[nagdu] Staff cuts at guide dog schools

[Margo and Arrow]

Hi, everyone.  I ditto what Buddy has said and just want to add some things.

The monies used by the Seeing Eye for the facilities were from bonds and I'm
sure there will be fund-raising to go along with that.  Some of you may have
heard Seeing Eye has put in a training escalator.  That was donated by a
graduate or two.  

I got my first dog from the Seeing eye in 1981.  We did not have field reps.
We received wonderful follow-up on the phone, via snail mail and via visits
from the Director of Training or an instructor.  A lot of time spent by the
field reps was in non-guide-dog mobility issues.  Certainly, the field reps
were great, wonderful, experienced people and it is very sad they were laid
off, but, like Buddy, do we really need them?  I have yet to hear of major
complaints about the reorganization of staff and its impact on services.
And, if people do have major complaints or minor ones, The Seeing Eye has
always been open to hearing those and taking them seriously.  Many
complaints and concerns are now an integral part of what we know as the
Seeing Eye.

Margo and Arrow

-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Buddy Brannan
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 10:48 AM
To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Staff cuts at guide dog schools

Hi,

Of course, cuts are everywhere, and cutbacks aren't unusual in any industry.
Bearing in mind that the schools are all privately funded by donations, belt
tightening is inevitable. 

I can't speak to GDB's situation, but here's what I can tell you about the
Seeing Eye. 

No, renovating the facilities isn't exactly tied to staff cuts. In a
nutshell, here's what we were told:

For the past several years, expenses have been increasing, while donations
have not. Thus, more and more of the endowment that has partial funded the
school has had to be used. Projecting these trends forward, it was
determined that at this rate, the endowment would be exhausted in a matter
of a few years, which would put the school in a financial precarious
position. They therefore had to find places to cut, and, unfortunately,
staffing cuts had to be made. No one likes staff cuts. No one likes it that
knowledgeable men and women have lost their jobs. But they had to reorganize
so that services could continue. This might be some controversial for an
opinion, but I kind of think that cutting field reps and moving all
follow-up services in-house might not be necessarily a bad thing. I wonder
if perhaps we might have gotten too reliant on them and have started
shouting for help before we really needed to? In other words, before using
some of the tools and techniques we were taught, and  trying to work through
problems on our own first? I'm not saying this very well, and I'm sure that
I'll get some indignant protests over this. Anyway, Seeing Eye is back to
early '90's staffing levels now.

A separate issue was that, one way or another, the facilities needed to be
upgraded to meet current building code. While they met 1960's residential
building codes, there were things that weren't up to current code, systems
that were being maintained, and so on. So they needed to update facilities,
bring everything up to code, replace systems that were being nursed along
and fixed as they broke, and so on. It was determined that it would be less
expensive to, therefore, do some renovations and add features while upgrades
were being made than it would be to go in and add those things later. This
makes a lot of sense, really. And additional fundraising campaigns will be
undertaken to offset some of those costs. Moreover, while we're talking
about a multi-million dollar upgrade (that is, bringing all systems up to
building code, replacing failing systems, and doing all the other upgrades,
like adding an escalator and what not), it's a one-time improvement cost,
with only ongoing  maintenance to deal with afterwards, probably maintenance
similar to what would have to be done regardless. Eighteen staff salaries
would be ongoing and probably come out of a different pot anyways (this
would be speculation). 

Clear as mud?
--
Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
Phone: (814) 860-3194 or 888-75-BUDDY



On Apr 17, 2013, at 10:09 AM, Deanna Lewis <DLewis at clovernook.org> wrote:

> Hi list,
> I have heard of some very big changes in a couple of guide dog schools
recently, and am a bit worried by it.
> I know that two very well respected Guide Dog schools have had large
staffing cuts recently. Both schools let go of trainers/field reps with
years of experience. Also, both schools are also renovating their
dormitories. I am wondering if there is a connection? And also I am worried
that this may become a trend with the training programs? I hope not.
> Do you know of any other schools who have done this recently?
> What do y'all think?
> I hope not to start a big debate, but I am just worried that many of the
schools are headed towards being less client driven.
> 
> Deanna and Pascal
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nagdu:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/buddy%40brannan.nam
> e


_______________________________________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nagdu:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/margo.downey%40verizon.ne
t