|
Home
| Projects
| Publications
|
Training
| What's
New |
ILRU / NCIL / APRIL: National Training & Technical Assistance
Project
Expanding the Power of the Independent Living Movement
SILC Congress '98
- endorsement form
- thank you letter
-
National SILC Organization
Facilitators
Gina McDonald
KACIL
1423 W. Crawford Street
Salina, KS 67401
(913) 825-2675 (V/TTY)
FAX: 825-7029
Email: ginamcd@aol.comBob Michaels
ILRU Program
65 E. Kelly Lane
Tempe, AZ 85284
(602) 961-0553 (V/TTY)
FAX: 961-0533
Email: michaels@impulsedata.netDuane French
AK Division of Vocational Rehabilitation
801 W. 10th Street, Suite200
Juneau, AK 99801
(907) 465-2814 (V/TTY)
FAX: 465-2856
Email: dfrench@educ.state.ak.usQuentin Smith
ILRU Program
4128 E. Bujia Segunda
Tucson, AZ 85718
(520) 299-7990
FAX: 299-5787
Email: quentin.smith@internetmci.comILRU STAFF
ILRU Program
2323 S. Shepherd, Suite 1000
Houston, TX 77019
(713) 520-0232
TTY: 520-5136
FAX: 520-5785
Email: ilru@ilru.orgBob Michaels michaels@impulsedata.net
Quentin Smith quentin.smith@internetmci.com
Laurel Richards
Richard Petty richard.petty@bcm.tmc.edu
Dawn Heinsohn heinsohn@ilru.org
steering committee
OFFICERS AT LARGE
Chair: Patrick Reinhart--AK
Vice Chair: Lydia Kirschenbaum--NJ
Secretary: Cris Clay--CA
PRIMARY AND ALTERNATE REPRESENTATIVES
Region I
Primary: Eugene Gagnon--NH
Alternate: Henrietta Jordan--VTRegion II
Primary: Lydia Kirschenbaum--NJ
Alternate: David Arocho--NYRegion III
Primary: Ann Meadows--WV
Alternate: --Region IV
Primary: Kimbal Gray--SC
Alternate: Jennifer Whitcomb--TNRegion V
Primary: Deb Wisniewski--WI
Alternate: John Eckert--ILRegion VI
Primary: Jeff Hughes--OK
Alternate: Bill Parker--NMRegion VII
Primary: Norma Boge--IA
Alternate: Shannon Jones--KSRegion VIII
Primary: Brian Dale--UT
Alternate: Tom Osborn--MTRegion IX
Primary: Cris Clay--CA
Alternate: Teresa McMorran--AZRegion X
Primary: Patrick Reinhart--AK
Alternate: Kelly Buckland--ID
ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '98
Overview:
SILC CONGRESS '98 was held in Houston on January 14-16 and attended by representatives of statewide independent living councils (SILCs) from all 50 states plus Washington, D.C., and the Virgin Islands. It was convened to examine SILC's most critical issues and to develop recommendations for addressing these issues.
To identify these issues prior to the conference, ILRU staff used a modified Delphi survey technique, contacting each SILC chair by mail and asking them to identify the most prominent issues facing SILCs. Results were compiled into a list of 21 items. This list was then re-sent to SILC chairs, asking them to rank them in terms of most important. Four issues clearly emerged as top ranking and were used to form the basis of the work groups at SILC Congress '98. The issues were:
· the SILC's relationship with independent living centers,
· the SILC's relationship with the designated state unit,
· SILC autonomy, and
· the SILC as a systems' advocate.
At the SILC CONGRESS '98 in Houston, a large-group discussion of each issue was led by panels composed of four SILC representatives who spoke on each issue. Then, work groups were convened on each issue, with group members being given the charge to develop a set of recommendations addressing that issue.
Following development of a set of recommendations on the part of each work group, participants were re-gathered into a large group and were joined (via speaker phone from Washington, D.C.) by RSA Independent Living Chief John Nelson. To the Congress at large, each group presented its recommendations and obtained feedback on extent of agreement, points to clarify, and issues to consider further. Participants then returned to their respective work groups to complete development of their recommendations.
It should be noted that these sets of issues and recommendations represent the opinions of participants in the SILC CONGRESS '98. Despite having rather strong opinions on these issues, conference facilitators and ILRU staff chose to play non-obtrusive roles consisting of creating a forum in which comprehensive discussions could take place and group consensus could be reached.
The issues and recommendations developed at the SILC CONGRESS '98 are attached, along with a roster of participants and facilitators. These sets of issues and recommendations were reviewed for accuracy by the group facilitators.
