[nfbmi-talk] Business as usual at B.S. for B.P.

[Terry D. Eagle]

This is a clear example of the selective discriminatory bureaucratic
stinking rotten rubbish BS4BP clients must endure, from incompetent BS4BP
administrators, while SIGHTED PERSONS operate BEP facilities, and four
licensed BEP cafeteria operators still are operating without required
cafeteria certification training, far beyond the three years allowed to
obtain the certification.  How is S-E-L-E-C-T-I-V-E
D-I-S-C-R-I-M-I-N-A-T-I-O-N spelled - BS4BP?  Not to mention the many
systematic violations of Rehabilitation and ADA law and regulations!  Pure
stinking B.S for Blind Persons! 

 

It is simply amazing how such morons can recognize and note the
contradictions in their own lies!

 

December 4, 2014

 

Administrative Review Report for Mr. Terry Eagle

 

This review was conducted on November 5, 2014, by Lisa Kisiel, Bureau of
Services for Blind Persons Training Center (BSBPTC) Director. 

 

Individuals present for the review:  Mr. Terry Eagle, his reader/driver
Jessica, and Central Region Manager Elizabeth White

 

Terry Eagle was previously served by the Bureau of Services for Blind
Persons (BSBP) in order to pursue the goal of Business Enterprise Program
(BEP) Operator. Mr. Eagle's stated reasons for requesting this review are as
follows:

 

Mr. Eagle feels that the application process was delayed and that rights and
laws were violated as a result of asking for an updated eye report.  Mr.
Eagle does not understand why he was asked to provide this updated report.
He feels that it was an intentional hurtle that was unnecessary and that
Nichole Wright had told him the "real reason" why the eye report was
requested, but he would not share that (audio recorded) information saying
that he would share it when he felt it would be the most useful. It should
be noted that Nichole Wright is no longer working for the BSBP.     {Here it
comes-swoosh, Nichole under the bus by BS4BP management; a classic Rodgers
action.


Mr. Eagle also indicates that he asked for his case file in an accessible
format and he received it in print by mail.  Central Region Manager Beth
White did acknowledge that this occurred and that it should not have.  Mr.
Eagle's preferred communication is electronic. Mr. Eagle also indicated that
he did not sign or receive a copy of his application for services.  There
was a signed application in the paper case file.  He said he did not
remember and did not receive a copy in an accessible format. 

 

Mr. Eagle's case was closed on 8/29/14. Mr. Eagle did not sign the plan
which stated his vocational goal was to become a BEP operator.  He indicated
that he read the plan via email and when the plan was sent to him via
certified mail that he would not sign it because he was not sure that it was
the same plan he read via email because the paper was not accessible.  The
services in the plan consisted of those that would allow Mr. Eagle to pursue
training to become a BEP operator.  {Note:  Services and option chosen only
by BS4BP administrators without options and cliet input.}  {Here comes their
big lie, among others}  Mr. Eagle does not feel that he needs to complete
the training as he has been an operator in the past and does not feel that
he needs to do the training again and that it is his right to decide how his
training should be provided.   {Note:  I desire the same training options on
the books available to all, and not subject to a "Terry Eagle clause"}  

 

Mr. Eagle feels that he was "shut out" of the BEP new operator training that
was held in February of 2014.  When asked if he would have attended the
training, his answer was "I might have".  This does seem to contradict the
opinion that he did not want this training.  However, the fact that he would
consider such an option is noted. 

 

There was some discussion between Mr. Eagle and Ms. White regarding the
concept of Mr. Eagle working  {in a BEP facility} and therefore not being
eligible for services {to become a BEP licensee}.  It was noted in the case
file that eligibility determination was extended to determine if Mr. Eagle
was working and if he should be served. It was determined that he should be
served {Note:  Only because Eagle quoted and presrnted the law to BS4BP
staff}, and from there a plan was written  {Note:  Written solely by BS4BP
staff and without Eagle's input}.  Mr. Eagle indicates that at this time he
is not working. 

