[nfbmi-talk] College policy edited board draft for 8-27 meeting

[joe harcz Comcast]

Yes, and once again who was on the final writing team? Does anyone know?
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Christine Boone" <Christine_Boone at comcast.net>
To: "'NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List'" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:43 PM
Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] College policy edited board draft for 8-27 meeting


> Fantastic work Elizabeth!
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
> On Behalf Of Elizabeth
> Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 12:17 PM
> To: Fred Wurtzel; geri.taeckens at isahealthfund.org; luzenskis at michigan.gov;
> alissa161 at gmail.com; cannonp at michigan.gov; dcgorton601 at comcast.net;
> mohnked at hotmail.com; wild-rose at sbcglobal.net; furtond at michigan.gov;
> grace at menzelcoaching.com; debate912 at gmail.com; mpvi at intergate.com;
> heibeckc at michigan.gov; jbrown at mpas.org; pilarskij at charter.net;
> jonesl2 at michigan.gov; kisiell at michigan.gov; Larry Posont;
> laury-johnsons at michigan.gov; lovep at michigan.gov; Lydia Schuck;
> mcnealg at michigan.gov; mcvoys at michigan.gov; silveya at michigan.gov;
> smithd11 at michigan.gov; martzvir at msu.edu; whitee2 at michigan.gov;
> wilsond9 at michigan.gov; NFB Michigan; Mary Wurtzel
> Cc: brlbumps at sbcglobal.net; John Scott; margwolfe at usa.net
> Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] College policy edited board draft for 8-27 
> meeting
>
>
> As members of the Michigan Commission for the Blind Board of Directors, 
> you
> have and obligation to adopt policies that adhear to the regulations set
> forth in the Rehabilitation Act as amended. It is with this sentiment that 
> I
> strongly urge the Commission Board to strike down the final draft policy
> that was submitted for adoption at the August 27, 2010 board meeting as it
> does not appear to adhear to these guidelines.
>
> It does not appear as though all of the references cited in the policy are
> correct. For example, in the fifth bullet under number nine in Policy C on
> Financial Aid, the policy refers to 34CFR361.53 which is a reference to 
> the
> Rehabilitation Act regulations and not the Rehabilitation Act itself.
> Moreover, this reference does not appear to speak to the issue of living
> costs associated with providing room and board as cited in the policy. The
> text of the proposed policy reads as follows:
>
> Policy C.  Financial Aid
> 9)       MCB contributions toward college-related costs may include the
> following:
> .         Any costs for room and board that exceed the normal living costs
> as defined by, (34CFR361.53).
>
> I am not sure how this regulation deals with the issue of providing room 
> and
> board when this regulation appears to deal with comparable benefits and
> interagency agreements. This regulation is posted in full at the bottom of
> this message for anyone who would like to read it.
>
> Another example of what appears to be another poorly cited reference can 
> be
> found in the main policy statement of Policy C on financial aid. The 
> policy
> reads as follows:
>
> Policy C.  Financial Aid
> According to state and federal mandates, MCB is to provide financial
> sponsorship to a student who is eligible for post- secondary
> training-education to the amount that is not covered through other 
> financial
> resources.  Other financial resources include, but are not limited to;
> grants and comparable benefits.  According to Rehabilitation Act 361.48 F.
> MCB counselors are required to ask the parents-guardians of potential MCB
> students if they are willing to participate in the financial support of
> their son-daughter's post-secondary training-
>
> However, it does not appear as though this reference is referring to a
> section in the Rehabilitation Act, as the reference cited does not appear
> within the Rehabilitation Act. It is possible that this citation is
> referring to 34 C.F. which is part of the regulations and not the act
> itself. In which case, the regulation does not mention anything about 
> asking
> the parents of students to financially participate in the cost of the
> students education. The regulation reads as follows:
>
> (f) Vocational and other training services, including personal and
> vocational adjustment training, books, tools, and other training 
> materials,
> except that no training or training services in an institution of higher
> education (universities, colleges, community or junior colleges, 
> vocational
> schools, technical institutes, or hospital schools of nursing) may be paid
> for with funds under this part unless maximum efforts have been made by 
> the
> State unit and the individual to secure grant assistance in whole or in 
> part
> from other sources to pay for that training.
