RSC Commissioner Budget & Audit Committee Meeting Minutes
10
pages
English
Documents
Le téléchargement nécessite un accès à la bibliothèque YouScribe Tout savoir sur nos offres
10
pages
English
Documents
Le téléchargement nécessite un accès à la bibliothèque YouScribe Tout savoir sur nos offres
RSC Commissioner Budget & Audit Committee Meeting Minutes Wednesday, January 7, 2009 9:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. – Cols/Zanesville Room 400 E. Campus View Blvd., Columbus, OH Commissioners: Commissioner David Daugherty, Commissioner Jacqui Romer-Sensky, Commissioner Joyce Young, Commissioner Bruce Growick Staff: Executive Director John Connelly, Christine Hansen, Michael Martz, Connie O’Brien, Michael Hanes, Steve Ostrander, Faye Spratley, Marc Protsman, Bruce Mrofka, Christina Wendell, Erik Williamson, Joe Dunn, Diane Taylor, Eileen Corson, Beverly Jennings Guests: Kelly Manns, Cincinnati OVGI, Mary Hiland, ACB, George Barnes, ACB, Eric Duffy, NFB Ohio, Marty Goudiose, Linda Weyman, ACB, Brenda Hanes, Goodwill Columbus, Christine Staccia, Jennifer Kuntz, Greenleaf JTS, George Ackerman, Brian White, Julie Russell, Jessica Hart, OAGWI , Dawn Christenson, Sight Center of NW Ohio Kevin Futryk, Ohio Alliance of CCDs The Budget and Audit Committee met on Wednesday, January 7, 2009 at 400 E. Campus View Blvd., Columbus, Ohio. Chair David Daugherty called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. Approval of Minutes Commissioner Growick moved to accept the minutes of the December 10, 2008 meeting. Seconded by Commissioner Romer-Sensky. Motion carried. Public Comment Kevin Futryck of the Ohio Alliance of Community Centers for the Deaf stated that Legislative Director Joe Dunn has been keeping the alliance informed and if they have any specific ...
Voir
Publié par
Langue
English
RSC Commissioner Budget & Audit Committee Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
9:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. – Cols/Zanesville Room
400 E. Campus View Blvd., Columbus, OH
Commissioners:
Commissioner David Daugherty, Commissioner Jacqui Romer-Sensky,
Commissioner Joyce Young, Commissioner Bruce Growick
Staff:
Executive Director John Connelly, Christine Hansen, Michael Martz, Connie O’Brien,
Michael Hanes, Steve Ostrander, Faye Spratley, Marc Protsman, Bruce Mrofka, Christina
Wendell, Erik Williamson, Joe Dunn, Diane Taylor, Eileen Corson, Beverly Jennings
Guests:
Kelly Manns, Cincinnati OVGI, Mary Hiland, ACB, George Barnes, ACB, Eric Duffy,
NFB Ohio, Marty Goudiose, Linda Weyman, ACB, Brenda Hanes, Goodwill Columbus,
Christine Staccia, Jennifer Kuntz, Greenleaf JTS,
George Ackerman, Brian White, Julie Russell,
Jessica Hart, OAGWI , Dawn Christenson, Sight Center of NW Ohio Kevin Futryk, Ohio
Alliance of CCDs
The Budget and Audit Committee met on Wednesday, January 7, 2009 at 400 E. Campus View
Blvd., Columbus, Ohio.
Chair David Daugherty called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m.
Approval of Minutes
Commissioner Growick moved to accept the minutes of the December 10, 2008 meeting.
Seconded by Commissioner Romer-Sensky.
Motion carried.
Public Comment
Kevin Futryck of the Ohio Alliance of Community Centers for the Deaf stated that Legislative
Director Joe Dunn has been keeping the alliance informed and if they have any specific
comments they will present those to the full Commission.
Eric Duffy, National Federation for the Blind expressed his desire to have the opportunity for
some of the same dialog at the last meeting regarding BSVI.
Old Business
Consumer/Partner Input:
CIO Michael Martz stated that arrangements have been made with
the Ohio Government Telecommunications (OGT) to enable RSC to webcast meetings.
