[Ohio-talk] [External] Re: OOD and braille instruction

[Richard Payne]

I was reading this again and thought it would fit.

SEPARATE AGENCY FOR THE BLIND: BEST PRACTICE FOR SUCCESS



By James H. Omvig
 From the Editor: Ever since Dr. Jernigan went to Iowa in 1958 to transform the worst agency serving blind people in the country into the best program anywhere, we have known how important it is for effective rehabilitation of the blind to be conducted by a separate agency. "Because separate agencies do a better job" is not a sufficient reason to give legislators being lured by the siren song of consolidation. Jim Omvig is one of the people whom Dr. Jernigan first rehabilitated and then trained to assist him to do his work in Iowa. Jim is a blind attorney who has now been involved in rehabilitation for more than thirty years. He wrote the following paper for several Arizona legislators some years ago. It is as relevant and helpful today as it was then.

Background: Every state has some form of vocational rehabilitation and training program for its blind adults, for which the federal government pays approximately eighty percent of the cost. The blind receive these services in one of two ways: either from a large general rehabilitation agency, which tries to serve people with all types of disabilities, or from a separate agency for the blind, which presumably has the requisite expertise and serves only blind consumers. Then in turn, if a separate program for the blind is established, it may be either a section or division within a much larger umbrella agency, or it may be a completely separate and independent agency, directly accountable to the governor, the legislature, the blind, and the general citizenry. It is up to each state to determine which governmental structure is best suited to meet the particular needs of its blind citizens.

Congress has recognized that the problems of the blind are unique and therefore that meaningful services for the blind are distinctly different from rehabilitation and related services for people with other disabilities. Accordingly, federal law permits the states to establish a completely separate, independent agency for the blind if they wish in order to address these unique needs in a comprehensive, specialized program. The relevant federal law is Title 29 USC, Section 701 (a) (1) (A) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.

Experience has shown that the blind always have the best possible chance of receiving quality services when such services are delivered through an independent, separate agency for the blind. There are numerous reasons for the tremendous success of these programs. They are outlined in the section below.

Why a Separate, Independent Agency for the Blind?

Rehabilitation of the blind has more in common with independent living services for the blind, services for the older blind, orientation and adjustment training for the blind, sight conservation, and sheltered employment for the blind than it does with rehabilitation of other disability groups or the socially or economically disadvantaged. Likewise small business enterprise programs for the blind have more in common with rehabilitation services for the blind than they do with other types of small business programs.

Even so, some argue that the blind should be lumped together with other disability groups or served through some giant umbrella agency to achieve integration and coordination of services. Until you think about it carefully and have certain facts presented to you, this might sound like pretty good, logical thinking.

There is, indeed, a need for coordination and integration of state services for the blind, but terminology should not be confused with reality. If, for instance, a state has a supervisor of highway construction, a supervisor of elementary education, a supervisor of pest control, and a supervisor of health and welfare, it does not follow that integration and coordination are achieved by creating a Department of Supervisors and lumping all of these people and functions together. Nor is any real integration or coordination achieved by establishing a Department of Health and Highways. Health is one function, highways another, and they cannot meaningfully be integrated.

If such a department is established, all that can be accomplished is to superimpose a costly administrative hierarchy upon the two departments. They will still remain separate functions whether they are called departments, divisions, sections, bureaus, or whatever. In fact the administrative hierarchy will be detrimental and will only cause inefficiency and waste in such a situation.

Relating all of this to the blind, fragmentation is increased rather than helped by putting all of the services for the blind into a division of a super-department. What is needed is common sense rather than textbook theory and neatness of somebody's organizational chart. Sound reasoning tells us that the various services for the blind complement and supplement one another and form one unique entity. They are only very slightly and incidentally related to services for people with other disabilities or other disadvantaged groups despite the similarity of terminology. 

The people who administer rehabilitation and other services for the blind should be able to administer the entire package, and they should not be distracted by other duties. Furthermore, they should not be responsible to people who have other program interests and who may, therefore, subordinate the needs of programs for the blind to other interests or pet projects. At the same time the professional agency for the blind administrator must be responsible to some authority as a check and balance and a testing ground for his or her judgment. This authority should be a lay board, preferably one containing a number of blind people themselves--people who know firsthand what the services are and what they should be to achieve best results.

In those states where separate, independent agencies exist, the governor (often with the advice and consent of the Senate) appoints the members of the lay board. The board hires the director, and the director then hires other staff and provides the leadership and day-to-day management of the program.

On the other hand, if the administrator of programs for the blind is responsible to the head of some super-agency or even directly to the governor, he or she is really not responsible to anyone, for these people are not knowledgeable about what is needed and are likely to be extremely busy with other matters. Thus an independent department or commission for the blind administering all state services for the blind is clearly best suited to meet the requirements for a good program.

