[nfbmi-talk] more jagged notes re college policy

Sun Jun 27 18:58:00 UTC 2010

Where does it say that the counselor is supposed to write the IPE? I thought 
the client was responsible for the contents and has the right to ask for 
assistance from MCB if they so wish.

Marcus
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
To: <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2010 4:43 PM
Subject: [nfbmi-talk] more jagged notes re college policy

> Ok I finished the afternoon session. I noted Leeman Jones continued 
> references to required performance standards and indicators relative to 
> the timeline and closure issue. And on several occasions both then and in 
> the past Gerri Taeckens asked for data to support the contentions made by 
> mostly staff, yet Leemon has never been able to produce data.
>
> Now, this is exactly the type of data that  MCB is required to submit to 
> RSA, and indeed to the Commission Board and indeed the public in the RSA 
> monitoring, state plans, and annual reviews.
>
> It is the commission folks that hasn't done its RSA homework in a timely 
> manner in these regards! And it is hiding this information from the 
> commission board and the public including NFB MI and individuals like 
> myself with its ludicrous FOIA denials, which, of course are totally 
> illegal in and of themselves.
>
> Moreover, the counselors voted on the timeline issue when they know or 
> should know that a uniform timeline (not a goal) is not something that 
> fits all. These things as Taeckens rightfully and to her credit 
> consistently pointsout are a function of the Individual Plan for 
> Employment. Note the term "Individual" here.
>
> Now each and every counselor speaking is supposed to be intiment with the 
> requirements for IPE development and related civil rights checks on 
> arbitrary and capricious administration. They were after all Certified 
> Rehabilitation Counselors and this goes into the training requirements. 
> Did each and every one of them flunk "IPE development 101"?
>
> Have not a one of them referenced RSA circulars, the Rehab Act itself, 
> and/or had continuous improvement in training on this issue?
>
> I simply wonder what in the world is going on here.
>
> My goodness consumers and other non-professionals including, by the way 
> Ms. Taeckens seem to have a grasp of what goes into the IPE and that also 
> includes setting goals and effectively timelines on an Individualized 
> basis. It also must consider going to Lydia's continued point and others, 
> the impact of multiple disabilities upon a person, sickness, and other 
> contingencies.
>
>
> Going back to the data issue...Leemon and others wish to use this issue as 
> an excuse on the policy development issue and on the other don't produce 
> the data or the systems to actually cull data like Taeckens asks for in 
> case examinations. and analysis.
>
> Other data required is again the consumer satisfaction surveys yet ours 
> has been so late in coming that findings would be virtually 
> meaningless...But again MCB was given these "homework" assignments 
> actually with continuiing and annual updates...And many of these 
> assignments were missed.
>
> Finally, on this thrust I am very proud of Fred in his standing up on the 
> issue. and I'm very proud of Elizabeth for effectively saying there are 
> obligations and timelines upon MCB staff including counselors.
>
> And I for one demand they meet their responsabilities.
>
> They are a dysfunctional family there and I'm talking about the counselors 
> and supervisors represented in my opinion. They wish to hold the consumer 
> constantly responsable for standards that the staff violates routinely. In 
> other words these so-called professionals do not practice what they preach 
> on the timeliness issue over and over again.
>
> And they wish to give anecdotal claims without supplying supporting data 
> to back allegations up. Good for Ms. Taeckens, Elizabeth and others for 
> holding them accountable. Good for Larry too in his comments at the end.
>
> I believe in high expectations. I expect accountability by highly paid and 
> professionally trained staff. Oh yes by the way many of these counselors 
> and supervisors did have much, if not all of their education funded by 
> MCB, or RSA through either being consumers themselves once upon a time, or 
> through RSA grants, or through RSA/MCB funding for continuous improvement 
> and certification.
>
> I sure know that Debbie Wilson had her switch from MSW to CRC funded 
> through MCB.
>
> Man, what a bunch of hypocrities were represented with that block!
>
> Now, before I end this diatribe I must say there are some excellent 
> counselors in MCB. I noticed not one of them were represented at this 
> meeting. And I assume that was because they are already competent in IPE 
> development and are or were working in the field doing their jobs, of 
> which, again they are highly paid for. No those are not the sherkers, or 
> the ones that blame consumers for all their earthly woes. Those are the 
> good guys and gals that Larry was right to point out that we in NFB and 
> other orgs are trying to protect and assist.
>
> Bottom line though is no matter what they do or finally right the law says 
> what the law says.
>
> And a consensus doesn't abrogate legal requirements that are already in 
> the law.
>
> But, sadly Cannon and his gang of disfunctionals seem to contiue to 
> violate all sorts of laws over and over again.
>
> Anyway I do not think frm this meeting that Ms. Taeckens was wrong, or 
> Jeanette Brown (as far as she went) or of course, those members of the NFB 
> led by Fred and Elizabeth  on this issue.
>
> And I think we should all ask Leemon for the data to affirm the 
> conjecture,.
>
> (Of course he doesn't have it as he has clearly stated over and over 
> again...Which is my point.)
>
> I'm reminded here of an old saying from former Senator Daniel Patrick 
> Monihan. He said, "People are all entitle to their opinions. But no one is 
> entitled to his own facts."
>
> You see the twenty twenty process has been abused here for it puts 
> opinions over facts; so-called concensus over fundamental laws including 
> the Rehab Act itself.
>
> I say to those counselors who don't like the Rehab Act or its clear cut 
> requirments then maybe, just maybe they should find another line of 
> employment. Perhaps they should consult with each other and draw up an 
> IPE!
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joe!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/marcus.simmons%40interbizusa.com 