OGT is
in the process of installing a videoconferencing system by the middle of this month. As soon as
they are ready, RSC will be testing its videoconferencing with OGT’s.
When testing is
completed, RSC will be able to make arrangements to live webcast at no cost.
This will happen,
hopefully, by the beginning of February.
2009 Budget Calendar:
CFO Hansen stated the only change to the Budget Calendar was
________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
2
Update on meetings with the Office of Budget & Management (OBM) and the Ohio Public
Employees Retirement System (OPERS):
CFO Hansen stated that since the last committee
meeting, meetings were scheduled with OBM to inform them of the options discussed.
A
meeting was held on December 15
th
with the Budget Analyst as well as the Analyst reviewing
the ERI proposals.
They expressed concern that RSC continue to work with partners and receive
their input.
Information was also shared from a conference call that Human Resources, Finance
and Budget had with OPERS regarding any layoffs anticipated in conjunction with ERI.
The
Staffing Analysis was also shared showing the results of the agency’s current staffing and what
may happen with the ERI.
OBM seemed pleased with the numbers.
The numbers are across the
board a 25% reduction, and they did not provide an answer.
They did, however, say they were in
agreement with the options but it is up to the Commissioners to make the final decision.
The
same information was shared with Amy McGee of the Governor’s Office, and she did not wish
to meet on it as she was satisfied with the information.
On December 19
th
OBM issued two
directives (#9 and #10).
Directive 9 was to revise the state revenue for the year, and Directive 10
notified agencies of the additional reductions they would have to take.
A request was made from
the State Independent Living Council (SILC) to provide the funds back that RSC paid to them,
and they did comply by returning a check for about $28,000.
The bottom line is that OBM is
looking for a commitment to staffing reductions and other reductions and/or actions RSC is
taking in addition to the ERI.
Commissioner Growick asked in terms of the ERI fulfillment vs. the overall deficit what the
approximate percentage filled with an ERI would be.
CFO Hansen stated the Impact Analysis
chart shows three scenarios, the middle scenario (with additional 5.75% reduction) reflects where
the agency stands right now.
The third scenario (with an additional 10% reduction) shows an
additional reduction since the agency is not sure of being out of the woods yet.
If OBM does
take the ERI into consideration, the middle box on the chart shows the deficit will go up to
approximately $11-12 million.
Commissioner Daugherty stated that if the ERI is not approved
the deficits continue to grow, so the sooner they are approved, the better the agency will be.
CFO Hansen stated the chart does show the impact of the ERI.
There were also additional
options in reducing technology costs which aren’t shown.
The technology savings for 2009 will
take care of a good portion of the deficit.
Commissioner Growick expressed concern with the
Maintenance of Effort (MOE) shortfall line item and asked if there are any updates on requesting
a variance from this.
CFO Hansen stated that generally this is not requested until it is absolutely
known for sure there will be a shortfall.
The Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) is
hoping agencies will try to create a situation where there isn’t a shortfall.
Cash Transfer Agreements with State Agencies:
Commissioner Growick stated the agency is in
an excellent position to provide services to other state agencies that might need RSC’s services.
If these agreements can be enacted, it may help.
Executive Director Connelly stated that the
challenge with Cash Transfer Agreements is they come from other agencies also funded with the
General Revenue Fund (GRF).
RSC has been informed by the Department of Mental Health that
they would like to do agreements, but do not have money.
The Department of MRDD said they
are developing a proposal and when ready to present they will contact us.
Negotiations are still
underway with the Board of Regents.
Three or four meetings have been held with them, and an
agreement is likely.
RSC has a small transfer agreement with Rehabilitation and Corrections but
their budget is also in dire straits.
The Bureau of Workers Compensation and RSC currently
have an agreement which is the only one not zeroed out.
Some challenges with the reporting
mechanism are continuing. A meeting is scheduled for January 15
th
with their director.
The
3
Department of Job and Family Services called yesterday to say they want to renegotiate their
agreement to go to a month-month basis because of the budget situation. A meeting was held the
week of December 25
th
with the Department of Education. They want to continue to work with
RSC.
Commissioner Growick asked if there is any assistance RSC can request from the Governor’s
Office or if legislative assistance is available when it comes to negotiating with other state
agencies.
