[nfbmi-talk] mcrs report

Tue May 20 17:19:34 UTC 2014

STATE PLAN FY 2015 - ATTACHMENT 4.2 (c) – DSU: Michigan Rehabilitation Services

The State Rehabilitation Council (SRC) in Michigan, known as the Michigan Council for Rehabilitation Services (MCRS) serves as the SRC to both the general designated state unit (DSU), Michigan Rehabilitation Services (MRS) and the blind DSU, Bureau of Services for Blind Persons (BSBP).  The designated state agency (DSA) for MRS is the Department of Human Services (DHS) and the DSA for BSBP is the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA). This attachment is focused on how the MCRS worked to achieve the eight federal mandates with MRS during fiscal year 2013.  

1.   Review, analyze, and advise the Grantor regarding its performance in determining eligibility, order of selection, effectiveness, scope and provision of services, and functions of the Grantor that affect or potentially affect the ability of persons with disabilities to achieve rehabilitation goals and objectives.  This mandate was achieved through active participation in the following MRS activities/work teams:  (1) Appeals Process Brochure Revision (2) Capital Quality Institute - Academy of Quality Management Fundamentals (3) CSNA (4) Consultation with the Customer Rights Representative/Hearings Manager (5) Customer Input (6) Customer Satisfaction Survey (7) DHS/MRS Contracts Training (8) Enhanced Partnership Meeting (9) Executive Strategy Team to manage the long term plan (10) Idea Stream Team, including presentations to three MRS District Offices (11) Leadership Council (12) Marketing Team and subgroups related to creating a MRS Annual Report Calendar (13) Order of Selection for Services (OSS) Workgroup (14) OSS Sub-Work Group for Partnership Training (15) Quality Core Management Team (16) State Plan (17) Statewide Staff Teleconference Calls (18) new Strategic Plan design.

Resulting Impact: The Council offered input from the customer perspective with regard to each of the above activities.  The Council works from the premise of the field staff needing to have the resources available to them so that the customer benefits from a quality service system.  Anecdotal input throughout the year from customers and MRS staff revealed that some offices were challenged with staff vacancies and high intake numbers of customers. Monthly service data often mirrored the comments received.  The MCRS remained constant in their contact with the MRS Administration questioning the DSUs ability to effectively serve all customers coming through their doors or whether service categories needed to be closed. 

2.  In partnership with the Grantor, provide advice in the preparation of statewide goals and priorities.  The partnership between the MRS Administration and the MCRS continued to function from a strong foundation of open communication on a regular basis, sharing both successes and challenges. This dynamic resulted in determining methods to manage emerging issues and design for implementation projects that enhanced their service system.  As the MRS Long Term Plan (LTP) entered its final year, the Council was included in the MRS Executive Team meetings that worked on the design of the Strategic Plan for FY 2014-2016. As part of the environmental scan (which was the first part of the process) the MCRS held 4 customer focus groups to gain input from their experiences with the MRS system.

Resulting Impact:  The customer voice presence was strong as the Council worked with MRS on the establishment of new goals and strategies.  Of critical concern to the MCRS was the input received from the Focus Groups of Customers of MRS, as they related challenging experiences regarding communication between counselors and customers. 

3.  In partnership with the Grantor, conduct a review and analysis of the effectiveness and consumer satisfaction with vocational rehabilitation services and employment outcomes, including employment benefits.  Anecdotal customer satisfaction information was collected by the MCRS through various activities:  (1) Council representation at a meeting with MRS and Project Excellence to review and analyze FY 2011-2012 survey results and the resulting report, in addition to the survey tools, processes and reporting mechanisms for the FY 2013 Customer Satisfaction Survey distributed at case closure and Individual Plan for Employment (IPE) (2) dialogue took place with MRS on other modalities that could be utilized to increase customer input (3) monthly meetings with the Client Assistance Program Director (4) through e-mails and phone calls received at the MCRS office and (5) Customer Focus Groups facilitated by the MCRS at MRS’s Trade School – Michigan Career and Technical Institute (MCTI). 

Resulting Impact:  The MCRS is pleased to be included in the design and review of the customer satisfaction survey tools.  The membership did raise the issue of wanting to know the themes of the percentage of those customers who responded to the surveys indicating that they were not satisfied with the MRS experience.  The Council believes that this information could serve as a credible resource for the continual improvement of the MRS system.  