It is, of course, possible to have an inefficient independent agency just as it is possible to have an inefficient program under any other type of structure, but the odds are much better for good programs if you have the independent agency system. This all depends, of course, upon the caliber and expertise of the people who do the administering. However, if all other things are equal, an independent commission affords the best organizational structure. Let me be more specific about what I have been saying. Even though the same words are sometimes used when we talk of various service programs, the mere use of such words is where the similarity ends. For example, rehabilitation of people using wheelchairs or of the deaf is in no sense the same process as rehabilitation of the blind. And this is equally true when discussing a hundred other types of rehabilitation. In other words, the problems facing blind people are unique. From this it naturally follows that those who are hired to provide rehabilitation services for blind people must possess a unique reservoir of knowledge specifically related to the problems of blindness, if effective programs are to be carried on. If we are to be truly effective, we need experts whose training and experience relate specifically to the problems of blindness. It is sheer nonsense to expect any human being to be knowledgeable about and to possess the necessary expertise to deal effectively with all of the problems of everyone needing various types of rehabilitation services.

"But," it is sometimes argued, "it is desirable to have the uniformity of administration found in a large super-agency." This argument might be made with considerable validity for producing license plates or for regulatory agencies -licensing, permits, etc. Its validity is much more doubtful, however, with respect to human-service programs, which for maximum efficiency must operate on a person-to-person basis. As I have said, neatness of somebody's organizational chart and uniformity of administrative pattern must not be permitted to obscure the human element. In fact, there is considerable evidence that bigness itself is a negative, not a positive factor.

"But," it is further argued, "programs for the blind and others which sound similar should be merged into large departments so that they will not function in a vacuum and be too independent." An interesting point can be made here. The best way to hide a tree is in a forest. A separate, independent agency for the blind with a lay board would always operate in the spotlight of inescapable scrutiny, accountability and responsibility. If its programs are not functioning well, the blind can and will rise in protest, and there can be no possibility of evasion, no shifting of responsibility, no passing the buck. There is no hierarchy of administrators, divisions, or bureaucrats to stand between unhappy blind consumers and the people employed to give them service.

On the other hand, if you want real independence and lack of accountability, turn that agency loose in the mazes of bureaucracy as a tiny segment of a super-agency. In the hide-and- seek of the intricacies and technicalities and divided responsibilities within a giant agency, no governor and no legislator can track it down. In the corridors of bureaucracy the full-time professional administrator is king, and the layman, whether governor, legislator, or average citizen just seeking service, is subject.

Establish a separate, independent agency for the blind with a lay board appointed by the governor and you have checks and balances and the maximum incentive for that agency to do a good job. Submerge services for the blind in a large department, and you give that program a blank check of independence and authority--independence and authority which it should neither want nor have.

Further, when you place services for the blind in a larger department of government, this will necessarily divert the energies and talents of administrators whose training, experience, and main professional concerns should be strictly with the blind. Can anyone really doubt what the main professional concerns of the high-level administrators of a giant, umbrella agency are? I can assure you that those concerns have nothing to do with blindness.

We who are blind do not wish to divert the energies or talents of anybody, nor do we wish the agency for the blind's energies and talents to be diverted, watered down, or shifted from the course of giving the best possible service to the blind of the state. This is probably one of the principal reasons why many states have separated their services for the blind from large departments. "But," as a last-ditch effort, it is argued by the uninformed, "can't we save a lot of state and federal money if we just lump together these seemingly related programs? We can avoid duplication and save a bundle." While this sounds logical and responsible, the fact is that, where this re-organizing takes place, the same program administrators and managers are generally retained, but in addition a new and costly level of administrators is imposed to supervise the original program managers. This practice costs more, not less.

Finally, several years ago an independent study (The Mallas Report) was made of service delivery systems to determine which type was best suited to provide quality rehabilitation and related services for the blind. The study concluded that the separate, independent agency with a lay board appointed by the governor is best. In an interview the researcher said, "Where reorganization of services for the blind has taken place on the basis of the economy-of-scale principle, its proponents have sold the legislature and the Governor on statements such as, `This will be more efficient and economical. It will let us get more mileage out of every tax dollar.' As a matter of fact, in every state where such a reorganization has taken place, the prestige and level of operation of the agencies serving the blind have been downgraded." This study also makes another revealing finding. "In general programs for the blind which fall under rehabilitation departments and umbrella agencies have the least effectiveness in developing and utilizing necessary financial resources."

In conclusion, we who are blind want the opportunity to receive services aimed at returning us to the mainstream of life. We want to be taxpayers, not tax users. The separate, independent agency for the blind offers us the best chance for meaningful programs. We are willing to work, and work hard, but we will also dare to dream in order to develop and protect our separate programs.