Executive Director Connelly replied that the first time RSC had Cash Transfer
Agreements, they were done under OBM, so OBM is very aware of that possibility. Talks have
been held with the Governor’s Office about this as well.
The legislature was very supportive of
it the last time it was done.
Legislative Director Joe Dunn added that the opportunity for
legislative action would come with opposition from the other state agencies.
The agencies would
also have budget problems and will need to keep this money for other programs. Commissioner
Growick asked if there are any thoughts of working with BWC since it is not GRF?
Executive
Director Connelly stated the meeting scheduled on January 15
th
with the BWC director will
include exploring that possibility. Commissioner Growick asked about negotiating with the
Veterans Services.
Executive Director Connelly responded that a meeting with the Director of
Department of Veterans Services was held and they did not feel they could move forward with a
Cash Transfer Agreement at this time.
Chair Daugherty suggested given his experience with the
BWC that Commissioner Growick attend the meeting scheduled with their director on January
15
th
along with Executive Director Connelly.
Administrative Management Layoffs and Cost Reductions:
Commissioner Growick stated that
the line item regarding Administrative Cost was not broken out at the last Committee meeting in
terms of the cost savings per line item. There was some discussion that perhaps the GRF can be
positively affected by reducing some of the Administrative cost.
Executive Director Connelly
briefed on things that have been done in the last 4-5 years to reduce Administrative Cost such as
reducing square footage of office space and streamlining support, management and supervisory
staff across VR Bureaus.
At the director’s level, staff has been reduced to 4 assistant directors,
and the executive director’s office has eliminated the assistant executive director’s position.
The
vacancy for HR team leader will not be filled.
Going forward with ERI, there will be 2 senior
positions where folks have indicated they will take the ERI if approved, and those positions will
not be filled.
Commissioner Daugherty asked if this has been quantified in terms of dollars.
CFO Hansen stated some is dependent on ERI, and meetings have been held with bureaus and
teams that looked at the structure of life after ERI.
Executive Director Connelly added that the
agency has also been in compliance with the hiring control, and eliminated equipment purchases
for the remainder of the year, and out of state travel. RSC has the largest telecommuting program
of any other state agency which has resulted in a significant savings.
Commissioner Growick
asked if there is any feeling of how Administration may change in the future with all the budget
cuts.
Executive Director Connelly responded that two or three folks on the Executive Team will
be taking the ERI and all RSC staff will be given the opportunity to provide feedback regarding
life after ERI. CFO Hansen stated that regarding the centralized or shared services with other
state agencies, OBM and DAS have looked at various functions across the state that are similar
among agencies.
They have found there are certain functions that are similar, and OBM has
developed a shared services operation and looking at certain functions that can be streamlined.
Travel requests, for example, is one area being discussed right now.
RSC is represented on the
committee with the shared services team, and will continue working with them.
Commissioner
Romer-Sensky stated she supports efforts to come up with fewer staff on the organizational
chart.
4
Presentation of White Paper Options
Financial Needs Testing for VR Services:
BSVI Director Mike Hanes and BVR Director
Williamson explained the Financial Needs Testing for VR Services option:
The option of
implementing a financial needs test for vocational rehabilitation services would enable RSC to
use the case service dollars available more efficiently and effectively for its consumers.
RSC did
have a financial needs test applicable to services in the 1980s, but was withdrawn when it was no
longer needed.
Federal Regulations permit the state to implement a financial needs test for
services or specific services, however, the state must detail how the financial needs policy works
in writing, the test must be reasonable, consider the individual’s disability related expenses, and
not deny individuals services.
Implementation of a financial needs test would require an
administrative rule and the process would take an average of six months to implementation.
Given the current and anticipated continuing need to seriously reduce spending within the
agency, it is recommended that RSC move forward with a financial needs test with the intention
of implementing on or about October 1, 2009.
In developing the financial needs test, RSC will
conduct additional research with states that currently have such a test. A plan for stakeholder
input and education will be developed to assure all concerns are appropriately considered.
Commissioner Growick expressed support for a financial needs test.
It is an option worthy of
exploring further and should be across the board and selective.
