[Ohio-talk] FW: Clarification Regarding our Meeting

Mon Oct 24 15:01:22 UTC 2011

So when people are being denied services and are not aware of the action
they can take shouldn't we tell them that they should appeal the action
that rehab is taking so there will be a record of this problem? I am
still concerned about the councilors that are denying people by not
following the process. Richard	 

-----Original Message-----
From: ohio-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:ohio-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
On Behalf Of J.W. Smith
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 2:53 PM
To: 'NFB of Ohio Announcement and Discussion List'; Capital Chapter
(Columbus,Ohio) Mailing List; Anne Marble; Annette Anderson; Barabara
Fohl; Barbara Pierce; Becky Booth; Beth Debus; Carol Akers; Colleen
Roth; Crystal McClain; Deanna Lewis; Debra Baker; Dr. JW Smith; Eric
Duffy; Paul Dressell; Richard Payne; Shelbi Hindel; Sheri Albers; Sherry
Ruth; Steve Vincke; Wanda Sloan; William Turner
Subject: [Ohio-talk] FW: Clarification Regarding our Meeting

Colleagues, plese read the very important message below and spread the
word.

It is one result of a productive meeting that I had with BSVI Director
Dan
Connors and Executive Director Kevin Miller this past Wednesday October
19th
in my office in Athens.

Jw

Dr. J. Webster Smith

President, National Federation of the Blind of Ohio

PO Box 458 Athens, OH 45701

740-592-6326

"Changing what it means to be blind"

For more information go to nfbohio.org

From: Connors, Daniel [mailto:Daniel.Connors at rsc.ohio.gov] 
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 3:21 PM
To: J Webster Smith (jwsmithnfb at frontier.com)
Subject: Clarification Regarding our Meeting

Good afternoon Dr. Smith,

It was a pleasure to meet with you this week. As promised, I wanted to
follow-up with you regarding the issue we discussed around our Order of
Selection Waiting List. From what I understand, there is a perception
amongst individuals who are blind and/or visually impaired (and perhaps
in
other disability groups) that, in order to be determined Most
Significantly
Disabled (MSD) and be served immediately under our Order of Selection
Waiting List, individuals need more than one disability. As an example,
an
individual who is blind and has no other disabilities would not be
capable
of being determined Most Significantly Disabled because they only have
one
disability. This is not correct. I thought the easiest way to clarify
might
be to say exactly what it takes to be determined Most Significantly
Disabled
under the Order of Selection Policy. I don't want to get too detailed,
but
it is helpful to start by clarifying that there are two decisions
essentially made in the eligibility process. The first is eligibility
for VR
services and the second is where they stand in regards to order of
selection
and the priority to serve. Those that are MSD are served immediately,
and
all other categories (described below)  of eligible individuals would be
placed on a wait list at this time. As stated, the first decision is
eligibility. This is determined by the following three criteria:

1.    The person must have a physical or mental impairment, which
constitutes or results in a substantial impediment to employment
(Important
note, this can, but does not have to be more than one disability)

2.    They need to be able to benefit from vocational rehabilitation
(V.R.)
services in terms of an employment outcome. 

3.    They require vocational rehabilitation services (V.R.) services to
prepare for, secure, retain, or regain employment. 

Once eligibility is established, a person then is given the designation
of
Most Significantly Disabled (MSD), Significantly Disabled (SD), or Other
Eligible Individual. This is based on the number of functional
limitations
that the individual has as a result of their disability in seven
functional
capacity areas. Again, their functional capacity areas can all be the
result
of one disability. The criteria is that limitations is 3 or more of the
areas would be an MSD designation, 1-2 functional capacity areas would
be an
SD designation, and Other Eligible Individuals would have no substantial
functional limitations in the capacity areas. These functional capacity
areas are as follows:

.         Communication

.         Interpersonal Skills

.         Mobility

.         Self-Care

.         Self-Direction

.         Work Skills

.         Work Tolerance

I can end by providing an example. If an individual who is blind and has
no
other disabilities applies for services, he/she has a physical
impairment
and assuming they can benefit in terms of an employment outcome and
require
VR services, they would then have to meet at least 3 of the functional
capacity limitations above. For example's sake, let's say that they meet
the
functional capacity areas of communication, mobility, and work skills.
In
this example, the person would be MSD, even though blindness is their
only
disability. 

I know that is a bit of a long explanation but I wanted to make sure it
went
through the whole process because it is definitely a multi-layered
decision.
I would finally say to that you can make sure anyone knows that, should
they
have an eligibility or order of selection decision made that they
disagree
with, they can appeal that decision so that it gets looked at. We have
both
an informal and formal evaluation of the decision if a consumer does not
agree.  

Thank you Dr. Smith. I hope that clarifies. I will also make sure to
discuss
this at the convention. Let me know if you need anything else. 

Thanks,

Dan

_______________________________________________
Ohio-talk mailing list
Ohio-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/ohio-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
Ohio-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ohio-talk_nfbnet.org/richard.payne%40g
e.com