>
> In addition to poorly cited references, the final draft of the policy 
> fails
> to include a no harm clause for the student when there is a dispute 
> between
> the Michigan Commission for the Blind and a college or university when
> providing services to students. In section 12 under Policy A on
> prerequisites for college and other post secondary training, the proposed
> policy states the following:
>
> The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is a written agreement between MCB 
> and
> some of the state universities and colleges which defines what MCB and 
> each
> college or university will be responsible for in terms of supplying a
> student with materials, equipment, and services.  The MCB counselor shall
> explain to a student, prior to their enrollment in a college or 
> university,
> which institutions hold a MOU with MCB and what the student can expect 
> from
> MCB and that educational institution. Students are encouraged to advocate
> for their needs by consulting with MCB counselors and the appropriate
> representative of their college or university, if there are questions
> related to the provision of these accommodations.
>
> In previous drafts of the policy, this section continued with the 
> following
> statement:
>
> . If there is a dispute over which entity will provide the necessary
> accommodations, the Michigan Commission for the Blind shall be responsible
> for providing the accommodation until the dispute is resolved.
>
> This same language can be found in both the Rehabilitation Act as well as
> the Memorandum of Understanding, and therefore should also be included in
> the college policy as well. The Rehabilitation Act states the following
> about interagency agreements.
>
> Sec. 101. State Plans
> (a) Plan Requirements
> (8) Comparable services and benefits
> (B) Interagency agreement
> (ii) Reimbursement
>
> If a public entity other than the designated State unit fails to provide 
> or
> pay for the services described in clause (i) for an eligible individual, 
> the
> designated State unit shall provide or pay for such services to the
> individual. Such designated State unit may claim reimbursement for the
> services from the public entity that failed to provide or pay for such
> services. Such public entity shall reimburse the designated State unit
> pursuant to the terms of the interagency agreement or other mechanism
> described in this paragraph according to the procedures established in 
> such
> agreement or mechanism pursuant to subparagraph (B)(ii).
>
> The Memorandum Of Understanding states the following about what happens 
> when
> there is a dispute regarding who will pay for the service:
>
> VII.  Interagency Disputes
>
> In the unlikely event a dispute arises about financial responsibility for 
> a
> service that is a part of a student's IPE, MRS and/or MCB will pay for
> service under dispute pending the resolution of the dispute. Based on the
> results of the dispute resolution process identified above, MRS and/or MCB
> will request/seek reimbursement from the IHE for any service determined by
> the disputing parties to be the responsibility of the university.
>
> Finally, there is the issue of the new Department of Energy, Labor, and
> Economic Growth Financial Needs form which is a part of the proposed 
> policy.
> The policy states the following in Policy C on  Financial Aid:
>
> 6)       MCB counselors shall utilize the DELEG/MCB Statement of Financial
> Need Resources and Authorization form as a budgeting tool to help 
> determine
> the amount of MCB financial support that is needed for the student's
> post-secondary training-educational program.
>
> 8)       The student's MCB counselor shall submit the signed copy of the
> DELEG/MCB Statement of Financial Need, Resources and Authorization form to
> the financial officer at the college or university.  The completed form
> shall be returned to the student's MCB counselor.  The student's MCB
> counselor shall share the information on the DELEG/MCB Statement of
> Financial Need, Resources and Authorization form with the student and 
> shall
> give the student a copy of this document.