Drop by ILRU's web site for information about the SILC CONGRESS '98, including the materials in this mailout--and some photos of SILC CONGRESS '98 attendees. Our address is http://www.ilru.org/silcs.
ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '98
The SILC's Relationship with CILs
Issue Statement:
Each SILC should include in their state plan how monitoring will be implemented. We agreed that the role of monitoring has to do with the state plan. With regard to relationships between the SILC and the CILs, monitoring has been and is being used in five different ways: site reviews, operation of the CIL, technical assistance, grants, and review of centers 704 reports. Recommendations on each approach are provided below.
Recommendations:
I. Site Reviews
The SILCs agree that there is a great benefit to having "peer reviewers" as part of the site review team. When the SILC members sit on the team to evaluate the CILs, it can potentially be damaging to the relationship between the SILC and the CIL. We, therefore, recommend that SILC members participate in site reviews when requested by the center as advocates of the center and observers of the process.
. Persons with expertise in center operations should be included on the site review team. They should be from outside the state, and the SILC should choose them.
. The SILC member who participates in the site review as advocate/observer must be approved in advance by the center director.
II. Operations
The SILC is not responsible for the day-to-day operations of the CIL. The SILC should monitor the activities of the state plan. The day-to-day operations of the CIL is the responsibility of the board and staff of the CIL.
If there is to be a review of the CIL for compliance with the standards and indicators or any additional state regulations, those reviews are the responsibility of the DSU. If they would like to include peer reviewers, we suggest the above approach.
III. Technical Assistance
CILs can benefit from technical assistance. As we improve the collaborative relationships between the SILC and CILs, there will be a better sharing of the technical assistance needs. In some cases, the SILC may be able to provide the assistance, but more likely they will provide opportunities for CILs to acquire technical assistance.
IV. Grants
From time to time, the SILC will directly award grants to CILs for activities included in the state plan. The CILs should never be required to accept grants. The SILC can and should monitor the implementation of the grant objectives.
If the grant is for general operations, refer to point B.
V. SILC Review CILs' 704 Reports
The SILC should review the annual 704 reports completed by centers for the following three purposes:
. To identify independent living trends based on indicated trends. This has to do with discerning statewide trends in delivery of IL services, trends related to advocacy issues, etc., that would be useful in formulating or amending the state plan, making grants, educating legislators, orchestrating advocacy activities, etc.
. To offer training and assistance to CILs. To identify training and technical assistance needs centers have identified for themselves and to develop means of addressing those needs of centers.
. To identify unmet needs. To obtain each center's perspective of the state's unmet independent living needs.
On SILC-CIL Relationships
1. SILCs should develop partnerships with CILs.
2. SILCs should assist CIL association and CILs to attend meetings (help to underwrite expenses).
3. SILCs are team players with centers, given how much they have in common, operationally and philosophically.
ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '98
The SILC's Relationship with State Agencies
Issue Statement:
The roles of the Statewide Independent Living Council (SILC) and the Designated State Unit (DSU) are not clearly defined, nationally consistent, agreed upon and enforced.
Recommendations:
I. SILC's will have co-sign-off authority of Title I state plan in consultation with the DSU and the State Rehabilitation Advisory Council (SRAC).
II. SILC's will have sole-sign-off authority on the State Plan for Independent Living (SPIL).
III. Establish an independent mechanism to resolve disputes between the SILC's and DSU's with regard to divisions of authority and the full implementation of the law (autonomy, sign-off authority, state plan development, monitoring and evaluation, fiscal operational funds, location of SILC, etc.)
IV. The Independent Living Research and Utilization Program (ILRU) report on the '98 SILC Congress to be distributed to all the members of the Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation (CSAVR), appropriate congressional committees, the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA), and other appropriate entities.
Time line: Given the immediacy of reauthorization, it is imperative that '98 SILC Congress report be disseminated immediately.
ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '98
SILC Autonomy
Issue Statement:
Although the statute is clear that the SILCs are to operate as independent entities, there is ample evidence that significant numbers of SILCs are struggling with problems related to inappropriate involvement of, if not outright interference by, other organizations involved in the disability-service program. This group addressed issues of autonomy and developed strategies for fostering the kind of autonomy that increases the likelihood that SILCs will be able to act effectively to promote the highest quality of life for people with disabilities in their respective states.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
I. Develop and use a self-assessment "Autonomy Tool" which includes a method for its use and a suggested complaint process to follow in cases when autonomy is blocked by DSU or others.
Characteristics of that tool include:
. Adherence to all "Act" requirements.
. Does the SILC develop, adopt, and control its own budget?
. Does the SILC administer its funds? If not, who does, and what is the arrangement?