4.  Assist in the preparation of the State Plan, Plan amendments, reports, needs assessments, and evaluation required by the Rehabilitation Act.  Beginning in February, the MCRS began weekly representation at MRS State Plan meetings, which involved the Council representing the ‘customer voice’ at the table with regard to reviewing and further revising updated draft Attachments, discussion of timelines, and the need to incorporate input from the new Strategic Plan into several attachments.  

Membership training about the State Plan took place in late March. Members were provided with an overview of the State Plan process, their mandated requirement to write Attachment 4.2 (c) (for both DSUs), and instructions on how they will need to review and contribute to the approval of the final MRS State Plan for FY 2014.  Members also viewed a 20-minute segment of the SRC Online Training Modules (a resource created by Rehabilitation Services Administration – RSA) to become further educated about the Council’s role in the State Plan.  The MCRS Executive Team assumed responsibility for managing aspects of drafting Attachment 4.2 (c), preparing an outline for the membership of updates made to other attachments, and any remaining tasks to complete the State Plan process.  In early May, Attachment 4.2 (c) was approved by the membership and forwarded to the MRS Acting State Director for response, which was returned to the Council with support for the MCRS recommendations.  Due to time constraints, the MCRS Executive Team reviewed and accepted the final MRS FY 2014 State Plan on behalf of the membership.  The MRS State Plan for FY 2014 was submitted to RSA before July 1st and was later approved by RSA.  

The Council was represented at all Comprehensive Statewide Needs Assessment (CSNA) meetings for the process being managed through the MRS contract with Michigan State University’s Project Excellence (conducts program evaluation for MRS).  With the involved partners (BSBP, MRS, Michigan Statewide Independent Living Council (MISILC), and MARO (the Michigan trade association for community rehabilitation programs) the data requirements, timelines, creation of survey tools and distribution and the key informant process were discussed with consensus for next steps. It was determined that the completion of the CSNA would be finalized in early spring 2014. During the last quarter of the fiscal year, updates about the progress of the CSNA stopped.  

Resulting Impact:  As has been expected practice, the MCRS was actively involved in the MRS State Plan process, offering support and customer perspective as relevant. The CSNA process needs to be reviewed, so that the previously agreed upon timeframe (expanding the process over the two years prior to the due date) takes place. Also, the Council believes that consideration must be given for focus groups of customers, employers, and staff.  The MCRS was actively involved in the process, but communication was sporadic, resulting in little information sharing throughout the last nine months (August 2013 – April 2014) of the process.  It is our understanding that a draft report will be presented in the near future.  We look forward to a meeting of the involved partners taking place to review the draft prior to it being published.   

5.  Prepare and submit an annual report to the Governor and the Commissioner of Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) on the status of the general vocational rehabilitation program operated within the State.  Data and other information from BSBP, MRS, and the Council were collected throughout the fiscal year and utilized to contribute content to the FY 2013 MCRS Annual Report.

6.  Coordinate with other state councils, including but not limited to the Statewide Independent Living Council, the Special Education Advisory Council under IDEA, the Developmental Disabilities Council, the State Mental Health Planning Council, and the Governor’s Workforce Development Board.  

Statewide Independent Living Council (SILC):  Coordinated activities included (1) members appointed to represent the respective councils (2) MCRS reports for SILC business meeting packets, SILC reports for MCRS business meeting packets (3) MCRS/SILC Member representation at the SILC/MCRS quarterly meetings (4) MCRS presentation to SILC Membership during their in-service session and (5) in June, as a result of an unexpected SILC Liaison vacancy, DHS Administration and the Appointments Office initiated the process to seek a replacement liaison member from the SILC to serve as a member of the MCRS, with hopes of filling the vacancy as soon as possible.  

The other mandated partnerships which include: Special Education Advisory Committee (SEAC); the Michigan Developmental Disabilities Council (MDDC); the State Mental Health Planning Council; and the Governor’s Workforce Development Board have been managed through members who represent these organizations and or at Executive Team direction. 

Resulting Impact:  The partnerships listed above provide great opportunity for networking with organizations that are working with similar customer populations, but the MCRS involvement can provide the VR prospective.  It is expected that these relationships will continue to develop.  