>
> I believe this form would only make it more difficult for students to
> receive sponsorship from the Michigan Commission for the Blind. With the
> transition of posting financial aid information online, a counselor is 
> more
> likely to receive this information in a more timely manner by working with
> the student rather than with the financial aid office. I typically do not
> receive anything in the mail from my college about financial aid until
> classes have already started, or a week or two before classes are set to
> begin. However, this same information is available for me to view online
> immediately once all of my financial aid information has been processed.
> Last year I received an email notifying me of my financial aid status well
> before I received anything in writing through the mail. If the counselors
> could use their established relationships with students to receive 
> financial
> aid through the use of the student's online account, then students would 
> be
> able to receive their services in a more timely manner.
>
>
> In addition, one of the things I heard during the college policy meeting 
> on
> August 20, 2010 was that the  new DELEG Financial Needs form was simply a
> tool for the counselor to understand the cost of attending college 
> including
> accommodations and  disability related costs. However, it is my
> understanding that this process should have already taken place during the
> development of the student's Individualized Plan for Employment. It was 
> also
> mentioned that this form is already being used by Michigan Rehabilitation
> Services, and as such would not be a new form for the financial aid office
> to fill out and return back to the agency in a timely manner. However, 
> what
> was not mentioned at this meeting was that Michigan Rehabilitation 
> Services
> uses a means test for college students, and after reading through their
> college policy, it appears as though they use this form as a part of their
> means test. So even though the explanation of this form made it sound as
> though it would not be a part of a means test, I still have my doubts and
> concerns that it would not be used as part of a means test. As to date I
> have not seen any real dialog or discussion about the use of this form
> except for the fact that it has to be a part of the policy with no 
> questions
> asked.
>
> Additional References:
>
> 34CFR361
>
> Sec. 361.53  Comparable services and benefits.
>
>    (a) Determination of availability. The State plan must assure that 
> prior
> to providing any vocational rehabilitation services, except those services
> listed in paragraph (b) of this section, to an eligible individual, or to
> members of the individual's family, the State unit must determine whether
> comparable services and benefits, as defined in Sec. 361.5(b)(10), exist
> under any other program and whether those services and benefits are
> available to the individual unless such a determination would interrupt or
> delay--
>    (1) The progress of the individual toward achieving the employment
> outcome identified in the individualized plan for employment;
>    (2) An immediate job placement; or
>    (3) The provision of vocational rehabilitation services to any
> individual who is determined to be at extreme medical risk, based on 
> medical
> evidence provided by an appropriate qualified medical professional.
>    (b) Exempt services. The following vocational rehabilitation services
> described in Sec. 361.48(a) are exempt from a determination of the
> availability of comparable services and benefits under paragraph
> (a) of this section:
>    (1) Assessment for determining eligibility and vocational 
> rehabilitation
> needs.
>    (2) Counseling and guidance, including information and support services
> to assist an individual in exercising informed choice.
>    (3) Referral and other services to secure needed services from other
> agencies, including other components of the statewide workforce investment
> system, if those services are not available under this part.
>    (4) Job-related services, including job search and placement 
> assistance,
> job retention services, follow-up services, and follow- along services.
>    (5) Rehabilitation technology, including telecommunications, sensory,
> and other technological aids and devices.
>    (6) Post-employment services consisting of the services listed under
> paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section.
>    (c) Provision of services.
>    (1) If comparable services or benefits exist under any other program 
> and
> are available to the individual at the time needed to ensure the progress 
> of
> the individual toward achieving the employment outcome in the individual's
> IPE, the designated State unit must use those comparable services or
> benefits to meet, in whole or part, the costs of the vocational
> rehabilitation services.
>    (2) If comparable services or benefits exist under any other program,
> but are not available to the individual at the time needed to ensure the
> progress of the individual toward achieving the employment outcome in the
> individual's IPE, the designated State unit must provide vocational
> rehabilitation services until those comparable services and benefits 
> become
> available.
>    (d) Interagency coordination.