. Does the SILC develop, implement, and monitor its SPIL?
. Does the SILC review and monitor its own progress?
. Does the SILC manage its own personnel, i.e., develop job descriptions, hire, supervise, fire, and pay its personnel?
. Does the SILC control its membership by recommending membership?
. Is the SILC accountable for its decisions and actions?
. Does the SILC have freedom to advocate about issues of its own choice?
. Has the SILC developed statutory authority, procedures, and other systematic methods for gaining, maintaining, and protecting its autonomy.This tool needs to be refined by the group and assistance in that effort will be provided by ILRU.
. The use of the "tool" should be preceded by a SILC statement of principal with SILC mission and role.
. After using the "tool" it should be reviewed with the DSU and submitted to regional RSA.
. An appeal process if the SILC is dissatisfied needs to be developed.II. Other recommendations are:
. ILRU will distribute the assessment tool with training and support in using it. The tool's features will be annotated with statute references.
. Suggested ways to include this tool's use in development of the SPIL will be provided by ILRU.
. Peer resources will be identified using other SILCs on the issue of autonomy.
. SILCs will develop a "Memo of Understanding" (MOU) with their DSU's relative to autonomy as part of the SPIL. The MOU will identify roles, responsibilities, commitments, appeal processes, and means of resolving differences.
. Network of SILCs will advocate for other SILCs.
. RSA needs to include all advisory committees including the SILC in face-to-face, substantive reviews of state DSU monitoring. Any plan for correction involving SILC autonomy must be signed off on by SILC.III. Means of resolving complaints include:
.Ask RSA for an attorney general opinion if DSU is not complying with SPIL. Any member of Congress may be asked to request an opinion.
.Use state attorney general for review of DSU compliance.
.Every state with a problem contact their congressional representatives while reauthorization is being considered.
NOTE: Quentin Smith, group facilitator, is working on a more detailed report from the group which should be ready by the end of January. This will be distributed to all participants in the autonomy work group as soon as it is ready. In the interim, if you have questions or suggestions, please feel free to contact Quentin at (520) 299-7990 or via e-mail at: quentin.smith@internetMCI.com.
ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '98
SILCs as Systems Advocates
Issue Statement:
SILCs will develop and implement effective strategies through which they can fulfill their obligation to promote and carry out an advocacy agenda.
Recommendations:
I. SILCs will promote issues of advocacy in their state plan.
A. Get commitment from each state to address systems advocacy issues in their state plan
B. Change regulations to include an advocacy attachment
C. Work with ILRU to develop training on preparing an advocacy planII. SILCs shall develop coalitions which may include but not be limited to:
. consumers
. other SILCs
. cross disability groups
. cross cultural
. non disability
. international organizationsA. Create/connect to a national organization
B. Conduct an annual SILC CongressIII. SILCs shall educate members, people with disabilities, advocates, and others.
A. Work with resource to establish advocacy curriculum
B. Assure that all SILC plans shall contain an advocacy component
C. Support other SILCs in their advocacy efforts
D. Require and support on-going training for SILC membersIV. SILCs shall exhibit, develop and support leadership
A. Sponsor or provide leadership development activities
B. Support youth involvement in SILC activities
C. Identify and support leadership activities in state planV. SILC's highest priority shall be to secure resources necessary to implement the advocacy agenda.
A. Identify and address specific line items in SILC budget which support this advocacy agenda
B. Coordinate with other organizations to achieve their advocacy agenda.
ENDORSEMENT OF ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS DEVELOPED AT THE SILC CONGRESS '98
The members of our SILC have reviewed the four sets of issues and recommendations which were developed by participants at the SILC Congress '98, and we have agreed to the following action:
______ We endorse the issues and recommendations of SILC CONGRESS '98
______ We do not endorse the issues and recommendation of the
SILC CONGRESS '98 for the following reason(s):
Signed on behalf of the SILC of: ____________________________________
(SILC Chair) (Date)Please make a printout on your local printer
The SILC CONGRESS '98, held in Houston on January 14-16 and attended by representatives of statewide independent living councils (SILCs) from all 50 states plus Washington, D.C., and the Virgin Islands, was convened to examine SILC's most critical issues and to develop recommendations for addressing these issues.
To identify these issues prior to the conference, ILRU staff used a modified Delphi survey technique, contacting each SILC chair by mail and asking them to identify the most prominent issues facing SILCs. Results were compiled into a list of 21 items. This list was then re-sent to SILC chairs, asking them to rank them in terms of most important. Four issues clearly emerged as top ranking and were used to form the basis of the work groups at SILC Congress '98. The issues were:
· the SILC's relationship with independent living centers,
· the SILC's relationship with the designated state unit,
· SILC autonomy, and
· the SILC as a systems' advocate.
