selection priorities of the approved State plan. By October 1995, the number of eligible persons whose services have been delayed will be separately identified in agency caseload data. A major problem of comparability arose in FY 1993 because of the new presumption of benefit provision. As a result of this provision, a sizable number of applicants, who previously would not have been accepted into the program, were determined to be eligible and had to be counted as "served" under the RSA reporting system. "Persons served" is the sum of clients recorded as being in the service statuses on the last day of the fiscal year (September 30), and the number whose cases were closed out as rehabilitated or not rehabilitated that year. The largest segment of persons served in any year is represented by those whose cases remain open, i.e. persons still in the service statuses when the fiscal year ends instead of ones whose cases were closed out in that year. In FY 1993, as of September 30, 1993, those individuals totaled 699,991, or 66.8 percent of all 1,048,527 persons counted as served. For FY 1992, persons remaining in the service statuses, as of September 30, 1992, totaled 65.1 percent of all persons served. Persons with Severe Disabilities Served (Tables 7 and 12) The number of persons with severe disabilities who received VR services at some time during FY 1993 (as defined above) was 762,218, or 14.0 percent more than the 668,487 persons served in FY 1992. The proportion of all persons served who were severely disabled reached its highest level in FY 1993, 73.1 percent. This percentage continues to increase annually. The increase in the number of individuals with severe disabilities served since FY 1989 has been substantial, nearly 138,000 persons. In the same interval, over 18,000 fewer persons with non-severe disabilities were served. V. NEW ACCEPTANCES All Persons Accepted for Services (Tables 6, 8 and 10) The number of applicants accepted for services, (i.e., determined eligible), in FY 1993 increased dramatically. In the previous four years, the number of individuals accepted for services was approximately 350,000 each year. In FY 1993, however, the number of applicants determined eligible, soared to 430,269 persons, an increase of 24.2 percent from the 346,325 acceptances in FY 1992. This was the highest influx of new acceptances since FY 1977 and is a direct result of the changes in the eligibility process made by the 1992 Amendments. The Acceptance Rate (Table 8) There was a large increase (24.2 percent) in the number of applicants accepted for services in FY 1993 and a small increase (5.7 percent) in those not accepted. Those accepted for services accounted for 60.4 percent of all applicants whose eligibility was decided upon. This is the acceptance rate, and it represented a sharp gain of nearly four percentage points in a single year (from 56.5 percent in FY 1992). It was also the highest acceptance rate in 19 years. Such a steep incline may have been anticipated given the new presumption of benefit requirement. Persons with Severe Disabilities Accepted for Services (Tables 9 and 12) State agencies accepted 323,339 persons with a severe disability for services in FY 1993, a surge of 29.4 percent from 249,791 in FY 1992. This gain represented the highest number of new acceptances among persons with severe disabilities yet recorded. It is anticipated that the large majority of these newly accepted individuals are in a position to receive rehabilitation services without delay because of the severity of their disabilities. The number of persons with non-severe disabilities accepted for services (106,930) also increased (by 10.8 percent) in FY 1993. This brought the proportion of all persons accepted for VR in FY 1993 who had severe disabilities to 75.1 percent, an all-time high. VI. NEW APPLICANTS (Tables 6, 10 and 11) The number of individuals applying for vocational rehabilitation services in FY 1993 totaled 617,463, a slight decline (0.5 percent) from the number applying in FY 1992 (620,332). This was the fourth small decrease in as many years. While the statistic for new applicants was apparently not affected by the 1992 Amendments, the number of applicant cases awaiting eligibility determination on September 30, 1993, was heavily impacted. The latter stood at 184,162 persons, about 96,500 persons less than on the same date one year earlier (280,690 on September 30, 1992). This 34.4 percent decrease reversed the trend of annual increases in the end-of-year backlog. Since FY 1989, consecutive annual increases slowly rose by 11,500 cases to September 30, 1992. In FY 1993, the four-year rise had been eliminated and another 85,028 applicants were removed from the carryover. The FY 1993 total of 184,162 was the smallest number of applicants awaiting eligibility determination on the last day of a fiscal year in 26 years. This would seem to reflect State agency compliance with the new requirement of the 1992 Amendments that eligibility generally be determined within 60 days of client application. VII. TOTAL AGENCY WORKLOAD (Tables 5, 10 and 11) The total agency workload of cases, made up of both applicants and clients in all stages of the rehabilitation process, increased to 1,534,254, or 1.3 percent more than the FY 1992 total of 1,514,477. This was the highest workload count since FY 1981. Total workload can be calculated in either