[Ohio-talk] FW: Clarification Regarding our Meeting

Mon Oct 24 23:45:33 UTC 2011

In all fairness, we did talk about that occurring and I'm sure that he just
forgot to put it in his message.

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

-----Original Message-----
From: ohio-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:ohio-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Eric Duffy
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 11:36 AM
To: NFB of Ohio Announcement and Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Ohio-talk] FW: Clarification Regarding our Meeting

We should tell people to appeal. In dans message i saw an explanation for
us, but nothing saying that this would be further clarified with counselors
and that's what needs to happen.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 24, 2011, at 11:09 AM, "Payne, Richard L (GE Capital)"
<richard.payne at ge.com> wrote:

> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/eduffy%40pobox.com

_______________________________________________
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/jwsmithnfb%40frontier
.com