7.  Facilitate coordination and working relationships between the Grantor, the Statewide Independent Living Council and centers for independent living throughout the state.  In Michigan, the CIL trade association, Disability Network/Michigan (DNM), and the Michigan SILC have a long established working partnership with MRS.  The MCRS continues their focus on working to enhance the partnership by continually advocating on behalf of the independent living needs of customers of MRS.  Involvement with strategic working alliance teams and other activities furthered the efforts.  The Council also participated in the IL/VR Alliance Operational Team which is working on an IL/VR Frequently Asked Questions publication for distribution to the staff at Centers for Independent Living (CILs) and MRS field staff.

Resulting Impact:  The MCRS involvement with the CILs network in Michigan has continued at the statewide level with the continued focus on the IL/VR alliance.  The Council role within this environment is to represent the VR customer and the full scope of their needs, often managed via the local MRS field office and their local CIL.

8.  Perform other functions consistent with the purpose of the Rehabilitation Act.  

Key Other Function:  Education of the State Legislature on the MRS Federal/State Match formula:   

Education of Michigan Legislature:

The MCRS was present at a Senate Appropriations Sub-Committee Meeting for DHS.  The MCRS Chair read a prepared statement which focused on educating and informing the Senators about the financial dynamics of the MRS system, most importantly the issue of the MRS Title 1 funds that continue to be returned to Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) for the past few years because of the lack of match with state dollars. The Council recognizes the number of persons with disabilities that could have received VR services resulting in meaningful competitive employment if MRS had been fully matched.  

Resulting Impact:  The MCRS testimony focused on three issues:  the role of the Council; the importance of receiving full match from the legislature; and the strong concern of Title 1 dollars being returned to RSA and reallocated to other state’s VR programs.  

Highlights of other MCRS Functions:  

New SRC

The Governor’s Executive Order Number 2012-10 issued in June 2012, abolished the Michigan Rehabilitation Council and created the SRC, the Michigan Council for Rehabilitation Services (MCRS).  Appointments for the new SRC were received in October 2012 (FY 2013) and a schedule of meetings and other activities was created to orient and involve the Council throughout the fiscal year.  Though faced with a number of challenges, the MCRS ‘acting’ Chair demonstrated the ability to organize the mandated work of the Council in a manner that assured progress was made on the federal mandates, while the new membership learned about and adapted to their roles and responsibilities.  

Resulting Impact:  The SRC in Michigan experienced a major change with a new Council, a new membership, expectations, and a funding loss.  The addition of a second DSU resulted in a doubled workload for a membership of volunteers historically stretched to achieve the mandates for one DSU.  

A Review of Business Activities related to Functions:

November 2012:  A 1-hour teleconference meeting took place to welcome the new membership to the Council and answer any initial questions.  Members were encouraged to view the online SRC training modules in preparation for the first scheduled member orientation session scheduled for January 2013.  A tentative meetings schedule was reviewed, with notice that further changes might be needed.

December:  A meeting was held with DHS staff, the MCRS Chair and Executive Director, MRS Director, and MRS Deputy Director to clarify the MCRS meetings schedule for the remainder of FY 2013.  It was determined that the membership would have input to the schedule during the upcoming in-person orientation session.

January 2013: The MCRS held an in-person Orientation Session.  Members had discussion and were educated about the Rehabilitation Act, including Section 105, which outlines the mandated responsibilities of the SRC; SRC history in Michigan; MCRS leadership and operational structure, including business and program operations; member roles and responsibilities; public VR in Michigan, including BSBP and MRS services, MCRS Bylaws, strategic plan, work teams; and partnerships, including both state and national partners.  The members heard from DHS Directors Corrigan and Rooney about the role and responsibilities of the MCRS. Members also discussed their availability for business meeting dates/times during the remainder of FY 2013. 

February:  The Council became directly involved in both MRS State Plan and the new Strategic Plan weekly meetings.  

March:  The Council conducted a business meeting in Lansing with members, staff, partners and guests in attendance.  The Agenda included: approval of the FY 2013 Meeting Schedule; Strategic Plan (through the end of FY 2013); and MCRS legal address, phone numbers, and website address.  In addition the following business was managed: Financial Statements; proposed draft Bylaws; Conflict of Interest statement; Executive Team election; partner reports and public comment.  