Commissioner Romer-Sensky
expressed support of the option and Commissioner Joyce Young stated it is a responsible way of
dealing with the current budget crisis the agency is facing.
Motion:
Commissioner Romer-Sensky moved that the Financial Needs Testing has
merit, and a staff should prepare a formal motion to present to the full Commission.
Seconded by Commissioner Growick.
Motion carried.
Personal Care Assistance (PCA) Program & Community Centers for the Deaf (CCD):
Team
Leader O’Brien stated that the PCA program was established as a pilot project by Senate Bill 522
in the 114
th
General Assembly in 198l to provide funds to pay for personal assistance services to
enable persons with severe physical disabilities to work and/or live independently.
The Ohio
Administrative Code rules 3304-4-01 through 3304-4-04 govern the administration of the PCA
program with rule 3304-4-02 outlining the specific requirements and structure for the program.
The program began servicing participants in FFY 1983 with $500,000 in GRF for the pilot
project.
The program is currently funded solely through RSC’s Social Security Reimbursement
(SSR) funds at just below $3.375M.
The initial administrative rules divided the program into four priority levels to establish the order
in which consumers would be served.
Administrative Rule 3304-4-02(A)(1) says “when
sufficient funds are available, those found eligible shall be served based on the rank order of
priority groups….”
The priority levels established under this administrative rule are:
Priority 1,
consumers who are employed; Priority 2, consumers who are in an active job search; Priority 3,
consumers who are engaged in training to lead to employment; and Priority 4, maintenance of
independent living.
Through various rule changes, a verbal commitment was made to legislators
that RSC would not eliminate serving individuals through Priority 4. However with the current
budget constraints it is imperative to consider this program’s administrative rules which include
the grandfather provision for Priority 4 were established based on the above noted rule, “when
sufficient funds are available….”
The paper recommends that RSC maintain Priority 1 and reduce the other 3 priority levels. It is
recommended the program be closed to new participants in all priority levels and maintain
5
assistance for the current participants who meet the definition of competitive employment
(Priority 1) until attrition eventually completely phases out the program.
These participants are
currently being served without any time limit as long as competitive employment is maintained.
When employment is lost, provide participant with a three-month grace period in which they can
still receive assistance while they network for other resources.
The cost of service delivery for
the current participants in Priority 1 who are competitively employed would be approximately
$1.4M for FFY 2010 including administrative costs.
If funding for this program is not adequate
to meet the demands of keeping services intact for Priority 1 participants, it is recommended to
close out the program to all participants at the end of FFY2009.
By implementing the
recommendation to close out the program to future participants and continue to serve only those
participants who are competitively employed, RSC will eventually save the total cost of the
program ($3.8M).
Chair Daugherty asked if these are dollars used for federal match.
Team Leader O’Brien stated
because they are SS dollars they cannot be matched to federal funds. Commissioner Romer-
Sensky asked if there has been any further discussion regarding making this a service under
Medicaid.
Team Leader O’Brien stated there is the Home Choice Program, but individuals must
be already living in an institution before funds can be withdrawn.
Commissioner Growick asked
if once a consumer in the PCA program is employed if there is a tax benefit.
Guest, Chris
Staccia, responded there is a tax benefit if someone has medical and related expenses and has
been prescribed services.
Motion:
Commissioner Romer-Sensky moved to close the PCA program to all new
participants and that staff bring recommendations for time limitations for Priority 1 to the
full Commission.
Seconded by Commissioner Growick.
Motion carried.
Community Centers for the Deaf (CCDs):
BVR Director Williamson stated the CCDs have
been strong advocates of RSC, including providing testimony for the agency during budget
hearings.
Ohio CCDs provide access to communication services enabling deaf, heard of hearing
and deaf-blind individuals to communicate with their hearing peers.
RSC funds an average of
32.5% of the CCDs budgets, with some relying on 70% from RSC.
Any reductions in the budget
would provide a commensurate impact on services available to the deaf community.
Changing
the funding structure from GRF to SSR would be a win-win situation for both entities.
Currently
$50,000 of the funding is GRS, with $750,000 in SSR.