of two ways, and each method is instructive in revealing what contributes to the quantitative changes in State agency caseloads. First, total workload is the sum of (a) all case closures during a fiscal year, regardless of the type of closure, and (b) the number of cases in various stages of the rehabilitation process on September 30, the last day of the fiscal year. Using these components, the workload increase in FY 1993 of approximately 19,600 is seen as a function of the increase in the number of cases closed in FY 1993 to 630,124, a rise of nearly 33,000 cases from FY 1992, or 5.5 percent. Most of the closures, in turn, were accounted for by applicants not accepted for services (up 13,900) and closures not rehabilitated before any services were delivered (up 9,600). A decline was noted in the end-of-year total of cases in all stages of the VR process, down about 13,000 to 904,130, or 1.4 percent. Total workload is also determined by summing (a) the number of new applications for rehabilitation services in a fiscal year and (b) the number of cases in various stages of the rehabilitation process on October 1, the first day of the same fiscal year. In examining these variables, the workload increase of about 19,600 in FY 1993 is seen to have been driven by the larger number of cases in agency caseloads on October 1, 1992, than on the same date in the previous year. These carried over cases totaled 916,791, about 22,600 more than on October 1, 1991, or 2.5 percent. New applications for services were 617,463 in FY 1993, a decrease of 2,900 cases, or 0.5 percent from FY 1992. In summation, workloads in State agencies rose slightly in FY 1993 with each of the four broadest components of total workload-- cases on hand at the beginning and at the end of the fiscal year and new applications and closures throughout the year--increasing or decreasing to a modest degree. While these broad caseload measurements for FY 1993 were similar to recent trends, smaller caseload segments veered strikingly up or down as a result of a very large shift of applicant cases into the active, or eligible, statuses. This sudden diversion of cases from one part of the caseload to another is a result of the changed eligibility requirements. For a summary of all the major caseload indicators, including those for persons with severe disabilities, discussed in this analysis, see Table 13 of Appendix C. Contact: Larry Mars, (202) 205-9404 COMPARISON OF ECONOMIC GAINS ACHIEVED BY PERSONS WITH SEVERE AND NON-SEVERE DISABILITIES REHABILITATED IN FISCAL YEAR 1992 Introduction The 1986 amendments to the Rehabilitation Act included a provision calling for "an evaluation of the status of individuals with severe handicaps ..." to be made part of the Annual Report. This section provides information on the economic gains of persons who are classified as severely disabled and persons who are classified as non-severely disabled, based on data obtained under the Case Service Report System (RSA-911). Persons who are classified as severely disabled are, in general terms, those (a) having stated types of major disabling conditions such as blindness, deafness and orthopedic impairments involving three or more limbs; or (b) having disabilities as qualified in some instances such as hearing impairments with a certain degree of decibel loss; or (c) being so impaired so that they were receiving Social Security Disability Insurance benefits or Supplemental Security Income payments at some time while undergoing rehabilitation services; or (d) having a documented loss in functioning such as the inability to perform sustained work activity for six hours or more a day and requiring multiple vocational rehabilitation services over an extended period of time. Data The data presented are those from the RSA's Case Service Report System (RSA-911), which is a prescribed set of information for cases closed in a fiscal year and is annually provided to RSA by the State VR agencies after the end of a fiscal year. The data presented here are for FY 1992. Data for FY 1993 are not yet available for analytical purposes. The FY 1992 data provided to RSA by each of the State agencies was examined in detail to identify errors, inconsistencies, or other problems identified. The results of this analysis were sent to each agency as a feedback and to resolve any problems identified. Agencies were requested to submit their corrected data within a specified time if there were problems with their data. All agencies had some problems to resolve. Of the total (81 agencies), 66 agencies resubmitted their data, resolving almost all of the problems identified. Of the remaining 15 agencies, 11 resubmitted their data without resolving many of the problems identified, while the rest did not resubmit their data at all. Although additional efforts are being made to obtain corrected data from these agencies, the available data were used for the purpose of this report, because it was impractical to try to obtain from every agency corrected data within a reasonable time. Therefore, the FY 1992 data presented here are qualified as preliminary. Comparison of Economic Gains Overall, both groups of persons, i.e., those with severe disabilities and those with non-severe disabilities, made appreciable gains in work status from application to closure; the latter made somewhat higher gains than the former, but the gain for both groups