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

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

[ Facilitators ]
[ Conference Steering Committee ]
[ Issues and Recommendations (includes response form) ]

STEERING COMMITTEE

Chris Clay CA SILC	Ann Meadows WV SILC
Pat Danielson ND SILC	Pat Puckett GA SILC
Kimball Gray MD SILC	Patrick Reinhart AK SILC
Shannon Jones KA SILC	Gil Vickery NH SILC
Maurice Lamothe LA SILC	Deb Wisniewski WI SILC

RESPONSE FORM    

The members of our SILC have reviewed the four sets of issues and recommendations which were developed by participants at the SILC Congress '99, and we have agreed to the following action:

_______ We endorse the issues and recommendations of SILC CONGRESS II

______ We do not endorse the issues and recommendations of the SILC CONGRESS II for the following reason(s):

 
The members of our SILC have reviewed the recommendations regarding the 704 Report and federal funding which were developed by participants at the SILC Congress II, and we have agreed to the following action:

______ We endorse the recommendations regarding the 704 Report and federal funding.

Signed on behalf of the SILC of: __________________________________________
                                                                                    (State) __________________________________________________________________
(SILC Chair)                                                                 (Date)

ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '99

The SILC's Relationship with CILs Issue Statement:    

Each SILC should include in their state plan how monitoring will be implemented. We agreed that the role of monitoring has to do with the state plan. With regard to relationships between the SILC and the CILs, monitoring has been and is being used in five different ways: site reviews, operation of the CIL, technical assistance, grants, and review of centers 704 reports. Recommendations on each approach are provided below.

Recommendations:    

I. Site Reviews    

The SILCs agree that monitoring centers is not an appropriate role for SILC members. Instead, their role should be one of promoting centers and providing assistance to improve the quality of programs and services. With regard to site reviews, teams may include "peer reviewers" from other states and SILC members from the home state, as long as the SILC members serve on the team as "observers", are not from the Designated State Unit (DSU), and are free of biases and conflicts of interest.    

II. Operations    

The SILC's primary responsibility with regard to the operations of centers is to monitor whether centers are meeting/following the contracts as specified in the State Plan. The SILC is not responsible for the day-to-day operations of the CIL.    

Likewise, in evaluating the state's ability to meet the requirements of the State Plan, the SILC must monitor the DSU's compliance with the plan.    

III. Technical Assistance    

CILs can benefit from technical assistance. As we improve the collaborative relationships between the SILC and CILs, there will be a better sharing of the technical assistance needs. In some cases, the SILC may be able to provide the assistance, but more likely they will provide opportunities for CILs to acquire technical assistance.    

IV. Grants    

From time to time, the SILC will directly award grants to CILs for activities included in the state plan. The CILs should never be required to accept grants. The SILC can and should monitor the implementation of the grant objectives.     If the grant is for general operations, refer to II.    

V. SILC Review CILs' 704 Reports    

The SILC should review the annual 704 reports completed by centers for the following three purposes:

On SILC-CIL Relationships    

1. SILCs should develop partnerships with CILs.
2. SILCs should assist CIL association and CILs to attend meetings (help to underwrite expenses).
3. SILCs are team players with centers, given how much they have in common, operationally and philosophically.    

Handling Complaints from CIL Consumers:    

1. Refer to CIL grievance procedure
2. Refer to CIL board
3. Refer to CAP/P&A, RSA
4. Provide training and technical assistance.  

ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '99 The SILC's Relationship with State AgenciesIssue Statement:     The roles of the Statewide Independent Living Council (SILC) and the Designated State Unit (DSU) are not clearly defined, nationally consistent, agreed upon and enforced.

Recommendations:    

I. SILCs will have co-sign-off authority of Title I state plan in consultation with the DSU and the State Rehabilitation Advisory Council (SRAC).    

II. SILCs will have sole-sign-off authority on the State Plan for Independent Living (SPIL).    

III. Establish an independent mechanism to resolve disputes between the SILCs and DSUs with regard to divisions of authority and the full implementation of the law (autonomy, sign-off authority, state plan development, monitoring and evaluation, fiscal operational funds, location of SILC, etc.)    

IV. SILCs will work with DSUs and State Rehabilitation Councils to further develop joint proposals for changing the Rehab Act prior to the next reauthorization.    

V. Other recommendations are: ! Peer resources will be identified using other SILCs on the issue of autonomy.

ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '99 SILCs as Systems AdvocatesIssue Statement:     SILCs will develop and implement an advocacy agenda that promotes the IL philosophy and results in meaningful and measurable systems change.

Recommendations:  

I. SILCs will address issues of advocacy resulting in systems change through their state plan.

    A. Get commitment from each state to address systems advocacy issues in their state plan
    B. Change regulations to include an advocacy attachment
    C. Work with ILRU to develop training on preparing an advocacy plan    

II. SILCs shall develop coalitions which may include but not be limited to:   

III. SILCs shall educate members, people with disabilities, advocates, and other decision-makers.

    A. Work with resource to establish advocacy curriculum
    B. Assure that all SILC plans shall contain an advocacy component
    C. Support other SILCs in their advocacy efforts
    D. Require and support on-going training for SILC members    

IV. SILCs shall exhibit, develop, sponsor, provide, and support leadership development activities through the State Plan.

V. SILC's highest priority shall be to direct and develop the resources necessary to implement its advocacy agenda.

    A. Identify and address specific line items in SILC budget which support this advocacy agenda
    B. Identify and develop other resources which support its advocacy agenda.
 

ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '99 SILC Autonomy

Issue Statement:     Although the statute is clear that the SILCs are to operate as independent entities, there is ample evidence that significant numbers of SILCs are struggling with problems related to inappropriate involvement of, if not outright interference by, other organizations involved in the disability-service program. This group addressed issues of autonomy and developed strategies for fostering the kind of autonomy that increases the likelihood that SILCs will be able to act effectively to promote the highest quality of life for people with disabilities in their respective states.    

Non-profit [501(c)(3)] status, large budgets, and affiliation with other state agencies are not, in and of themselves, determinants of autonomy. An attachment in the State Plan is an appropriate place for each state to address autonomy issues.

Recommendations:     I. Develop and use a self-assessment "Autonomy Tool" which includes a method for its use and a suggested complaint process to follow in cases when autonomy is blocked by DSU or others.    

Characteristics of that tool include:  

• Adherence to all "Act" requirements.

• Does the SILC develop, adopt, and control its own budget?

• Does the SILC administer its funds? If not, who does, and what is the arrangement?

• Does the SILC develop, implement, and monitor its SPIL?

• Does the SILC review and monitor its own progress?

• Does the SILC manage its own personnel, i.e., develop job descriptions, hire, supervise, fire, and pay its personnel?

• Does the SILC control its membership by recommending membership?

• Is the SILC accountable for its decisions and actions?

• Does the SILC have freedom to advocate about issues of its own choice?

• Has the SILC developed statutory authority, procedures, and other systematic methods for gaining, maintaining, and protecting its autonomy.

This tool needs to be refined by the group and tested to ensure that the questions provide the SILCs with the answers they need to determine their level of autonomy.

• The use of the "tool" should be preceded by a SILC statement of principal with SILC mission and role.

• Testing of the tool should be reflective of the diversity of the types of SILCs throughout the nation.

• Once tested, the tool should be shared with the statewide rehabilitation councils to assist them in becoming autonomous.

• RSA should create a committee from among the SILCs to develop standards and indicators for SILCs.

---

 

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