CANAR

ILRU / NCIL / APRIL: National Training & Technical Assistance Project
Expanding the Power of the Independent Living Movement

Consortia of Administrators for Native American Rehabilitation (CANAR) proposals for Changes needed in the Rehabilitation Act

1. We recommend a steady expansion of the American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services (AIVRS) Program by increasing .1 percent each year the amount allotted to Section 110(c)(2)(A) and (B) of the amount appropriated under Section 100(b)(1) of the Act.

Basis: There are over 550 Federal and State Reservations in the country. There are currently 67 VR grants serving approximately 90 reservations. In FY 2000 AIVR programs successfully rehabilitated 963 American Indians with disabilities and served 4178 American Indian with disabilities were under an IPE. In FY 2001, fourteen tribes or consortia of tribes applied. Of the fourteen who applied, only five were funded due to insufficient funds. This means that nine tribal areas will not receive VR services this FY. The Secretary is currently authorized to reserve for allotment to Section 121, not less than 1 percent and not more than 1.5 of appropriations to section 100(b)(1) for each fiscal year 2000 to 2003. The Secretary has not raised the allotment beyond the minimum of 1 percent since 1999. In fiscal year 2000, 13 applications were unable to be funded because the allotted funds were insufficient. Funds under Section 21 continue to be awarded to capacity building grants to assist the unserved and underserved to fully participate in programs under the Act. They help generate the interest and the quality of applications but the lack of funds available discourages applicants. We encourage the Secretary to reserve 1.1 percent of the Section 100(b)(1) appropriation for fiscal year 2002, 1.2 percent for year 2003, 1.3 percent for 2004, with an additional .1 percent per year until 2 percent has been achieved.

2. If allotments are increased as in recommendation #1, we recommend that 2 percent of the allotment to section 121 be "set-aside" to supplement national training, technical assistance and to support monitoring of the program.

Basis: The AIVRS Program was a Navajo only program from 1978 to 1986 when other Tribal Governments on Federal or State Reservations became eligible applicants. The program is new and continues to improve through substantial training and technical assistance. Tribal vocational rehabilitation has greatly benefited from the variety of training programs funded for our State VR agency partners. However, we continue to need supplemental training designed especially for our culturally appropriate AIVRS programs. As with Centers for Independent Living in section 721(b), we encourage a portion of our grant funding be dedicated to support training and technical assistance. (Example $520,000 of the projected $26,000,000 for FFY 2002)

3. If allotments are increased as in recommendation #1, we recommend that up to 25 percent of the "2 percent set-aside" in recommendation #2 be used to support RSA on-site monitoring and TA.

Basis: As new AIVRS programs have been established, many have been greatly assisted through technical assistance provided by their State VR partners. Section 121 programs have learned vocational rehabilitation by adopting many of State VR systems and processes. As the programs have matured, they are finding that some of the state practices do not fit tribal communities. Section 121 programs at times are somewhat confused about which processes are Federally required and which are State initiated. Tribal VR projects are committed to run quality programs and need assistance from RSA through on-site monitoring and technical assistance. We have found the Region X on-site monitoring was very beneficial.

We recommend requiring RSA to conduct on-site monitoring of at least 15 percent of agencies each year. (Example up to $130,000 of the above noted $520,000; the balance could be granted to CANAR to broker national training and TA)

4. We recommend that AIVRS Projects once funded continue to be funded based on decisions from monitoring and technical assistance rather than competing for continuance every five years. This strategy is similar to funding the Centers for Independent Living in section 722(e)(1) in the Act.

Basis: The AIVRS Projects provide comprehensive VR services comparable to the State VR agencies. We apply eligibility criteria and deliver services based on Individualized Plans for Employment as prescribed in Section 102 of the Act. Most section 121 consumers pursue employment outcomes that require multi year plans. The caseloads need to be protected by continuing the projects that serve them. Each year one or two existing projects loose competition through peer review. Our RSA mentors have told us that the projects that have lost competition are substantially performing according to the provisions of law and regulations. We recommend the Act adopt the protection for continued funding enjoyed by the Centers for Independent Living. Specifically we recommend continued funding each performing agency that is funded on September 30, 2003 thus eliminating the 60-month project period.

5. We recommend that each AIVRS project receive at least a cost-of-living increase as per the CPI each year similar to the appropriation to Titles I and VII. This precedent is established in section 100(b)(1) for the State VR program and COLA for Centers for Independent Living according to section 722(e)(2).

