View this email in your browser<http://us11.campaign-archive2.com/?u=bd3c8fefc9f905f5ccf41c577&id=973bcc49b3&e=869e02ed6b> [American Foundation for the Blind logo: Expanding possibilities for people with vision loss. AFB DirectConnect - 1660 L Street, NY Suite 513, Washington, DC 20036, Tel 202-469-6831, www.afb.org] Righting the Wrongs in the Rehab Regs: Messaging the Homemaker-Closure and Integrated-Settings Issues for Policymakers For further information, contact: Mark Richert, Esq. Director, Public Policy, AFB (202) 469-6833 MRichert@afb.net<mailto:mrichert@afb.net> Advocates will recall that the U.S. Department of Education has issued regulations that significantly impair the ability of states to appropriately serve their vocational rehabilitation clients who are blind or visually impaired. AFB, in partnership with consumer, private agency, and other stakeholder groups in our field, is working to address these unfortunate bureaucratic barriers to full employment and independent living. Advocates may find the material below to be useful in framing effective arguments and other messaging to policymakers. Please consider making active use of the following material in your own oral and written communications concerning these topics. At present, we are educating members of Congress and the new Administration about the very real and avoidable limitations on appropriate VR services that the current regulations represent. Please share this email with your networks and join us in this important advocacy initiative. ________________________________ Recognizing Rehabilitation that Works: Honoring Competitive AbilityOne® Program Careers and Uncompensated Employment Outcomes for People who are Blind or Visually Impaired Action to be Taken: The current federal regulations implementing the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (as amended) must be revised or otherwise augmented/supplemented to ensure that: (1) Competitive jobs created by the AbilityOne program are fully recognized as appropriate employment outcomes, and (2) Traditionally uncompensated work, such as raising a family, caring for family members, or managing a household, can be considered appropriate vocational rehabilitation (VR) outcomes. (1) The U.S. Department of Education’s Rehab Act regulations concerning “competitive integrated employment” are denying people who are blind or visually impaired full access to competitive jobs and upwardly mobile career opportunities. Quality Competitive Careers: AbilityOne employment opportunities provided through nonprofit agencies associated with National Industries for the Blind (NIB) are consistently demonstrating that this program can be a pathway toward upward mobility and positive career growth. Throughout its nationwide network of nonprofit agencies, NIB supports myriad programs that offer competitive wages and benefits, provide business training and career development, and foster empowerment and work integration across business units. Moreover, these employment opportunities are not just indistinguishable from jobs commonly found in every community across America; they routinely surpass the private for-profit sector in superior employee performance because these nonprofit agencies embrace a spirit of universal access and design from a blindness perspective. This is part of the reason why NIB’s nationwide network remains the largest employment resource for individuals who are blind or visually impaired. Needless Regulatory Barriers: Unfortunately, in implementing the most recent reauthorization of the Rehab Act, the U.S. Department of Education has made a blanket determination that any job opportunity in an AbilityOne setting may not be deemed as competitive and integrated. As a result, these career opportunities do not qualify as a successful employment closure, which results in clients’ inability to receive all appropriate services and supports through their state vocational rehabilitation agencies. This not only sends a negative message to individuals finding success through such employment opportunities, it denies job seekers the opportunity to gain self-sufficiency and independence by closing the door to work that provides competitive wages and benefits and that offers a pathway toward upward mobility. Jobs the Education Department Will Not Allow: The following is a brief list of illustrative examples of the kinds of job opportunities for people who are blind or visually impaired that the Education Department does not recognize as appropriate employment outcomes: * Call Center Operator, a full-time position that is paid well above minimum wage, with benefits, either in a call center facility or at home, with career advancement opportunities. Such jobs are performed by federal employees, contractors and tens of thousands of Americans across the United States. However, when the position is offered by a community rehabilitation program for either AbilityOne, or commercial work, the position is not deemed competitive integrated by the Department. * Machine Operator, a full-time skilled labor position that is paid well above minimum wage, with benefits, in an industrial setting, with career advancement opportunities. Such jobs are performed by federal contractors and hundreds of thousands of Americans throughout our country’s manufacturing base. However, when the position is offered by a community rehabilitation program for either AbilityOne or commercial work (such as a machinist earning a competitive salary operating a CNC that produces thousands of parts for Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner), the position is not deemed competitive integrated by the Department. * Cashier/Shelf Stocker, a full-time position that is paid well above minimum wage, with benefits, at a retail store with career advancement opportunities. Such jobs are performed by hundreds of thousands of Americans across the United States, including on military installations. However, when the position is offered by a community rehabilitation program to operate a Base Supply Store on a military installation, the position is not deemed competitive integrated by the Department. * Contract Closeout Specialist, a full-time, salaried position which requires a college degree and background check that is paid pursuant to SCA wage rates with benefits, with career advancement opportunities. Such jobs are performed by federal employees and contractors. However, when the employer is fulfilling an AbilityOne contract, the position is not deemed competitive integrated by the Department. * Process Engineer, a full time salaried position paid well above minimum wage with benefits in an industrial setting with opportunities for advancement that requires a bachelor’s degree or equivalent experience that when performed in an AbilityOne agency is not deemed competitive integrated employment. An Unfair Assessment: Incredibly, the U.S. Education