can be attributed largely to the vocational rehabilitation services provided. See Appendix H for all the Tables referred to in this section. Age (Tables 1 and 2) Age is one of the factors that influence one's economic activity, and therefore it is useful to see how the two groups (i.e., those with severe and non-severe disabilities) compare in this respect. At application, persons with severe disabilities were on the average older than those with non-severe disabilities (Mean age: 34.7 vs. 32.9; Median age: 32.1 vs. 31.4). Although the percentage of persons under 18 was nearly the same in the two groups (7.3 percent vs. 8.0 percent), the percentage of persons 65 and above was substantially higher for those with severe disabilities (4.5 percent vs. 1.6 percent). A similar pattern of difference between the two groups was observed at closure (Mean age: 36.7 vs. 34.7); Median age: 33.9 vs. 33.1). Work Status (Tables 3, 4, and 5) At application, a substantially smaller proportion of the severely disabled group was in competitive labor market or self- employed (16.6 percent vs. 24.0 percent). The proportion of nonworkers was comparatively high among the severely disabled group (75.8 percent vs. 73.3 percent). At closure, the percentage in competitive labor market or self-employed was substantially higher for both groups (79.6 percent vs. 94.7 percent), although the pattern of difference between the two groups persisted. A comparison of the work status at application with work status at closure for each group is helpful in assessing the gains in this regard; these gains can largely be attributed to the vocational rehabilitation services. Among those with severe disabilities, an overwhelming majority (93.2 percent) of those who were in competitive labor market at application remained in that status at closure, while a small proportion (1.9 percent) became self-employed, and a slightly higher proportion (2.7 percent) became homemakers. A little over two-thirds (67.3 percent) of the sheltered workshop workers at application were in competitive labor market at closure, while a little over a fourth (27.1 percent) remained in that status. Less than half (43.2 percent) of the self-employed entered the competitive labor market and 49.4 percent remained in that status at closure. A large majority of the three categories of nonworkers at application went into competitive labor market at closure (nonworker-student: 84.6 percent; nonworker-other: 77.0 percent, and nonworker-trainee: 79.6 percent). Slightly over half (51.6 percent) of the unpaid family workers at application were in competitive labor market at closure, while about a fourth (24.8 percent remained in that status, and about a seventh (15.1 percent became homemakers), about a ninth (11.3 percent) of those individuals who were homemakers at application were in competitive labor market at closure, while an overwhelming majority (85.4 percent) remained as homemakers at closure. Persons with non-severe disabilities made seemingly higher gains in work status than those with severe disabilities. Nearly all who were in competitive labor market at application either remained in the same status (96.5 percent) or became self-employed (2.0 percent) at closure. About three-fourths (75.6 percent) of those who were sheltered workshop workers at application were in competitive labor market at closure, while a small proportion (2.4 percent) became self-employed. A little over half (51.9 percent) of the self-employed at application remained in that status at closure, while close to half (46.7 percent) were in competitive labor market. The three categories of nonworkers made substantial gains in work status from application to closure, as 95 to 97 percent of them were either in competitive labor market or were self-employed at closure. Slightly over half (52.0 percent) of the unpaid family workers at application were in competitive labor market at closure, while nearly a tenth (9.3 percent) of them became self-employed. Nearly a quarter (24.0 percent) of the unpaid family workers, however, remained in that status at closure while about a seventh (14.7 percent) became homemakers. A large majority (71.0 percent) of the homemakers at application remained in that status at closure, while about a fourth (24.8 percent) were in competitive labor market. Earnings (Tables 6, 7, and 8) Another set of information available in the case service data system that can be used to assess approximately the economic gains from application to closure of persons rehabilitated consists of the earnings in the week prior to application and the earning in the week prior to closure. Mean earnings both at application and at closure were higher for those with non-severe disabilities than for those with severe disabilities (non-severe: $45.01 and $236.79; severe: $33.88 and $181.76). And for both groups, the mean earnings at closure were substantially higher than the mean earnings at application; the increase was slightly over five-fold for both groups. A more specific account of change than what these averages provide is the distribution of the differences in the weekly earnings (i.e., earnings at closure minus earnings at application). It should be noted that differentials in earnings observed are not necessarily associated with actual wage gain or loss as achieved during a period of vocational rehabilitation. Change in wage rates