Basis: The cost of providing VR services increases with inflation each year in addition to the need to properly reimburse staff for their services. The AIVRS projects are investing in staff development and need to protect their investment by rewarding staff that increase their education and skill. We recommend increased funding to each Tribal VR Agency by the CPI of the prior year. (Example a 3 percent COLA for a $300,000 project is $10,500)

6. We understand and support the need for performance standards that can be used to measure the progress of each agency. We recommend that RSA, working with CANAR, adopt a set of standards and indicators by which AIVRS projects can be measured.

Basis: We are currently reporting in accordance with the GPRA data elements. The State VR agencies funded under Title I and the Projects with Industry funded under Title VI now have standards and indicators.

We understand that RSA has let a contract to begin working on a reporting format for the AIVRS program and we would suggest that RSA coordinate with CANAR before any S&I are adopted. Based on our current development as strong VR agencies the following items appear to represent our current performance.

After the first 3 years each project should produce one successful outcome for each $25,000.00 Federal funds spent. (Example 14 outcomes for $350,000.00)

Write one IPE for each $11,667.00 Federal funds spent. (Example 30 IPEs for $350,000.00 spent)

7. We recommend that Section 121 of the Act be amended to allow projects to purchase buildings for confidential and accessible office space at a reasonable matching ratio.

Basis: Many of our communities have insufficient office space available to house a VR program that requires confidential and accessible office space. Too many of our projects have "cubical offices" with 6-foot visual barriers that din not adequately address the consumer need for confidentiality. Often it is not possible to locate better counseling facilities, as they're none available. Manufactured buildings are generally available on the market but often the Tribes have insufficient funds to purchase the buildings. For programs that have been able to secure these, seem to work very well for them.

8. We recommend amending the Act to provide a funding priority under Title VII for independent living services in Tribal Communities.

Basis: The concepts of "disability" and "vocational rehabilitation" are new to many of our Indian communities. As we have identified the needs of our people with disabilities, we have recognized a great need for independent living services in tribal communities. Many of our communities do not have the opportunity to access Independent Living services. We recommend priority funding for centers of independent living on or near American Indian Reservations.

9. We recommend an amendment to section 110(b)(2) of the Act that would enable Tribal VR programs to participate in the reallocation of section 110 allotments that cannot be used by the State VR agency (ies) in their respective state.

Basis: States receive allotments under section 110 of the Act. When there are two separate agency state agencies, if one State VR agency cannot use all its allotment, the other State VR agency can receive the excess if it can spend the necessary non-Federal funds to meet the required match. When the state VR program(s) are not able to utilize all of the allotted federal funds and must to return them to a national pool for reallotment, we request that the Tribal 121 programs be allowed to receive funds which they need and can match.

Further, as VR allotments are based in part on state populations that include American Indians, we recommend that Tribal VR programs in those states have access to funds before they are returned to the national reallotment pool. Providing tribal vr programs can demonstrate need and provide the required match.

10. Amend section 121 of the Act to add language similar to section 101(a)(2)(B) that requires a "designated Tribal VR unit" with organizational levels and sole authorities like those required for the States.

Basis: We have observed the importance of the "DSU concept" that protects the integrity of the State VR agencies and the resources for the people they serve. Tribal VR programs have similar needs. The 34 CFR 361 regulations, section 361.13(c) also include sole authority to establish policies. Generally Tribal Governments understand these issues when they are explained in terms of protecting resources and maintaining confidentiality for the consumers. However, it is much easier to achieve this when law and regulation make it clear.

11. In the 1998 amendments to the Act, Tribal VR made substantial gains. We now recommend that the language of the Act be strengthened and that RSA require states to comply with the provisions of the Act regarding American Indians. The following are examples that need attention:

a. For a State to receive funds under Title I of the Act, section 105 of the Act requires "in those States in which one or more projects are carried out under Section 121, at least one representative of the directors of the project(s) will be a member(s) of the State Rehabilitation Council(s)". State VR agencies generally want 121 directors on the SRCs but too often the process of being appointed by the Governor's takes years. The preamble of the new 361 regulations suggests limitations to this provision of the Act by stating that where a section 121 project serves people in more than one State, they only need to be members of the SRC in the State of their headquarters. We believe this preamble comment misses the intent of section 105 of the Act. Currently 3 states do not have 121 directors on their SRC.

b. For a State to receive funds under Title VII of the Act, Section 705 of the Act requires at least one representative of the AIVRS directors to be a member of the Statewide Independent Living Councils. Generally the council members want us on but too often the process of being appointed by the Governor's takes years. Presently, 3 states still do not have section 121 directors on their SILC.

c. Section 101(a)(11)(F) requires the State VR agencies to assure in their State Plans that they have entered into a formal cooperative agreement with each grant recipient in the State that receives funds under Part C (the American Indians VR Services Projects). Our Section 121 grantees report 60 of the 67 Tribal VR programs have or are in the process of negotiating cooperative agreements with their State partners.