‹ POLITICS AND REHABILITATION: SERVING THE CUSTOMER, SERVING THE AGENCY, SERVING THE PUBLIC

up

Convention Highlights 1999 ›
.


-----Original Message-----
From: Ohio-Talk [mailto:ohio-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Robert Spangler via Ohio-Talk
Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2017 12:17 AM
To: 'NFB of Ohio Announcement and Discussion List' <ohio-talk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Robert Spangler <spangler.robert at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Ohio-talk] [External] Re: OOD and braille instruction

I don't normally respond with one-liners but thanks for that response.  That is a satisfactory explanation.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ohio-Talk [mailto:ohio-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of barbara.pierce9366--- via Ohio-Talk
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 8:19 AM
To: NFB of Ohio Announcement and Discussion List <ohio-talk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: barbara.pierce9366 at gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Ohio-talk] [External] Re: OOD and braille instruction

The problem is that blind customers have rehabilitation needs that are very different from those of other disabilities because of the communication and travel training that they need. It takes experience for counselors to recognize the solutions necessary to get successful training for the clients. You can already see the problems with counselors not understanding the importance of Braille for adult consumers. Robbie stipulates that trained counselors in a single agency could do the job, but that is exactly what we would not get. Blind people would be assigned to general counselors, and the quality of services offered would tumble. I have read statistics showing that people coming through a blindness commission are much better equipped to get and keep jobs than those coming through general agencies.

Barbara
Barbara Pierce
President Emerita
National Federation of the Blind of Ohio Barbara.pierce9366 at gmail.com
440-774-8077
The National Federation of the Blind knows that blindness is not the characteristic that defines you or your future. Every day we raise the expectations of blind people, because low expectations create obstacles between blind people and our dreams. You can live the life you want; blindness is not what holds you back.