over time may be attributed to inflation and other factors unrelated to the provision of vocational rehabilitation services. Nevertheless, the differences observed may be viewed as a crude measure of change in earnings. Nearly six out of ten (59.1 percent) of those with severe disabilities had gains ranging from $50 - $299, while a little over six out of ten (63.3 percent) among those with non-severe group had gains in the range of $300-$499. Mean gain in earnings for those with non-severe disabilities is appreciably higher than that for those with severe disabilities ($191.70 vs. $147.79). Hours Worked (Tables 9 and 10) A larger proportion of those with severe disabilities than those with non-severe disabilities reported zero hours worked in the week prior to application (81.3 percent vs. 76.5 percent). The mean hours worked in the week prior to application was lower for those with severe disabilities than those with non-severe disabilities (5.67 vs. 7.48). In the week prior to closure, the proportion reporting zero hours worked was lower for both groups, the non- severe disabilities group at 12.5 percent and the severe disability group at 4.4 percent. This represented an increase in hours worked of 85 percent for the severely disabled group and 94 percent for the non-severely disabled group. The mean hours worked was much higher in the week prior to closure, compared to that in the week prior to application, for both groups (29.63 percent for severe group and 35.45 for the non-severe group, which was a 5.2 fold increase for the severe group and 4.7 fold increase for the non- severe group). Wage Rate (Tables 11 and 12) The mean hourly wage rate in the week prior to application was lower for the group with severe disabilities than for the group with non-severe disabilities ($1.11 vs. $1.41). The rate increased for both groups by the week prior to closure; the group with severe disabilities maintaining a lower rate ($5.24 vs. $6.38). The magnitude of gain for the non-severe group is greater than that for the severe group. Contact Person: Neal Nair, (202) 205-5514 POST-EMPLOYMENT SERVICES The report on Post-Employment Services and Annual Reviews (Form RSA-62) submitted each year by State VR agencies contains statistical information on three separate activities conducted under Title I of the Act. These activities are (a) the delivery of post-employment services to previously rehabilitated persons; (b) the conduct of ineligibility determination reviews; and (c) the conduct of reviews of placements into extended employment, especially sheltered workshops. A decade-long summary of activity in these three areas at the national level is presented below and in four tables in Appendix E. Post-employment services (Appendix E, Tables 1 and 2) Section 103(a) of the Act identifies the many types of VR services which can be provided to individuals with disabilities. Included among these services are post-employment services necessary to assist previously rehabilitated clients to maintain or regain employment. State agencies can provide these minor services, such as medical treatment and transportation assistance, without having to re-open the recipient's case. The number of rehabilitated persons receiving post-employment services (PES) has continued to increase steadily. Of those who received PES in FY 1993 (21,642), 82 percent were severely disabled. The primary goal of post-employment services-- maintaining or regaining employment--was met by 75 percent of all individuals for whom the services were completed or terminated. In FY 1993, a total of 10,712 cases were terminated of whom 8,852 were severely disabled. The utilization rate, or the number of persons getting post- employment services as a percent of the number rehabilitated in the previous fiscal year, increased in FY 1993. Individuals receiving post-employment services in FY 1993 (21,642) were 11.3 percent of all individuals rehabilitated in FY 1992 (191,854). The utilization rate was 13.3 percent for individuals with severe disabilities and 6.5 percent for those with non-severe disabilities. Looking by type of agency, the rates were 28.1 percent for agencies for the blind and 10.4 percent for the general/combined agencies. Review of ineligibility determinations (Appendix E, Table 3) State agencies are required by Section 101(a)(9)(D) of the Act to review each determination of ineligibility no later than 12 months following such determination, and report this information to the Commissioner. The review makes it possible for some individuals to be accepted for rehabilitation services after previously being declared ineligible for such services. There were 22,835 reviews of ineligibility determinations conducted during FY 1993. This was 7.4 percent fewer than the number of reviews in FY 1992. The decrease in the number of such reviews is due in part to the decrease in the number of applicants determined to be ineligible in FY 1992. Only 2.5 percent of the individuals whose reviews were completed in FY 1993 were accepted for services, while 2.4 percent were not accepted for services and 1.7 percent had re-entered the rehabilitation process, but their eligibility for services had not been determined. An overwhelming majority, 93.4 percent, of the reviews completed required no further consideration from the State agency, i.e., the review took place, but no further consideration was required