May:  An in-service training session was conducted for members in the morning just prior to the start of the business meeting, which focused on the VR process as it relates to services provided by BSBP and MRS.  A BSBP PowerPoint presentation was shared, along with discussion about the MRS ‘Six Steps to Vocational Rehabilitation’ Customer Handbook and VR Process desktop tool.

The Council conducted a business meeting in Lansing, with members, staff, partners and guests in attendance.  The Agenda led to the following business being managed: State Plan Attachment 4.2 for BSBP and Attachment 4.2 for MRS; Financial Statements; the MCRS FY 2012 Financial Review; proposed draft Bylaws with a work team established to manage this document to resolution; ET was empowered to work with the Designated State Units (BSBP and MRS) to develop Resource Plans and Budgets for both FY 2013 and 2014; signed the National Coalition of State Rehabilitation Councils (NCRSC) Resolution; added a second opportunity for public comment on agendas for future MCRS business meetings; public comment and partnership updates.  

In an effort to gain customer input for the environmental scanning process for the MRS Strategic Planning process, four focus groups were conducted at the Michigan Career and Technical Institute (MCTI) in Plainwell at the beginning of May.  With over 70 students in attendance, questions were asked that related to student experiences in working with MRS as well as attending trade programs at MCTI.  Students were provided with opportunities to contribute responses both verbally and in written format via the Instrumented Group Interview (IGI) facilitation process.  Three questions were utilized with the following themes identified:  1 - Think back over the past year of the things that you did with MRS, what went particularly well? Counselor Relationship; Transition to MCTI; IPE Process; Testing for Skills; and Connection with MRS in High School. 2 - What did not go well? Communication with Counselors (i.e. should return phone calls within 48 hours, new counselor assignments); MRS move to DHS – no information to customers, very confusing; Interpreters not provided; and MRS system is slow. 3 - How can MRS improve? Increase the time Counselors have to do one on one work with Customers; Establish expectations for Counselors returning phone calls within 48 hours; Establish processes for informing customers of Counselor changes; Provide consistency of information about services available; The MRS system takes too much time, need to analyze why for example there are such lengthy gaps in contacts between counselors and customers.

This information was shared with MRS during their Strategic Planning process and will be incorporated into the creation of the MCRS Strategic Plan.   

June:  MCRS members participated in a teleconference training session focused on Overviews of the BSBP and MRS systems.  Members had opportunities to ask questions, engage in discussion, and learn more about how both bureaus operate to provide VR counseling to customers, services to employers, and more.  A training modality was designed to be held via teleconference and was implemented this month, with additional sessions in July and August.  The topics included:  organizational structure of BSBP and MRS; Strategic Planning for the Mandates; VR Data Collection; Customer Satisfaction Survey Process and the Comprehensive Statewide Needs Assessment.

July:  MCRS members participated in a teleconference training session focused on Data Collection and Reporting.  Members had opportunities to ask questions, engage in discussion, and learn more about how data impacts the provision of VR counseling services to customers, employers, and more.  A MCRS Member and Staff Person attended the summer graduation event at MCTI.

As a result of a memorandum issued by DHS this month imposing travel restrictions through the end of September 2013, the in person August Business Meeting was held by teleconference.  

August:  MCRS members participated in a teleconference training session focused on Strategic Planning.  Members reviewed information about strategic planning, as well as the current FY 2013 Strategic Plan.  

A business meeting by teleconference was held with members, staff, partners and guests were in attendance.  The Agenda led to the following business being conducted: Financial Statements; approval of amended Bylaws; approval of the proposed MCRS Resource Plan and Budget for FY 2014; partnership reports; and public comment.

Resulting Impact:  As directed by the ET, the focus for this fiscal year was to reorganize organizational operations to success; educate and inform the membership about issues critical to their mandates; complete the State Plan as a credible partner; and utilize the themes that surfaced in the focus groups about the need for improved standards for communication between Counselors and Customers.

Work Teams Functions:

Executive Team (ET): The ET held twice monthly meetings beginning in February 2014.  A number of the meetings were held in person for a longer period of time. The Agendas focused on becoming informed about the staff’s management of the daily business operations and other Council operational and program needs. 