[About the IL NET] [IL Coach] [Regional Coordinators] [ILRU Directory of CILs/SILCs] [IL Information You Can Use] [News You Can Use] [SILC Information] [Training] [Web casts] [Publications] [IL Video Lending Library] [ADA] [704 Searchable Database] [704 Data Compiled] [Join our mail lists] [Justin Dart]

The mission of the IL NET is to provide training and technical assistance on a variety of issues central to independent living today--understanding the Rehab Act, what the statewide independent living council is and how it can operate most effectively, management issues for centers for independent living, systems advocacy, computer networking, and others. Training activities are conducted conference-style, via long-distance communication, webcasts, through widely disseminated print and audio materials, and through the promotion of a strong national network of centers and individuals in the independent living field.

Substantial support for development of this publication was provided by the Rehabilitation Services Administration, U.S. Department of Education. The content is the responsibility of ILRU and no official endorsement of the Department of Education should be inferred.

ILRU is a program of TIRR (The Institute for Rehabilitation and Research), a nationally recognized medical rehabilitation facility for persons with disabilities.

This site is hosted as a courtesy of Baylor College of Medicine
Privacy Notices

[About the IL NET] [IL Coach] [Regional Coordinators] [ILRU Directory of CILs/SILCs] [IL Information You Asked For ]
[SILC Information] [Webcast] [Publications] [IL Video Lending Library] [ADA] [Contacting IL NET] [Join our mail lists]