for reasons such as the person moved, was not interested in services, died, or was institutionalized. Reviews of extended employment in rehabilitation facilities (including workshops) (Appendix E, Table 4) Section 101(a)(16) of the Act requires State agencies to conduct periodic reviews and reevaluations of the status of rehabilitated persons placed into extended employment in rehabilitation facilities (including sheltered workshops) to determine the interests, priorities, and needs of the individual for employment or training for competitive employment in an integrated setting in the labor market. There were 40,663 reviews of non-competitive employment placement conducted by State VR agencies in FY 1993, a 2.7 percent decrease from FY 1992. Of the 38,837 reviews/reevaluations completed in FY 1993, 5.4 percent resulted in placements into competitive or self-employment. Over four out of five individuals (83.6 percent) were maintained in non-competitive employment (i.e., in workshops). Most of the remaining individuals were not available for a review (8.0 percent) while a few (3.0 percent) had re-entered the VR process. Contact Person: Neal Nair, (202) 205-5514 CHARACTERISTICS OF REHABILITATED CLIENTS-FISCAL YEAR 1992 (Appendix D, Table 1) Introduction Section 13 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, requires the Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) to submit a report to the President and the Congress covering the rehabilitation services provided to individuals, along with their characteristics, who were closed from the vocational rehabilitation (VR) services program during the previous fiscal year. In partial fulfillment of this requirement, the characteristics of individuals closed as rehabilitated in FY 1992 are briefly discussed here (Refer to later section for discussion of the reason for closure of the not accepted and non- rehabilitated individuals, and refer to earlier section for discussion of the comparison of economic gains of individuals with severe disability and those with non-severe disability). The tabulated data are presented in Appendix D, with similar data for FY 1991 and FY 1990. The data presented are those from the RSA's Case Service Report System (RSA-911). Selected Characteristics There were a total of 191,821 rehabilitated cases in FY 1992. However, the numbers reporting different items of data are typically less than this number and also vary by item. Age at application for Vocational Rehabilitation Services Although there is no established legal upper or lower age limit for applications, approximately half (50.3 percent) of the rehabilitated individuals were between 25 and 44 years of age and over 83 percent were between the ages 18 and 54. These are typically the working ages for most people, and the fact that an overwhelming majority of the individuals with disabilities came from this broad age group is thus expected. The average age at application of the rehabilitated individuals was 34.2 years and the median age was about 32 years. Gender Males outnumber females (56 percent versus 44 percent) among the rehabilitated cases in FY 1992. Race Whites constitute 80 percent of persons rehabilitated in FY 1992, blacks 18 percent, American Indian/Alaskan Natives 0.7 percent, and Asian and Pacific Islanders 1.3 percent. Hispanic Approximately 8 percent of the rehabilitated individuals identified themselves as Hispanic, regardless of their racial characteristics. Highest grade completed The highest grade of school completed was reported in terms of number of years. Over three-quarters (76.3 percent) of individuals who were rehabilitated reported that they had completed 9 or more grades. Only 2.6 percent reported no completed grades. About 14 percent reported no specific grade or grade equivalent. The mean number of grades completed for rehabilitated individuals who reported a specific grade was 11.3 years. Marital status Nearly half (48.5 percent) of the individuals rehabilitated in FY 1992 were never married, while a little over a quarter (27.5 percent) were currently married. The remaining (24.0 percent) were widowed, divorced, or separated. Type of institution at application Nine out of ten individuals (90.5 percent) were not in any type of institution for special care at the time of application. The remaining were in a number of different types of institutions. Source of referral A little less than a quarter (23.5 percent) of the rehabilitated individuals came to the VR program on their own (self-referred), while about a 20.4 percent were referred by other individuals, including physicians. Nearly 16 percent were referred by educational institutions, 13.1 percent by health organizations, 13.4 percent by other public sources, and the remaining 13.7 percent by other sources including hospitals and sanatoriums (5.8 percent). Major disabling condition The major disabling condition is reported as the physical or mental condition, impairment, or disease most responsible for an individual's work limitation. A number of specific disabling conditions were reported by each State agency with respect to the individuals it rehabilitated in FY 1992. For the purpose of this report, they have been grouped into separate major categories. orthopedic impairments (21.0 percent), mental illness (16.3 percent), mental retardation (13.4 percent), and substance abuse (11.5 percent) were the four major