An Advisory Bylaws Work Team was established in June in an effort to review and assure that the ‘new’ Bylaws met the legislative standards and input from the Assistant Attorney General.  The final draft of the amended Bylaws were presented for approval at the August Business Meeting.  

Strategic Plan – Environmental Scan: For strategic planning purposes, with consideration given to travel limitations, three advisory ad hoc work teams (Agency Staff, Customers, and Partners/Legislature) were established. Their charge was to complete an environmental scan of their topic via research and discussion with recommendations made of key findings to be considered for the strategic plan. The ET determined a timeframe for completion of the work by the end of the calendar year, with the Strategic Plan day scheduled early in 2014. 

Resulting Impact:  Findings will be moved forward to a full day of strategic planning for the membership so that a multiyear plan of activities can be determined which focuses on how to achieve the federal mandates for each DSU.

Membership:  A new SRC of 17 members was announced by the Governor in October 2012. With the EO’s requirement for a minimum of 15 voting members (with both the Director of the BSBP and MRS Director as ex-officio non-voting members), this group (and its staff) doubled its mandated responsibilities to include SRC responsibilities for both DSUs.  As a result of this increased responsibility, education for new members became the initial focus.  The learning curve of the two public VR service systems is great as there are many nuances along with specific differences between the two DSUs.  The MCRS looked forward to the new opportunity of advocating on behalf of citizens served by both bureaus.  Throughout the balance of the fiscal year, there were marked reductions in the membership through attrition.  The MCRS staff worked with the Appointments and DHS Staff to fill the vacancies.

Resulting Impact:  The Governor’s Appointment Office Staff along with a DHS Staff person have been highly successful in their recommendations for MCRS members to the Governor.  We recognize that as attrition takes place that the Council would benefit from increased geographic and racial diversity in their members and will work with the appointing staff to manage this need.

Statewide Activities (focused on strengthening partnerships): The MCRS continued participation in the following statewide activities: (1) Governor’s Business to Business Summit on Disability (2) IL/VR Alliance Operational Team Meetings (3) KANDU Ribbon Cutting Ceremony for a new employment initiative (4) MARO Day at the Capitol (5) MARO Spring Leadership Training Conference in Traverse City; the MCRS Chair joined an MRS Division Director and Deputy Director to provide a presentation outlining an MRS update, including various aspects of the partnership between MRS and the Council (6) Michigan Rehabilitation Association (MRA) Membership, with the MCRS Executive Director (ED) being elected to the MRA board (7) Nancy Crewe Memorial Symposium event held at Peckham (8) the re:con Convention of New Beginnings Program Planning Committee and (9) re:con – The Convention of New Beginnings - in Traverse City and (10) SILC Business Meetings.
Resulting Impact:  The above activities serve to strengthen relationships within the disability and business community.  We have seen the Council’s role and responsibility become more familiar across the state as networking takes place.
National Activities:  Two MCRS Staff Members are members of the National Rehabilitation Association.   

The MCRS is a member of the National Coalition of State Rehabilitation Councils (NCSRC).  Participation included teleconferences for national NCSRC meetings and monthly NCSRC Steering Committee (SC) meetings.  The ED served as Chair of the NCSRC, while the AD provided expertise and technical support through management of the website and list servs as supported by the MCRS, including a new ‘Coalition Members Only’ list serv developed for SRC Members, Staff, VR Agency Staff/Liaisons and others associated with the 46 Member SRCs.  During November 2012 and April 2013, the ED, along with other SC members, facilitated Saturday Leadership Training and Sunday Public Policy Training Sessions for SRCs in San Diego and Bethesda respectively.  SRC members/staff, VR staff, RSA staff, and others attended the sessions and engaged in activities and dialogue related to promising practices for SRCs.  The MCRS was also represented at the Fall Conference for the Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation (CSAVR) in San Diego.  

In June, the MCRS Chair represented the Council at a 2-day RSA SRC Training Forum in Washington DC.  The main objectives of the forum were to empower Councils and strengthen partnerships with State VR Agencies.

The ED served on the Summit Group, a national work team dedicated to reading cutting edge books related to leadership and quality management, with plans to provide workshop sessions on the reading materials at a national program evaluation conference in the fall of 2013.  