Last Modified: 03-23-05

	\| Home \| Projects \| Publications \| Training \| What's New \|



	ILRU / NCIL / APRIL: National Training & Technical Assistance Project Expanding the Power of the Independent Living Movement
Consortia of Administrators for Native American Rehabilitation (CANAR) proposals for Changes needed in the Rehabilitation Act 1. We recommend a steady expansion of the American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services (AIVRS) Program by increasing .1 percent each year the amount allotted to Section 110(c)(2)(A) and (B) of the amount appropriated under Section 100(b)(1) of the Act. Basis: There are over 550 Federal and State Reservations in the country. There are currently 67 VR grants serving approximately 90 reservations. In FY 2000 AIVR programs successfully rehabilitated 963 American Indians with disabilities and served 4178 American Indian with disabilities were under an IPE. In FY 2001, fourteen tribes or consortia of tribes applied. Of the fourteen who applied, only five were funded due to insufficient funds. This means that nine tribal areas will not receive VR services this FY. The Secretary is currently authorized to reserve for allotment to Section 121, not less than 1 percent and not more than 1.5 of appropriations to section 100(b)(1) for each fiscal year 2000 to 2003. The Secretary has not raised the allotment beyond the minimum of 1 percent since 1999. In fiscal year 2000, 13 applications were unable to be funded because the allotted funds were insufficient. Funds under Section 21 continue to be awarded to capacity building grants to assist the unserved and underserved to fully participate in programs under the Act. They help generate the interest and the quality of applications but the lack of funds available discourages applicants. We encourage the Secretary to reserve 1.1 percent of the Section 100(b)(1) appropriation for fiscal year 2002, 1.2 percent for year 2003, 1.3 percent for 2004, with an additional .1 percent per year until 2 percent has been achieved. 2. If allotments are increased as in recommendation #1, we recommend that 2 percent of the allotment to section 121 be "set-aside" to supplement national training, technical assistance and to support monitoring of the program. Basis: The AIVRS Program was a Navajo only program from 1978 to 1986 when other Tribal Governments on Federal or State Reservations became eligible applicants. The program is new and continues to improve through substantial training and technical assistance. Tribal vocational rehabilitation has greatly benefited from the variety of training programs funded for our State VR agency partners. However, we continue to need supplemental training designed especially for our culturally appropriate AIVRS programs. As with Centers for Independent Living in section 721(b), we encourage a portion of our grant funding be dedicated to support training and technical assistance. (Example $520,000 of the projected $26,000,000 for FFY 2002) 3. If allotments are increased as in recommendation #1, we recommend that up to 25 percent of the "2 percent set-aside" in recommendation #2 be used to support RSA on-site monitoring and TA. Basis: As new AIVRS programs have been established, many have been greatly assisted through technical assistance provided by their State VR partners. Section 121 programs have learned vocational rehabilitation by adopting many of State VR systems and processes. As the programs have matured, they are finding that some of the state practices do not fit tribal communities. Section 121 programs at times are somewhat confused about which processes are Federally required and which are State initiated. Tribal VR projects are committed to run quality programs and need assistance from RSA through on-site monitoring and technical assistance. We have found the Region X on-site monitoring was very beneficial. We recommend requiring RSA to conduct on-site monitoring of at least 15 percent of agencies each year. (Example up to $130,000 of the above noted $520,000; the balance could be granted to CANAR to broker national training and TA) 4. We recommend that AIVRS Projects once funded continue to be funded based on decisions from monitoring and technical assistance rather than competing for continuance every five years. This strategy is similar to funding the Centers for Independent Living in section 722(e)(1) in the Act. Basis: The AIVRS Projects provide comprehensive VR services comparable to the State VR agencies. We apply eligibility criteria and deliver services based on Individualized Plans for Employment as prescribed in Section 102 of the Act. Most section 121 consumers pursue employment outcomes that require multi year plans. The caseloads need to be protected by continuing the projects that serve them. Each year one or two existing projects loose competition through peer review. Our RSA mentors have told us that the projects that have lost competition are substantially performing according to the provisions of law and regulations. We recommend the Act adopt the protection for continued funding enjoyed by the Centers for Independent Living. Specifically we recommend continued funding each performing agency that is funded on September 30, 2003 thus eliminating the 60-month project period. 5. We recommend that each AIVRS project receive at least a cost-of-living increase as per the CPI each year similar to the appropriation to Titles I and VII. This precedent is established in section 100(b)(1) for the State VR program and COLA for Centers for Independent Living according to section 722(e)(2). Basis: The cost of providing VR services increases with inflation each year in addition to the need to properly reimburse staff for their services. The AIVRS projects are investing in staff development and need to protect their investment by rewarding staff that increase their education and skill. We recommend increased funding to each Tribal VR Agency by the CPI of the prior year. (Example a 3 percent COLA for a $300,000 project is $10,500) 6. We understand and support the need for performance standards that can be used to measure the progress of each agency. We recommend that RSA, working with CANAR, adopt a set of standards and indicators by which AIVRS projects can be measured. Basis: We are currently reporting in accordance with the GPRA data elements. The State VR agencies funded under Title I and the Projects with Industry funded under Title VI now have standards and indicators. We understand that RSA has let a contract to begin working on a reporting format for the AIVRS program and we would suggest that RSA coordinate with CANAR before any S&I are adopted. Based on our current development as strong VR agencies the following items appear to represent our current performance. After the first 3 years each project should produce one successful outcome for each $25,000.00 Federal funds spent. (Example 14 outcomes for $350,000.00) Write one IPE for each $11,667.00 Federal funds spent. (Example 30 IPEs for $350,000.00 spent) 7. We recommend that Section 121 of the Act be amended to allow projects to purchase buildings for confidential and accessible office space