categories of disabling conditions reported, followed by visual impairments (9.6 percent), hearing impairments (8.4 percent) and learning disabilities (6.7 percent). Secondary disabling condition This is a disability that is next in importance to the major disability discussed above for the work limitation. The percentage of rehabilitated individuals having a secondary disability has gradually increased each year. Severely disabled Seven out of ten (70.6 percent) individuals rehabilitated in FY 1992 were classified as severely disabled. Given the statutory requirement that individuals with severe disabilities must be given priority for VR services, the phenomenon that such a large majority of individuals who were rehabilitated were individuals with severe disabilities is to be expected. Public support At the time of application, a little over a fifth (22.1 percent) were receiving public assistance. One in ten (10.1 percent) were receiving SSDI during VR, while about one in eight (12.9 percent) were receiving SSI. Time in the VR Program The majority (87.5 percent) of rehabilitated individuals were in the VR Program for more than six months. The average time in the VR program for these rehabilitated individuals was 23.1 months. Cost of purchased services VR agencies were required to report the total cost of services they purchased from outside sources for each rehabilitated individual. This cost does not include an agency's own administrative or counselor costs, nor does it include the cost of rehabilitation services, if any, that the agency provided directly to the individual. Some of the VR agencies operate their own facilities for providing rehabilitation services. For this latter group, the cost reported may be comparatively lower. The cost of purchased services for individuals rehabilitated in FY 1993 varied widely. The cost of purchased services for a third (33.4 percent) of these individuals was between $100 and $999, for a little over a quarter (27.2 percent), the cost was between $1,000 and $2,999, and for over another quarter (28.0 percent) the cost was $3,000 and above. For approximately a seventh (15.1 percent), of these individuals the cost of purchased services was $5,000 or more. The mean cost of purchased services was $2,740, which represented an 8.8 percent increase from the mean cost for FY 1991. Types of services provided Nearly everyone (94.4 percent) received diagnosis and evaluation services and four in ten (40.1 percent) received restoration (physical or mental) services. Well over half (56.4 percent) received one or more kinds of training: personal and vocational adjustment (23.0 percent), miscellaneous (16.8 percent), business and vocational (13.8 percent), and college and university (12.9 percent). Well over a third (37.0 percent) received a job placement service, more than four out of ten (42.5 percent) received a job referral service, and over a third (35.3 percent) received transportation services. Type of facilities or agency providing services Private individuals are the single most common provider of services, having provided services for nearly half (48.5 percent) of all individuals rehabilitated in FY 1993. The next most common provider is a community rehabilitation program (33.3 percent), and is followed by private organizations and agencies (26.1 percent), academic institutions (20.0 percent), health organizations (17.4 percent), hospitals (15.9 percent), and business and vocational schools (14.3 percent). Work status and earnings At application, a little less than a fifth of the individuals who were rehabilitated in 1993 (18.1 percent) were in the competitive labor market. Nearly three-fourths (74.9 percent) were non-workers. Homemakers constituted a small fraction (4.0 percent), while sheltered workshop workers constituted an even smaller fraction (2.0 percent). The remaining individuals (1.0 percent) were either self-employed or unpaid family workers. At closure, more than eight out of ten rehabilitated individuals (81.3 percent) were in the competitive labor market. Nearly one in ten (9.5 percent) were homemakers, while about one in twenty (5.4 percent) were sheltered workshop workers. Individuals who were self-employed or working in State agency-managed business enterprises constituted only a small fraction (3.3 percent), while the remaining individuals (0.4 percent) were unpaid family workers. As for weekly earnings, well over three-fourths (79.2 percent) had no earnings at application, while nearly a seventh (13.5 percent) had earnings ranging from $1 to $199. The remaining (7.3 percent) had earnings of $200 or more. The mean earnings at application was $37.35. At closure, only less than a tenth (9.5 percent) had no weekly earnings, a little less than half (44.3 percent) had $1 to $199, and the remaining (46.4 percent) had $200 or more in earnings. The mean earnings at closure was $198.27. Thus, as should be expected, the economic status of the rehabilitated individuals, as measured by work status and weekly earnings, improved considerably from application to closure. Most, if not all, of this improvement can be attributed to the VR program. Primary source of support Another indicator of the improvement in economic status of the rehabilitated individuals is the change in their primary source of support from application to closure. At application less than a fifth (17.8 percent) had current