>    (1) The State plan must assure that the Governor, in consultation with
> the entity in the State responsible for the vocational rehabilitation
> program and other appropriate agencies, will ensure that an interagency
> agreement or other mechanism for interagency coordination takes effect
> between the designated State vocational rehabilitation unit and any
> appropriate public entity, including the State entity responsible for
> administering the State medicaid program, a public institution of higher
> education, and a component of the statewide workforce investment system, 
> to
> ensure the provision of vocational rehabilitation services (other than 
> those
> services listed in paragraph (b) of this section) that are included in the
> IPE, including the provision of those vocational rehabilitation services
> during the pendency of any interagency dispute in accordance with the
> provisions of paragraph (d)(3)(iii) of this section.
>    (2) The Governor may meet the requirements of paragraph (d)(1) of this
> section through--
>    (i) A State statute or regulation;
>    (ii) A signed agreement between the respective officials of the public
> entities that clearly identifies the responsibilities of each public 
> entity
> for the provision of the services; or
>    (iii) Another appropriate mechanism as determined by the designated
> State vocational rehabilitation unit.
>    (3) The interagency agreement or other mechanism for interagency
> coordination must include the following:
>    (i) Agency financial responsibility. An identification of, or
> description of a method for defining, the financial responsibility of the
> public entity for providing the vocational rehabilitation services other
> than those listed in paragraph (b) of this section and a provision stating
> the financial
>
> responsibility of the public entity for providing those services.
>    (ii) Conditions, terms, and procedures of reimbursement.
> Information specifying the conditions, terms, and procedures under which 
> the
> designated State unit must be reimbursed by the other public entities for
> providing vocational rehabilitation services based on the terms of the
> interagency agreement or other mechanism for interagency coordination.
>    (iii) Interagency disputes. Information specifying procedures for
> resolving interagency disputes under the interagency agreement or other
> mechanism for interagency coordination, including procedures under which 
> the
> designated State unit may initiate proceedings to secure reimbursement 
> from
> other public entities or otherwise implement the provisions of the 
> agreement
> or mechanism.
>    (iv) Procedures for coordination of services. Information specifying
> policies and procedures for public entities to determine and identify
> interagency coordination responsibilities of each public entity to promote
> the coordination and timely delivery of vocational rehabilitation services
> other than those listed in paragraph (b) of this section.
>    (e) Responsibilities under other law.
>    (1) If a public entity (other than the designated State unit) is
> obligated under Federal law (such as the Americans with Disabilities Act,
> section 504 of the Act, or section 188 of the Workforce Investment
> Act) or State law, or assigned responsibility under State policy or an
> interagency agreement established under this section, to provide or pay 
> for
> any services considered to be vocational rehabilitation services (e.g.,
> interpreter services under Sec. 361.48(j)), other than those services 
> listed
> in paragraph (b) of this section, the public entity must fulfill that
> obligation or responsibility through--
>    (i) The terms of the interagency agreement or other requirements of 
> this
> section;
>    (ii) Providing or paying for the service directly or by contract; or
>    (iii) Other arrangement.
>    (2) If a public entity other than the designated State unit fails to
> provide or pay for vocational rehabilitation services for an eligible
> individual as established under this section, the designated State unit 
> must
> provide or pay for those services to the individual and may claim
> reimbursement for the services from the public entity that failed to 
> provide
> or pay for those services. The public entity must reimburse the designated
> State unit pursuant to the terms of the interagency agreement or other
> mechanism described in paragraph (d) of this section in accordance with 
> the
> procedures established in the agreement or mechanism pursuant to paragraph
> (d)(3)(ii) of this section.
>
> (Authority: Sections 12(c) and 101(a)(8) of the Act; 29 U.S.C.
> 709(c) and 721(a)(8))
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbmi-talk mailing list
> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nfbmi-talk:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/christine_boone%
> 40comcast.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbmi-talk mailing list
> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nfbmi-talk:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net