Switching the additional $50,000 to SSR
would allow RSC to draw down an additional $184,742 in federal matching funds. BVR Director
Williamson stated it is recommended that RSC not reduce funding of the CCDs and that all of
the CCDs funding be moved to Social Security Reimbursement so that more GRF dollars can be
used to draw down federal matching dollars.
This would preserve services and the relationship
RSC enjoys with the CCDs.
Kevin Futryck of the Alliance of CCDs stated that at this time, the
CCDs have no objection with this recommendation.
Motion:
Commissioner Romer-Sensky moved that RSC pursue using Social Security
Reimbursement funding instead of GRF for the $50,000 allocated to the CCDs with the
caveat to re-examine this with the current budget.
Seconded by Commissioner Growick.
Third Party Cooperative Agreements: California Model/Pathways Expansion:
Team Leader
O’Brien stated that since Pathways has been so successful, it was decided to take a look around
the country to see what other states are doing regarding Cooperative Agreements. The California
Model provides a mechanism for partnership on both state and political subdivisions to bring
together funding and services to provide services to people with disabilities. The California
6
Model employs a funding formula in which the partner (local political subdivision) and the
Designated State Unit (DSU) share the federal match delineated by in-kind or cash match.
For
every dollar of in-kind match the partner provides, they receive one dollar of the federal match.
Executive Director Connelly stated that the California Model is currently going through their
monitoring review by the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA).
There is some question
as to whether RSA is going to approve the California Model continuing the in-kind match.
RSA
has been very adamant about having hard cash for match.
Team Leader O’Brien stated it is recommended RSC proceed with the implementation of the
third party cooperative agreement model.
Regardless of the type of match received, either in-
kind or cash, the funding formula supports the person with a disability via specialized partner
services and DSU services.
Decisions must be made in concert with the existing Pathways
Program.
This includes an increase by RSC to the pathways Program contracts to cover the full
programmatic oversight costs. In addition, the continuation and responsible expansion of the
Pathways II program is recommended.
An increase in federal match split should be considered
to provide more statewide services to more diverse populations of Ohioans with disabilities, and
cap of 30% of case services budgets should be allocated to third party agreements.
Commissioner Growick stated it is an excellent, creative recommendation and asked if the
Commission supports this kind of model would this be more attractive to other state entities.
Legislative Director Dunn replied it would be and, legislatively, it would be popular.
Commissioner Romer-Sensky asked when RSC enters into these agreements, who would hold
the ultimate liability on audit finance.
Team Leader O’Brien said the monitoring of the
agreements is a lot more intense.
California has about 200 agreements and 12 people assigned to
monitor the programs at all times.
Commissioner Romer-Sensky stated that RSC should
continue to explore the possibility of cooperative agreements and to articulate it is pending
federal approval.
Guest, Kelly Manns, stated that many of the CRPs would be interested in the
in-kind match, but there needs to be much more information available.
Executive Director
Connelly stated that the Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation (CSAVR)
has not taken a position on this yet.
One of the things they have taken position on, however is
the Economic Stimulus--Job Retention and Creation for Workers with Disabilities. More
discussion should be held on this over the next day or two at the CSAVR Executive Committee
Meeting in Phoenix.
Chair Daugherty suggested to continue to pursue this and find out what is
going to happen with the California Model as far as RSA is concerned.
Legislative Director
Dunn asked that his office be authorized to actively seek in-kind language in the Stimulus Bill.
Motion:
Commissioner Growick moved that a recommendation be made to the full
Commission that RSC be empowered to further explore cooperative agreements with in-
kind benefits and that legislative action be looked into that might be helpful in
incorporating that into any Economic Stimulus package.
Seconded by Commissioner
Romer-Sensky.
Motion carried.
Merger of BVR/BSVI:
BSVI Director Hanes discussed some of the VR Bureau efficiencies that
have been put into place to date including, reducing the number of geographical areas from 8 to
4; cross supervision between the bureaus, resources shared between the Bureaus including
support staff, equipment, office space, supplies, etc., and BSVI has developed strong
partnerships with the American Council of the Blind and the National Federation of the Blind to
serve consumers and educate BSVI counselors and the general public on blindness issues.
Future efficiencies for consideration include expansion of telecommuting, increased use of
caseload assistants, financial needs test for consumers, increased provision of in-house services,
7
and returning the Independent Living Older Blind and Homemaker program to the areas vs. it
being a separate program.