earnings (their own earnings) as their primary source of support, while at closure nearly three- fourths (74.9 percent) had current earnings as their primary source of support. Close to half (44.6 percent) had family and friends as their primary source of support at application, while only less than a tenth (9.9 percent) had that situation at closure. Occupation at closure The type of occupation of individuals at closure was classified according to the system in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles. This classification system gives additional specification of the nature of work at closure of these individuals. About half were in the services (24.2 percent) or industrial (25.6 percent) fields. Another quarter were either holding professional, technical, or managerial occupations (14.4 percent) or clerical positions (13.6 percent). The remaining quarter were reported as homemakers or in sales, agricultural, and other occupations. REASONS FOR CLOSURE (Appendix D, Table 2) As part of the RSA-911 system, the State VR agencies were required to provide the reason for closure of each individual whose case was closed as not accepted or not rehabilitated. There were a total of 266,205 not accepted cases, and 139,044 not rehabilitated cases in FY 1992. The reason for closure of these cases are presented below. Not accepted cases Nearly three out of ten applicants (29.6 percent) were not accepted because they refused services, and about a fifth (19.6 percent) were not accepted because they failed to cooperate. A little over a sixth (17.4 percent) were not accepted because they could not be located (after application). The remaining applicants were not accepted for a variety of other reasons, including no disabling condition (4.3 percent), disability too severe (6.2 percent), and no impediment to employment (6.0 percent). Not rehabilitated cases A little over a quarter of eligible individuals (26.6 percent) were closed as not rehabilitated because they could not be located, and about the same proportion (26.2 percent) were closed for the reason that they refused services. A fifth (20.2 percent) were closed because they failed to cooperate. The remaining eligible individuals (27.0 percent) were closed for a variety of other reasons, including 7.2 percent whose disability was later determined to be too severe. Contact Person: Neal Nair, (202) 205-5514 REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Office of Program Operations Section 103(b) See also 20 U.S.C. 107 et seq. (Randolph-Sheppard Act) Vending Facilities Program Federal Funds $34,200,000 (Section 110 funds) MISSION, PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND Section 103(b)(1) of the Rehabilitation Act provides that vocational rehabilitation (VR) services, can include management and supervision and other services to improve small businesses operated by individuals with severe disabilities. The Vending Facility program, authorized by the Randolph- Sheppard Act and funded at the discretion of State VR agencies with the use of VR Services program funds for groups, provides persons who are blind with remunerative employment and self-support through the operation of vending facilities on Federal and other property. The program, enacted into law in 1936, was intended to enhance employment opportunities for trained, licensed blind persons to operate facilities. At the outset, sundry stands were placed in the lobbies of Federal office buildings and post offices. The law was amended in 1954 and again in 1974 to assure individuals who are blind a "priority" in the operation of vending facilities on Federal property, which include cafeterias, snack bars, and automatic vending machines. More than 22,000 blind persons have been employed in this program since its inception. The program has broadened considerably from Federal locations to also include State, county, municipal, and private installations. HIGHLIGHTS Facilities, Vendors and Other Personnel Reports from 51 State licensing agencies show: o In FY 1993, there were 3,389 vending facilities compared to 3,344 in FY 1992, an increase of 45 locations; in FY 1993 1,078 were located on Federal property and 2,311 on non-Federal property; o Employment was provided for 3,486 blind vendors in FY 1993, compared to 3,487 the previous year. In FY 1993, 1,121 vendors were on Federal property and 2,365 were on non-Federal property; o In Fy 1993, 377 blind persons were trained to become vendors compared to 406 the previous year, a decrease of 29 persons; 169 or 45 percent were placed as licensed operators. In addition, in FY 1993, 47 trainees were placed as employees in facilities operated by blind vendors and in allied food service programs compared to 67 similar placements in the previous year; o In FY 1993, 523 blind individuals received upward mobility training, compared to 636 in FY 1992; of the 523 receiving upward mobility training, 147, or 28 percent, were promoted to a more lucrative job in the program; o State licensing agencies surveyed 831 potential sites for new facilities and 360, or 43 percent, were accepted; o The General Services Administration had the largest number of Randolph-Sheppard facilities on its property, with 537. This was followed by the U.S. Postal Service, with 260 facilities and the U.S. Department of Defense, with 116 facilities; and o In addition to the 3,486 licensed blind operators