at a reasonable matching ratio. Basis: Many of our communities have insufficient office space available to house a VR program that requires confidential and accessible office space. Too many of our projects have "cubical offices" with 6-foot visual barriers that din not adequately address the consumer need for confidentiality. Often it is not possible to locate better counseling facilities, as they're none available. Manufactured buildings are generally available on the market but often the Tribes have insufficient funds to purchase the buildings. For programs that have been able to secure these, seem to work very well for them. 8. We recommend amending the Act to provide a funding priority under Title VII for independent living services in Tribal Communities. Basis: The concepts of "disability" and "vocational rehabilitation" are new to many of our Indian communities. As we have identified the needs of our people with disabilities, we have recognized a great need for independent living services in tribal communities. Many of our communities do not have the opportunity to access Independent Living services. We recommend priority funding for centers of independent living on or near American Indian Reservations. 9. We recommend an amendment to section 110(b)(2) of the Act that would enable Tribal VR programs to participate in the reallocation of section 110 allotments that cannot be used by the State VR agency (ies) in their respective state. Basis: States receive allotments under section 110 of the Act. When there are two separate agency state agencies, if one State VR agency cannot use all its allotment, the other State VR agency can receive the excess if it can spend the necessary non-Federal funds to meet the required match. When the state VR program(s) are not able to utilize all of the allotted federal funds and must to return them to a national pool for reallotment, we request that the Tribal 121 programs be allowed to receive funds which they need and can match. Further, as VR allotments are based in part on state populations that include American Indians, we recommend that Tribal VR programs in those states have access to funds before they are returned to the national reallotment pool. Providing tribal vr programs can demonstrate need and provide the required match. 10. Amend section 121 of the Act to add language similar to section 101(a)(2)(B) that requires a "designated Tribal VR unit" with organizational levels and sole authorities like those required for the States. Basis: We have observed the importance of the "DSU concept" that protects the integrity of the State VR agencies and the resources for the people they serve. Tribal VR programs have similar needs. The 34 CFR 361 regulations, section 361.13(c) also include sole authority to establish policies. Generally Tribal Governments understand these issues when they are explained in terms of protecting resources and maintaining confidentiality for the consumers. However, it is much easier to achieve this when law and regulation make it clear. 11. In the 1998 amendments to the Act, Tribal VR made substantial gains. We now recommend that the language of the Act be strengthened and that RSA require states to comply with the provisions of the Act regarding American Indians. The following are examples that need attention: a. For a State to receive funds under Title I of the Act, section 105 of the Act requires "in those States in which one or more projects are carried out under Section 121, at least one representative of the directors of the project(s) will be a member(s) of the State Rehabilitation Council(s)". State VR agencies generally want 121 directors on the SRCs but too often the process of being appointed by the Governor's takes years. The preamble of the new 361 regulations suggests limitations to this provision of the Act by stating that where a section 121 project serves people in more than one State, they only need to be members of the SRC in the State of their headquarters. We believe this preamble comment misses the intent of section 105 of the Act. Currently 3 states do not have 121 directors on their SRC. b. For a State to receive funds under Title VII of the Act, Section 705 of the Act requires at least one representative of the AIVRS directors to be a member of the Statewide Independent Living Councils. Generally the council members want us on but too often the process of being appointed by the Governor's takes years. Presently, 3 states still do not have section 121 directors on their SILC. c. Section 101(a)(11)(F) requires the State VR agencies to assure in their State Plans that they have entered into a formal cooperative agreement with each grant recipient in the State that receives funds under Part C (the American Indians VR Services Projects). Our Section 121 grantees report 60 of the 67 Tribal VR programs have or are in the process of negotiating cooperative agreements with their State partners. [About the IL NET] [IL Coach] [Regional Coordinators] [ILRU Directory of CILs/SILCs] [IL Information You Can Use] [News You Can Use] [SILC Information] [Training] [Web casts] [Publications] [IL Video Lending Library] [ADA] [704 Searchable Database] [704 Data Compiled] [Join our mail lists] [Justin Dart]
The mission of the IL NET is to provide training and technical assistance on a variety of issues central to independent living today--understanding the Rehab Act, what the statewide independent living council is and how it can operate most effectively, management issues for centers for independent living, systems advocacy, computer networking, and others. Training activities are conducted conference-style, via long-distance communication, webcasts, through widely disseminated print and audio materials, and through the promotion of a strong national network of centers and individuals in the independent living field. Substantial support for development of this publication was provided by the Rehabilitation Services Administration, U.S. Department of Education. The content is the responsibility of ILRU and no official endorsement of the Department of Education should be inferred.
	ILRU is a program of TIRR (The Institute for Rehabilitation and Research), a nationally recognized medical rehabilitation facility for persons with disabilities.	This site is hosted as a courtesy of Baylor College of Medicine Privacy Notices
[About the IL NET] [IL Coach] [Regional Coordinators] [ILRU Directory of CILs/SILCs] [IL Information You Asked For ] [SILC Information] [Webcast] [Publications] [IL Video Lending Library] [ADA] [Contacting IL NET] [Join our mail lists] \| Home \| Projects \| Publications \| Training \| What's New \| ©2005 ILRU Program, All rights reserved Contact Us: IL NET or ILRU 713.520.0232 (V/TTY) 713.520.5785 (Fax) Last Modified: 03-23-05

ILRU / NCIL / APRIL: National Training & Technical Assistance Project Expanding the Power of the Independent Living Movement

Consortia of Administrators for Native American Rehabilitation (CANAR) proposals for Changes needed in the Rehabilitation Act

ILRU / NCIL / APRIL: National Training & Technical Assistance Project
Expanding the Power of the Independent Living Movement