BVR Director Hanes stated that based on the available research,
literature, consumer group positions, and experiences of other state vocational rehabilitation
programs and RSC’s Northwest model, it is not recommended that the Commissioners pursue
merging BSVI and BVR into one single bureau to serve all disability groups.
Commissioner Romer-Sensky asked how many people there are in Central Office for BVR and
BSVI.
BVR Director Williamson stated there are a total of 7 for both bureaus.
Executive
Director Connelly added there were 22 in the 1990s.
Commissioner Growick asked for more
specifics regarding the potential future efficiencies.
BSVI Director Hanes stated that some of the
future efficiencies are already under way, for example, expanding telecommuting.
There are
some areas with offices that only have 1 or 2 counselors.
These counselors can work from home.
The use of caseload assistants can be increased to perform more of the pre-vocational work and
financial needs testing.
Chair Daugherty asked if there would there be savings if the two Bureaus were combined?
BSVI
Director Hanes stated that the agency would end up losing some of the quality monitoring and
there would probably not be significant savings.
CFO Hansen added that a fiscal analysis on this
has not been done, but the bureaus have defined the services and costs savings that would be
provided.
Many of the bureaus and teams are looking at streamlining.
Chair Daugherty stated it
would then be modest savings, if at all, in combining the Bureaus.
Commissioner Romer-Sensky
stated there would be no major fiscal impairments in combining the Bureaus, but perhaps some
service provision problems.
Commissioner Growick said he would like to see some figures that
articulate where the current overlap is, how success of the NW Model can be extended to the
other 3 areas, and what the positions and monetary issues are.
Guest, Brian White stated that the NW Model works because the managers call other BSVI area
managers and talk to them about situations.
If the BSVI area managers are deleted from the state
the NW Model will no longer work.
Motion:
Commissioner Romer-Sensky moved to maintain the two Bureaus but continue to urge
the Bureaus to pursue joint administration and supervisory services when possible and to
quantify them for full Commission enlightenment.
Seconded by Commissioner Growick.
Motion carried.
Restructuring Consumer Affairs:
Team Leader O’Brien stated the current structure of the
Consumer Affairs programs has been reviewed.
The Consumer Affairs unit and the state
Consumer Advisory Committee (CAC) are required by the Ohio Revised Code.
The agency has
the discretion to create additional advisory committees as it has with the local CACs.
The
average cost of a state CAC meeting is $2,152, while a local meeting costs approximately $175.
It is recommended to reduce the number of local CACs from 12 to 6 to be located in each of the
four local areas; develop an agency best practice for when focus groups should be initiated;
revise the current practice of processing Status 26 closure surveys to include analysis by
consumer affairs to review for statewide trends, successes and concerns; and re-establish the
grant writer responsibilities to search for alternative funding sources through RSA and other
entities where 501 3C status is not required, assist the agency leadership in monitoring grant
outcomes and compliance requirements.
Commissioner Growick asked for more information on the grant writing aspect.
Team Leader
O’Brien stated that one coordinator had previously been designated as fulltime grant writer
8
which was not good use of the position.
Commissioner Romer-Sensky stated this is not much of
a budget consideration and the most compelling issue was regarding CAC attendance in certain
areas. She will be attending this Saturday’s CAC meeting and would like to get input from the
members and bring back more information to the Committee.
Replacing GRF with Social Security Reimbursement Dollars:
A paper was prepared to
consider the option of shifting non-matching GRFs of approximately $460,000 currently
appropriated to the CCDs, the SILC and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) to the VR program and
replacing funds with federal Social SSR funds.
If done, the GRF could then be used by the VR
program as non-federal match which could generate $1.7 million in federal funds.
Legislative
Director Dunn stated it is not recommended to seek a change for the 2011 Biennial Budget in the
GRF Dollars and to move the $460,000 so it can be matched and shift it to SSR.
Commissioner Growick stated concern regarding the SILCs and he would like to hear from them
as to what kinds of opportunities there would be by moving this to the SSR and how it would
affect the SILCs.
CFO Hansen stated she did ask Brenda Curtiss to provide any information
possible.