The ED served on the Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Effective VR Service Delivery Practices Advisory Council.  This five year grant funded project is determining methods that can be utilized to transition research findings into practice in the field of vocational rehabilitation. 

Resulting Impact:  The involvement of the MCRS in the various national activities continues to enhance the reputation of this SRC as being one of the best models across our country.  The knowledge gained through this involvement serves to strengthen the work activities of the Council.  

re:con a convention of new beginnings (formerly Michigan Rehabilitation Conference):  The MCRS engaged in activities related to this event through the following:  (1) The AD attended program planning committee meetings for the newly named and redesigned re:con Conference, (2) members and staff attended re:con (which took place in Traverse City in November 2012) and included the responsibilities of staffing the exhibit, attending sessions, and taking advantage of networking opportunities.  

Resulting Impact:  Active participation with this Conference provides great opportunity for interaction with DSU staff and their partners to learn of promising practices and service challenges. 

Miscellaneous INFORMATION – Daily Business Operations:

FISCAL AND OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT:

Fiscal Agent:  In an effort to uphold the intent of the Rehabilitation Act, to assure the autonomy and independence of the State Rehabilitation Council operations and staff, MRS has contracted with MARO since 2004 (prior to that a contract with another state wide organization held the contract from 1996 – 2003).  The Council agrees that this contact provides the mechanism needed for a fiscal agent to serve as the employer of record for MCRS staff, along with accounting services for payroll and operational expenses.  This contract has continued due to the outstanding accounting talents of the MARO staff that has resulted in nine clean financial reviews and services that were provided in a professional, flexible manner.  The MCRS expects that this contract will continue to be supported by MRS, assuring the stability of the Council’s future.  

FY 2013 Financial Review:  The Auditor finalized the review of the Council’s financial records for FY 2013, resulting in a clean financial review.

FY 2013 / FY 2014 MCRS Budget:  

Following implementation of the Governor’s Executive Order 2012-10 in October 2012, initial meetings took place between the MCRS and BSBP to determine a plan for how BSBP would provide funding to the MCRS for its new responsibility as BSBP’s SRC.  Further joint meetings took place between the BSBP, DHS, LARA, MARO, MCRS, MRS, Attorney General’s Office, and Civil Service over the next few months to have further discussions and negotiations about how the Designated State Agencies (DHS and LARA) and Designated State Units (BSBP and MRS) would work together with the MCRS to establish a Resource Plan and Budget to fund the Council for the current and future fiscal years.  

The MCRS Resource Plan and Budget for FY 2013 was approved by the membership and then negotiated with the DSU to ensure financial solvency for the MCRS beginning October 1, 2012.  The grant between MARO and MRS was signed by DHS for the first six months of the fiscal year.  In March 2013, DHS approved a three month grant extension (through June 2013) and then a second extension was approved in July for the remainder of the fiscal year.

The FY 2014 Resource Plan and Budget was approved by the membership and managed by the  ET.  In a meeting with the MRS Administrator they received support, with DHS providing approval for the contract with MARO/MRS for the first six months of FY 2014.

MCRS Staff:  The staff of the Council began the fiscal year with three full-time employees:  Executive Director (ED), Assistant Director (AD), and Executive Assistant (EA).  In March 2013 the staff complement was reduced to two, with the EA being laid off due to lack of funding.  With the EA vacancy, the ED and AD absorbed the administrative responsibilities of this position.  The daily business workload was managed to assure the success of the membership as they worked with the two DSUs (within two DSAs), with the staff reduction.  

Resulting Impact:  Though FY 2013 provided operational challenges due to short term financial contracts and a funding reduction which resulted in the loss of our administrative support staff position. In the midst of this environment, the ET was successful in their management of the Council’s work activities within the scope of our financial resources.