 

Mr. Eagle does understand that his case is closed, however he does not feel
that he should have to "jump hoops" to become a client again.  Mr. Eagle
also wonders why Rob Essenberg was involved with his case and the answer
received is that because Mr. Essenberg is working at the Anderson building,
which is, as this reviewer under stands, was an interest of Mr. Eagle.
{Note:  Mr. Essenberger's sole role was to frustrate and block any and all
opportunity and chance for Eagle to operate the Anderson building BEP or
BADP, or whatever the hell it is dung by the sighted operator.}

 

In summation and recommendation:

Mr. Eagle is absolutely able to apply for services.  He will need to review
and sign an application and that information should be provided to him in
electronic format and a hard copy of the application should be provided to
Mr. Eagle, which contains his signature for his records.  When determining
eligibility it is the prerogative of the VR counselor {to selectively
discriminate and totally ignore the laws, regulations, and service mmanual}
to request an eye report to determine if there have been vision changes.
This is a fairly common practice for individuals who are legally blind/low
vision.   {Note:  including selectively some documented as receiving SSI or
SSDI}Presumed eligibility can be done if the individual is receiving Social
Security benefits as a result of legal blindness and the existence of
impediments to employment exists and can be documented.  It is this
reviewer's understanding that the Bureau does have the ability to determine
how best to provide the training that we feel the BEP operators can benefit
from.  Should individuals wish to participate in the program, that
parameters of the program would need to be reviewed with the potential
consumer and those parameters would need to be understood and agreed upon by
the consumer and, if appropriate, a plan would be designed that is a
partnership between the consumer and the counselor and takes into
consideration the agency policies and the needs of the consumer.    {Note:
Does that writer, or any administrator within BS4BP, even know the
definition of a partnership, other than intimate partnership?} There should
be an expectation that the individual can benefit in terms of an employment
outcome. 

 

Mr. Eagle's case was closed. Services could not be provided as he did not
agree with the BEP training process and therefore services could not
continue.  The Bureau is not obligated to change the training program.  The
Bureau correctly closed this case.   Should Mr. Eagle apply for services in
the future it would be recommended that a manager should monitor this case
very closely {Note: Why?  I don't desire an intimate partnership!}.  It
would be imperative that regular and documented communication be had and
that Mr. Eagle and the manager and/ or counselor should meet and communicate
regularly {Something BS4BP does not know how to and cares not to do}.

 

 



 

 

Lisa Kisiel

Bureau of Services for Blind Persons Training Center Director

1541 Oakland

Kalamazoo, MI.  49008

269-337-3238

Fax# 269-337-3872

 

NOTE:  Please notify the Bureau's Hearing Coordinator, Carla Haynes, if you
agree or disagree with this Administrative Review Report.  If you agree with
this Administrative Review Report, then no further action will be taken.  If
you do not agree with this Administrative Review report, you may request a
hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the Michigan Administrative
Services System (MAHS). {{What a corrupt crule joke to end!}

 

 

 

December 4, 2014

 

Administrative Review Report for Mr. Terry Eagle

 

This review was conducted on November 5, 2014, by Lisa Kisiel, Bureau of
Services for Blind Persons Training Center (BSBPTC) Director. 

 

Individuals present for the review:  Mr. Terry Eagle, his reader/driver
Jessica, and Central Region Manager Elizabeth White

 

Terry Eagle was previously served by the Bureau of Services for Blind
Persons (BSBP) in order to pursue the goal of Business Enterprise Program
(BEP) Operator. Mr. Eagle's stated reasons for requesting this review are as
follows:

 

Mr. Eagle feels that the application process was delayed and that rights and
laws were violated as a result of asking for an updated eye report.  Mr.
Eagle does not understand why he was asked to provide this updated report.
He feels that it was an intentional hurtle that was unnecessary and that
Nichole Wright had told him the "real reason" why the eye report was
requested, but he would not share that information saying that he would
share it when he felt it would be the most useful. It should be noted that
Nichole Wright is no longer working for the BSBP. 