> On Jan 12, 2017, at 11:24 PM, Robert Spangler via Ohio-Talk <ohio-talk at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> Can you please explain to me the importance of having separate bureaus?  Why not just have OOD with counselors which specialize in mental disabilities, those that specialize in blindness, etc?  What's the importance of the structure?
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ohio-Talk [mailto:ohio-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of 
> Eric Duffy via Ohio-Talk
> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 11:04 AM
> To: marianne via Ohio-Talk <ohio-talk at nfbnet.org>
> Cc: Eric Duffy <peduffy63 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Ohio-talk] [External] Re: OOD and braille instruction
> 
> I don't participate much on this list these days, but this discussion is too important too pass by. In all but a few cases a blind person should always be asigned BSVI.
> Blindness is the primary disability.
> 
> As far as the name goes I just want to remind everyone that it is imrotant that we get it right even if they don't. We have often had to fight to keep a separate bureau. We must understand the structure and  at the worst defend it as it is, and at best improve it. Ohio  has  a real budget  crisis and Human Services is always easy pickings.
> 
> Eric
> 
> On Jan 6, 2017 10:13 AM, marianne via Ohio-Talk <ohio-talk at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> 
>> I would like to add that there are times when an individual has a counselor who is not working under BSVI. This further causes problems. It also seems like there is constant turnover in BSVI so the counselors have no knowledge of blindness or the needs of people who are blind.
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ohio-Talk [mailto:ohio-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of 
>> Payne, Richard (Synchrony Financial) via Ohio-Talk
>> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 8:23 AM
>> To: NFB of Ohio Announcement and Discussion List 
>> <ohio-talk at nfbnet.org>
>> Cc: Payne, Richard (Synchrony Financial) <richard.payne at syf.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Ohio-talk] [External] Re: OOD and braille instruction
>> 
>> Yes this is correct but when Bob and others email us they reference 
>> to OOD  not BSVI. I think it is very easy to say the name wrong. I 
>> was in a meeting with OODD and another group last year and they 
>> constantly refered  to NFBO as AFB so that is common. I do agree that 
>> the name is important. Richard
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ohio-Talk [mailto:ohio-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
>> barbara.pierce9366--- via Ohio-Talk
>> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 8:07 AM
>> To: NFB of Ohio Announcement and Discussion List 
>> <ohio-talk at nfbnet.org>
>> Cc: barbara.pierce9366 at gmail.com
>> Subject: [External] Re: [Ohio-talk] OOD and braille instruction
>> 
>> Please, let’s get it right. OOD is the new name for the Rehabilitation Services Commission, not BSVI. Richard made this slip on the convention platform, and Bob Nicholson corrected him instantly. This may not seem very important to some of us, but we undermine our contention that we are serious players at the state level when we get these names wrong. Sorry to be passionate about this, but I do think it is important. RSC became OOD. BSVI has been BSVI since the seventies when its name was changed from BSB, the Bureau of Services for the Blind.
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> Barbara
>> Barbara Pierce
>> President Emerita
>> National Federation of the Blind of Ohio Barbara.pierce9366 at gmail.com
>> 440-774-8077
>> The National Federation of the Blind knows that blindness is not the characteristic that defines you or your future. Every day we raise the expectations of blind people, because low expectations create obstacles between blind people and our dreams. You can live the life you want; blindness is not what holds you back.
>> 
>>> On Jan 5, 2017, at 2:24 PM, Marianne Denning via Ohio-Talk <ohio-talk at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Does everyone remember that at our state conventions we have been 
>>> told that bblind adults do not want to learn braille in Ohio so it 
>>> is not needed here? Also, on the rare occasion when someone requests 
>>> braille the individual is referred to Hadley. I have been doing some research.
>>> I have learned that when braille is recommended by a rehabilitation 
>>> teacher OOD counselors will not provide the service. I have also 
>>> learned that if someone wants other training from a vision rehab 
>>> therapist it is usually limited to four hours of service. I 
>>> understand this is in an effort to hold down costs but this severely 
>>> limits the ability of a blind adult to learn skills to live 
>>> independently. I do not blame the counselors for this but the people at the top of OOD.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Marianne Denning, TVI, MA
>>> Teacher of students who are blind or visually impaired
>>> (513) 607-6053
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ohio-Talk mailing list
>>> Ohio-Talk at nfbnet.org
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__nfbnet.org_mailm
>>> an
>>> _listinfo_ohio-2Dtalk-5Fnfbnet.org&d=DQIGaQ&c=i0QXx0LZaNWl3bsI0Hrdtw
>>> &r
>>> =VwceYPGIIpVPLVm9gShbIRaVNtDCN1-d9rGacia1JBYgBHb7brUX0EXwNQPG1QWx&m=
>>> Jb
>>> fSui1IH0sqH1OspDCNI6sZtHCtCRFOW3xCNkUkfGg&s=kgi6sTjerlhqDr4xN-TwH87w
>>> uA eLrZcvaZGNUC8F3r4&e= To unsubscribe, change your list options or 
>>> get your account info for Ohio-Talk:
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__nfbnet.org_mailm
>>> an
>>> _options_ohio-2Dtalk-5Fnfbnet.org_barbara.pierce9366-2540gmail.com&d
>>> =D
>>> QIGaQ&c=i0QXx0LZaNWl3bsI0Hrdtw&r=VwceYPGIIpVPLVm9gShbIRaVNtDCN1-d9rG
>>> ac
>>> ia1JBYgBHb7brUX0EXwNQPG1QWx&m=JbfSui1IH0sqH1OspDCNI6sZtHCtCRFOW3xCNk
>>> Uk fGg&s=M3w3GOi82uIemiqGQhfiHlxTjDR8CL-YQ0MuI-BHjbc&e=
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ohio-Talk mailing list
>> Ohio-Talk at nfbnet.org
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__nfbnet.org_mailma
>> n
>> _listinfo_ohio-2Dtalk-5Fnfbnet.org&d=DQIGaQ&c=i0QXx0LZaNWl3bsI0Hrdtw&
>> r
>> =VwceYPGIIpVPLVm9gShbIRaVNtDCN1-d9rGacia1JBYgBHb7brUX0EXwNQPG1QWx&m=J
>> b
>> fSui1IH0sqH1OspDCNI6sZtHCtCRFOW3xCNkUkfGg&s=kgi6sTjerlhqDr4xN-TwH87wu
>> A eLrZcvaZGNUC8F3r4&e= To unsubscribe, change your list options or 
>> get your account info for Ohio-Talk:
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__nfbnet.org_mailma
>> n
>> _options_ohio-2Dtalk-5Fnfbnet.org_richard.payne-2540synchronyfinancia
>> l
>> .com&d=DQIGaQ&c=i0QXx0LZaNWl3bsI0Hrdtw&r=VwceYPGIIpVPLVm9gShbIRaVNtDC
>> N
>> 1-d9rGacia1JBYgBHb7brUX0EXwNQPG1QWx&m=JbfSui1IH0sqH1OspDCNI6sZtHCtCRF
>> O W3xCNkUkfGg&s=0Oku96ffwKyUYLIOHuCoq1UBDvH-RJ6SOJ6ZBCbRU8s&e=
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/marianne%40den
>> n
>> ingweb.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/peduffy63%40gm
>> a
>> il.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/spangler.robert
> %40gmail.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/barbara.pierce9
> 366%40gmail.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/spangler.robert%40gmail.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/rchpay7%40gmail.com