In Closing:

The MCRS maintains a focus of the ‘customer’s best interest’ throughout all levels of their work.  The resulting impact is seen as the Council has become part of the fabric of the MRS system.  Interaction with customers, staff, employers and partners reveals the commitment to providing VR services in a manner which is respectful, efficient and results in meaningful employment. The SRC in Michigan has a long history of having an effective proactive partnership with MRS.  The transition to a new DSA and the additional responsibility to serve as the SRC for the DSU for the Blind has not changed this relationship.  The leadership of MRS and the MCRS have continued to engage in a partnership that is focused on the value added when the customer voice is encouraged and incorporated into the operational aspects of the public VR system in Michigan.  One of the greatest benefits for each partner is the dynamic tension that exists as issues are raised, discussed and managed for the best interest of the customers being served.  Change is inevitable in all systems and at times during fiscal year 2013 was trying, regardless, with all things considered, the MRS Staff are to be commended for their commitment, fortitude, and resourcefulness as they work on behalf of Michigan citizens with disabilities. We look forward to our continued work on behalf of people with disabilities, in partnership with MRS as they strive to be one of the leaders of public vocational rehabilitation in our country.  

Recommendations:

The following eight recommendations include two from the last State Plan with the remaining six designed to reflect customer input and results from our analysis and review of the MRS system.  

1 - We recommend that MRS maintain their established Order of Selection for Services (OSS) during FY 2015.  The Council was an active partner in the internal processes that led to MRS establishing OSS.  We recognize that there exists a number of variables related to financial and staff resources that have the potential to impact MRS’s ability to serve all customers coming through their doors.  We expect that with the recent progress made by MRS in strengthening resources, that the implementation of OSS (closing service categories and the creation of a waiting list) will not take place. We believe that maintaining the establishment provides a safeguard to assure a smooth transition for customers and staff, in the event that circumstances could change.

2 – We recommend that MRS provide the Council with information and data about their current staff capacity in the field, at Michigan Career and Technical Institute (MCTI) and at their Central Administrative Offices.  We are aware that as a result of budget cutting measures, hiring freezes and the centralization of staff to the Designated State Agency, MRS staff have been reduced by 95 positions.  We understand that some positions are currently posted and should be filled in the near future.  We are encouraged by this positive change.  The Council’s interest is:  1 - we need to learn about the current capacity of counselors and managers in the field and their effectiveness in serving customers and employers;  2 – we need to learn about the current capacity of MCTI staff in meeting the myriad of student needs at a residential facility (programming for the trades, residential supports and safety) and 3 – we need to learn about the impact on the ongoing operations and programming aspects provided by the Central Office Staff and what staff functions have been absorbed into DHS, including the impact on operational efficiencies and deficiencies.  We are requesting this information so that the membership can determine the current and future potential for the ongoing effectiveness of the public VR program. 

3 - We recommend that MRS establish protocols for the prompt return of phone calls to customers from their counselor. Customer input received during focus groups, public comment and direct contact to the MCRS office has revealed that in some circumstances there is an issue with communication between a customer and their counselor, specific to phone calls not being returned in a timely manner (examples were provided of experiences with calls returned within a 7 – 14 day time span).  

4 - We recommend that the Council receives the program and financial data that MRS submits to Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) each month.  We recognize the value of this information as we work to review, analyze and advise MRS about their service system.  

5 – We recommend that the process of conducting the triennial Comprehensive Statewide Needs Assessment be reviewed at a meeting with all of the involved partners.  The Council would like to see the process be designed at the beginning of the three year cycle, that it is ongoing in the first two years, and that the report is written in the third year, with ample time for review, discussion and consensus on the final document.  In addition, we would like to see consideration given to the expansion of modalities in gaining “needs input”. 

6 - We recommend that the Council receives all of the anecdotal information from both the successful and not successful responses received from the Customer Satisfaction Surveys (at plan and closure).  We recognize the value of this information as we work to review, analyze and advise MRS about their service system.  

7 – We recommend that MRS publish an annual report on the outcomes of their agreements. 

This recommendation is carried forward from last year.  The Council believes that having a formal record of the successes and resulting impact on a local community would benefit MRS for public education purposes by their staff and the Council.  

8 – We recommend that MRS provide the Council with the rationale regarding their decision to maintain the practice of individualized eligibility.  As a result of our previous recommendation in the FY 2014 State Plan related to ‘centralized eligibility’, we acknowledge that MRS has implemented training and pilots in field offices to determine the policy compliance, statewide consistency and efficiency (bringing quality tools and systems to the process) of eligibility determination.  The Council’s primary concern with eligibility was related to what appeared to be the need for enhanced statewide equity in the determination of each customer’s eligibility. 