Department’s Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) has determined that the above positions and many others like them, due to their association with AbilityOne, do not count as a real job because they are allegedly not "typically found in the community." Remarkably, the Department does deem part-time positions with undetermined work hours, often at minimum wage and without benefits in fast food restaurants or retail outlets to be competitive integrated positions and would seemingly favor them over the above positions. Restoring Common Sense: The simple truth is that RSA has allowed an unwarranted bias against AbilityOne careers to cloud its judgment about the availability and quality of employment that can and should be open to people who are blind or visually impaired. Rather than penalizing clients who choose to work in competitive settings where other people with vision loss may work – and rather than restricting states from exercising maximum flexibility in the placement of clients in settings tailor made to promote the success of employees with visual disabilities – the U.S. Education Department should reconsider and revise its regulations to fully recognize the value and appropriateness of competitive careers afforded by NIB-associated AbilityOne nonprofit agencies. (2) Prohibiting states from allowing clients to work in uncompensated contexts, such as raising a family or managing a household, is an unwarranted intrusion on state discretion denying vital rehabilitative services to people with vision loss. Regulatory Overreach: When the U.S. Department of Education released sweeping regulations ostensibly intended to implement the most recent congressional reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, it did not simply carry out the express intent of Congress but, in a number of areas, opportunistically exercised authority to limit states’ flexibility to meet the unique rehabilitative needs of clients who are blind or visually impaired. Specifically, under the new rules, the Department will penalize states when clients may be able to successfully complete vocational rehabilitation (VR) programs but ultimately work without compensation. This means that clients who choose to work without pay under circumstances that are not typically compensated, such as raising a family or managing a household, will be denied the very services that can enable them to do so. Moreover, a number of individuals who experience vision loss in the midst of their careers fully intend to return to the paid workforce but simply require extra time to rebuild personal confidence and acquire workplace skills that will facilitate that return. Restoring access to uncompensated VR outcomes would allow these individuals time to prepare for their eventual return to work. A Rationale Without Reason: In articulating its rationale for eliminating the homemaker and other so-called non-compensated employment outcomes, the Education Department admits that withholding recognition for specific employment outcomes is not required by the most recent congressional amendments to the Rehab Act but is purely a discretionary matter. Nevertheless, the Department argues that the emphasis placed on competitive employment in the recent Rehab Act amendments gives the Department license to exercise such discretion. This erroneous rationale ignores the plain fact that the Rehab Act has made a priority of competitive work for decades, and the homemaker and similar closures remained available throughout that period. Moreover, although the Education Department has acknowledged that the proportion of clients in uncompensated employment has been consistently quite small (if so few clients were being closed as homemakers, why solve a problem that does not exist?), the Department fails to understand that the provision of VR services through separate state agencies for the blind, along with the demographics of aging and vision loss, means that the regulations as written place a significantly disproportionate burden on people who are blind or visually impaired and on the public and private agencies specifically charged to serve them. A Growing Population with Nowhere Else to Turn: According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Vision Health Initiative (VHI), the incidence of vision loss will increase exponentially in the years to come. Diseases such as diabetes and glaucoma remain leading causes of blindness, and are especially prevalent among middle age adults in communities of color. It is particularly important, then, to recognize the diversity of the population of people with vision loss and to promote, rather than discourage, a full continuum of options and outcomes, including uncompensated employment outcomes. This is all the more apparent when one remembers that vision rehabilitation provided by highly qualified professionals specifically trained to meet the unique needs of people with vision loss is not offered through Medicare, Medicaid, or private insurers. Consequently, for people who are blind or visually impaired of working age, meaningful rehabilitation is only available through the very state programs that the Education Department is now constraining through its arbitrary exercise of regulatory authority. Real World Impact: If the regulations remain in place as written, states will have no choice but to refuse to provide much-needed vocational rehabilitation services to those clients who choose to work under circumstances that are not traditionally compensated. This is because the current regulations mean that states will not commit the federal dollars they receive to provide services to clients who do not seek and secure paid employment. It is therefore likely, under the current regulations, that potential clients who have lost their vision later in their working years but who want nothing more than to continue to raise their families or independently manage their own affairs will be denied the only publicly available source of rehabilitation available today. A Ready Solution: The U.S. Department of Education must immediately rescind the provisions of its rules implementing the Rehabilitation Act which needlessly impose top-down restrictions on states’ ability to prepare VR clients for a full array of employment opportunities, including opportunities to be productive community contributors but which may not be traditionally compensated. Should the Education Department fail to act on its own, the U.S. Congress should direct the Department to amend its regulations accordingly. [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-facebook-48.png]<http://afb.us11.list-manage.com/track/click?u=bd3c8fefc9f905f5ccf41c577&id=fa7dcf1294&e=869e02ed6b> [https://cdn-images.mailchimp.com/icons/social-block-v2/color-link-48.png]<http://afb.us11.list-manage.com/track/click?u=bd3c8fefc9f905f5ccf41c577&id=1ddae56306&e=869e02ed6b>