 

Mr. Eagle also indicates that he asked for his case file in an accessible
format and he received it in print by mail.  Central Region Manager Beth
White did acknowledge that this occurred and that it should not have.  Mr.
Eagle's preferred communication is electronic. Mr. Eagle also indicated that
he did not sign or receive a copy of his application for services.  There
was a signed application in the paper case file.  He said he did not
remember and did not receive a copy in an accessible format. 

 

Mr. Eagle's case was closed on 8/29/14. Mr. Eagle did not sign the plan
which stated his vocational goal was to become a BEP operator.  He indicated
that he read the plan via email and when the plan was sent to him via
certified mail that he would not sign it because he was not sure that it was
the same plan he read via email because the paper was not accessible.  The
services in the plan consisted of those that would allow Mr. Eagle to pursue
training to become a BEP operator.  Mr. Eagle does not feel that he needs to
complete the training as he has been an operator in the past and does not
feel that he needs to do the training again and that it is his right to
decide how his training should be provided. 

 

Mr. Eagle feels that he was "shut out" of the BEP new operator training that
was held in February of 2014.  When asked if he would have attended the
training, his answer was "I might have".  This does seem to contradict the
opinion that he did not want this training.  However, the fact that he would
consider such an option is noted. 

 

There was some discussion between Mr. Eagle and Ms. White regarding the
concept of Mr. Eagle working and therefore not being eligible for services.
It was noted in the case file that eligibility determination was extended to
determine if Mr. Eagle was working and if he should be served. It was
determined that he should be served and from there a plan was written.  Mr.
Eagle indicates that at this time he is not working. 

 

Mr. Eagle does understand that his case is closed, however he does not feel
that he should have to "jump hoops" to become a client again.  Mr. Eagle
also wonders why Rob Essenberg was involved with his case and the answer
received is that because Mr. Essenberg is working at the Anderson building,
which is, as this reviewer under stands, was an interest of Mr. Eagle. 

 

In summation and recommendation:

Mr. Eagle is absolutely able to apply for services.  He will need to review
and sign an application and that information should be provided to him in
electronic format and a hard copy of the application should be provided to
Mr. Eagle, which contains his signature for his records.  When determining
eligibility it is the prerogative of the VR counselor to request an eye
report to determine if there have been vision changes.  This is a fairly
common practice for individuals who are legally blind/low vision.  Presumed
eligibility can be done if the individual is receiving Social Security
benefits as a result of legal blindness and the existence of impediments to
employment exists and can be documented.  It is this reviewer's
understanding that the Bureau does have the ability to determine how best to
provide the training that we feel the BEP operators can benefit from.
Should individuals wish to participate in the program, that parameters of
the program would need to be reviewed with the potential consumer and those
parameters would need to be understood and agreed upon by the consumer and,
if appropriate, a plan would be designed that is a partnership between the
consumer and the counselor and takes into consideration the agency policies
and the needs of the consumer.  There should be an expectation that the
individual can benefit in terms of an employment outcome. 

 

Mr. Eagle's case was closed. Services could not be provided as he did not
agree with the BEP training process and therefore services could not
continue.  The Bureau is not obligated to change the training program.  The
Bureau correctly closed this case.   Should Mr. Eagle apply for services in
the future it would be recommended that a manager should monitor this case
very closely.  It would be imperative that regular and documented
communication be had and that Mr. Eagle and the manager and/ or counselor
should meet and communicate regularly.

 

 



 

 

Lisa Kisiel

Bureau of Services for Blind Persons Training Center Director

1541 Oakland

Kalamazoo, MI.  49008

269-337-3238

Fax# 269-337-3872

 

NOTE:  Please notify the Bureau's Hearing Coordinator, Carla Haynes, if you
agree or disagree with this Administrative Review Report.  If you agree with
this Administrative Review Report, then no further action will be taken.  If
you do not agree with this Administrative Review report, you may request a
hearing before an Administrative Law Judge from the Michigan Administrative
Services System (MAHS).

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3595 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20141216/7cf6ac76/attachment.png>