employed in vending facilities, the vending facility program employed 419 individuals with visual impairments and 477 with other disabilities. Program Income The program gross income (including gross sales, vending machine and other income) from all facilities totaled $401.0 million, an increase of $3.5 million over FY 1992 ($397.5 million). This produced total vendor earnings of $80.9 million -- an increase of $2.2 million over FY 1992 ($78.7 million). The national average annual earnings of all vendors was $25,832 in FY 1993, an increase of $1,049 over FY 1992. Program Expenditures The total program expenditures for administering the Vending Facility program by the State licensing agencies were $66.4 million in FY 1993. The funding for those expenditures came from the following sources of support: vending machine income -- $11.4 million; levied set-aside from vendors - $14.7 million; State appropriations - $6.1 million; and Federal (Section 110 funds) -- $34.2 million. Types of Facilities This report identifies differences in data on the following specific types of facilities: snack bars and other facilities, vending machines, and cafeterias. In FY 1993, of the total of 3,389 vending facilities, 2,022, or 59.7 percent, were snack bars and other facilities, 504, or 14.9 percent, were cafeterias, and 863, or 25.5 percent, were vending machines. Snack Bars and Other Facilities There were 2,022 snack bars and other facilities in operation in FY 1993, with 662 on Federal property and 1,360 on non-Federal property. The gross sales for this type of facility were $206.5 million, or 53.0 percent, of the total program gross ($389.9 million). The average vendor earnings were $21,941. Cafeterias There were 504 cafeteria-type facilities, with 111 located on Federal property and 393 located on non-Federal property. The gross sales from cafeterias were $100.5 million, 25.8 percent of the total. The average vendor earnings for this category were $30,149. Vending Machine Facilities There were 863 vending machine facilities, 305 on Federal property and 558 on non-Federal property. The gross sales from vending machines were $82.9 million or 21.3 percent of the total gross sales. The average vendor earnings for this category were $33,722. Contact Person: George Arsnow, (202) 205-9317 REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Office of Program Operations Section 112 Client Assistance Program (CAP) Federal Funds: $9,296,000 MISSION AND PURPOSE This formula grant program provides assistance and advocacy to individuals seeking or receiving services under the Act, and information and referral services to individuals with disabilities concerning benefits and services under the Act and Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act. ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS In FY 1993, 57 States and territories were awarded CAP grants, which ranged from $45,000 to $917,595. See Appendix B, pages B-3, B-4. States must operate a CAP in order to receive Vocational Rehabilitation State Grant funds. Grants are administered by agencies designated by the Governors. Generally, these agencies must be independent of any agency that provides rehabilitation services under the Act. Proposed regulations implementing the 1992 Amendments were published in 1993. These regulations will address requirements under the 1992 and 1993 Amendments that CAPs facilitate access to services funded under the Rehabilitation Act through individual and systemic advocacy and provide information on the available services and benefits under the Rehabilitation Act and Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act. CAPs work with State vocational rehabilitation agencies and other rehabilitation programs that receive funds under the Rehabilitation Act. In FY 1993, information/referral and advisory interpretation strategies were used in 34 percent of the CAP cases, compared with 47.3 percent of the FY 1992 CAP cases. Mediation and negotiation strategies were used in 24.4 percent of the cases, up from 20 percent in FY 1992. CAP used legal advocacy or formal appeals in 1.2 percent of the time, for a total of 279 cases nationally. In FY 1992, in contrast, litigation or formal appeals were used in .2 percent of CAP cases. In addition, CAPs engaged in systemic advocacy through a variety of means, including meeting with State policy directors, commenting on proposed policies and regulations relating to individuals with disabilities, and outreach and training activities. In FY 1993, 88 percent of CAP cases dealt solely with concerns about the State vocational rehabilitation (VR) agency. Three percent of the cases dealt only with other Rehabilitation Act programs and activities, including independent living. The remaining cases involved both the VR agency and other programs or activities funded under the Rehabilitation Act. The majority of cases handled by CAPs were service-related, accounting for 31 percent of the CAP workload in FY 1993. Other CAP problem areas included client-staff conflict (13 percent), communication-related (14 percent), and eligibility (14 percent), with 4 percent "other." Twenty-one percent of the cases involved information provision. Contact Person: Parma Yarkin, (313) 930-6809 REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Office of Program Operations Section 130 American Indians with Disabilities Rehabilitation Services Projects