Information received was that there was only about $2,000 being used for match. The
information does not indicate it will be a matching issue for the SILCs.
Motion:
Commissioner Romer-Sensky moved to recommend to the full Commission
that the SILC funding be changed to SSR and the GRF be directed to the VR program,
CCD and TBI with the caveat that maybe up to $10,000 in GRF to them be verified and
the situation be revisited in the next Biennial Budget.
Seconded by Commissioner
Growick.
Motion carried.
Creating Case Service Efficiency by Providing Services In-House:
BVR Director Williamson
provided the following update regarding in-house services:
RSC, historically, has provided a
variety of in-house vocational rehabilitation programming initiatives that have been success in
providing more rapid engagement of consumers at a lower cost. In recent years, RSC’s
counselors have largely purchased services for consumers due to productivity demands and
workload constraints.
RSC is currently faced with reduced case service resources; therefore,
field staff has been making use of available internal resources to provide direct services to
consumers in an effort to keep them moving the vocational rehabilitation process in a timely
manner.
Services provided in-house currently include, in-house testing; career exploration
workshops; personal empowerment training; job seeking skills training; and job clubs.
Closure of 150 Crosswoods Office/Relocation Plan & Space Considerations:
CIO Martz stated
that closing of the 150 Crosswoods Office is part on on-going space reduction plans.
The
number of staff in the 150 building and in the 400 building has declined.
The plan is to move
people from the 150 building back to the 400 building. The 150 building will be closed by the
end of March 09.
An annual on-going savings of nearly $230,000 will be realized.
Other Business
Order of Selection:
Commissioner Growick stated that as the fiscal crunch continues, it would
be prudent for the agency to articulate what some options might be in the way business is
conducted, such as deciding what consumers are served first and in what manner.
BVR Director
Williamson commented that the RSA Monitoring asked that RSC be more specific as to how we
provide services and track the population serviced.
The agency is currently doing that.
A work
9
group has been established to look at ways the agency can better define and articulate services.
BVR Director Williamson stated he will obtain a progress report from the work group.
Case Aids:
– Commissioner Growick asked about the use of case aids.
BVR Director
Williamson stated that the main problem right now is that RSC cannot hire more case aids, but it
is a great model.
ERI Proposal
Chair Daugherty read the following motion:
Motion:
In light of actions recommended by the Budget and Audit Committee today to reduce
expenditures, improve administrative efficiencies and enhance agency revenues, and based upon
a review of the proposed staffing analysis from the December 10, 2008 Committee meeting, the
Budget and Audit Committee continues to support the ERI proposals approved by the full
Commission on September 10, 2008 and submitted to OBM as a key cornerstone in resolving the
deficiencies caused by GRF budget reductions.
Commissioner Romer-Sensky so moved.
Commissioner Growick seconded.
Discussion:
Commissioner Young commented that the need to push forward on the ERI has been discussed
with her and Commission Vice Chair Romer-Sensky.
Commissioner Growick expressed concern that the full Commission is not involved and he
would be more comfortable if the motion read that
we as a Commission as a whole support the
ERI and that it will continue to be mentioned to the Governor’s Office
.
Chair Daugherty stated OBM has requested a motion today coming from the Budget and Audit
Committee and they would then hopefully move forward. Executive Director Connelly
commented the agency is reaching a point where by not getting a decision, the problem is being
compounded around $1 million a month.
Commissioner Young stated she would be happy to phone the other Commission members to see
if there are any objections and to discuss this issue and give them a week to respond.
Referencing Roberts Rules, Chair Daugherty stated the Motion is on the floor.
Commissioner Growick then moved to amend the motion to include that the Commission Chair
call a meeting of the other Commissioners to discuss this issue before a confirmation of the
earlier vote the Commissioner’s took is confirmed.
Amendment failed for lack of a second.
Chair Daugherty called attention back to the original motion and called the question.
Commissioner Romer-Sensky – aye
Chair Daugherty – aye
Commissioner Growick - opposed
Motion passed.
10
Commissioner Growick moved for adjournment.
Seconded by Commissioner Romer-Sensky.
Meeting adjourned at 12:05 p.m. Motion to convene:
BG. Seconded JRS
12:05