At the SILC CONGRESS '98 in Houston, a large-group discussion of each issue was led by panels composed of four SILC representatives who spoke on each issue. Then, work groups were convened on each issue, with group members being given the charge to develop a set of recommendations addressing that issue.
Following development of a set of recommendations on the part of each work group, participants were re-gathered into a large group and were joined (via speaker phone from Washington, D.C.) by RSA Independent Living Chief John Nelson. To the Congress at large, each group presented its recommendations and obtained feedback on extent of agreement, points to clarify, and issues to consider further. Participants then returned to their respective work groups to complete development of their recommendations.
It should be noted that these sets of issues and recommendations represent the opinions of participants in the SILC CONGRESS '98. Despite having rather strong opinions on these issues, conference facilitators and ILRU staff chose to play non-obtrusive roles consisting of creating a forum in which comprehensive discussions could take place and group consensus could be reached.
The issues and recommendations developed at the SILC CONGRESS '98 are attached, along with a roster of participants and facilitators. These sets of issues and recommendations were reviewed for accuracy by the group facilitators.
Drop by ILRU's web site for information about the SILC CONGRESS '98, including the materials in this mailout--and some photos of SILC CONGRESS '98 attendees. Our address is http://www.ilru.org/silcs.
ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '98
The SILC's Relationship with CILs
Issue Statement:
Each SILC should include in their state plan how monitoring will be implemented. We agreed that the role of monitoring has to do with the state plan. With regard to relationships between the SILC and the CILs, monitoring has been and is being used in five different ways: site reviews, operation of the CIL, technical assistance, grants, and review of centers 704 reports. Recommendations on each approach are provided below.
Recommendations:
I. Site Reviews
The SILCs agree that there is a great benefit to having "peer reviewers" as part of the site review team. When the SILC members sit on the team to evaluate the CILs, it can potentially be damaging to the relationship between the SILC and the CIL. We, therefore, recommend that SILC members participate in site reviews when requested by the center as advocates of the center and observers of the process.
. Persons with expertise in center operations should be included on the site review team. They should be from outside the state, and the SILC should choose them.
. The SILC member who participates in the site review as advocate/observer must be approved in advance by the center director.
II. Operations
The SILC is not responsible for the day-to-day operations of the CIL. The SILC should monitor the activities of the state plan. The day-to-day operations of the CIL is the responsibility of the board and staff of the CIL.
If there is to be a review of the CIL for compliance with the standards and indicators or any additional state regulations, those reviews are the responsibility of the DSU. If they would like to include peer reviewers, we suggest the above approach.
III. Technical Assistance
CILs can benefit from technical assistance. As we improve the collaborative relationships between the SILC and CILs, there will be a better sharing of the technical assistance needs. In some cases, the SILC may be able to provide the assistance, but more likely they will provide opportunities for CILs to acquire technical assistance.
IV. Grants
From time to time, the SILC will directly award grants to CILs for activities included in the state plan. The CILs should never be required to accept grants. The SILC can and should monitor the implementation of the grant objectives.
If the grant is for general operations, refer to point B.
V. SILC Review CILs' 704 Reports
The SILC should review the annual 704 reports completed by centers for the following three purposes:
. To identify independent living trends based on indicated trends. This has to do with discerning statewide trends in delivery of IL services, trends related to advocacy issues, etc., that would be useful in formulating or amending the state plan, making grants, educating legislators, orchestrating advocacy activities, etc.
. To offer training and assistance to CILs. To identify training and technical assistance needs centers have identified for themselves and to develop means of addressing those needs of centers.
. To identify unmet needs. To obtain each center's perspective of the state's unmet independent living needs.
On SILC-CIL Relationships
1. SILCs should develop partnerships with CILs.
2. SILCs should assist CIL association and CILs to attend meetings (help to underwrite expenses).
3. SILCs are team players with centers, given how much they have in common, operationally and philosophically.
ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '98
The SILC's Relationship with State Agencies
Issue Statement:
The roles of the Statewide Independent Living Council (SILC) and the Designated State Unit (DSU) are not clearly defined, nationally consistent, agreed upon and enforced.
Recommendations:
I. SILC's will have co-sign-off authority of Title I state plan in consultation with the DSU and the State Rehabilitation Advisory Council (SRAC).
II. SILC's will have sole-sign-off authority on the State Plan for Independent Living (SPIL).
III. Establish an independent mechanism to resolve disputes between the SILC's and DSU's with regard to divisions of authority and the full implementation of the law (autonomy, sign-off authority, state plan development, monitoring and evaluation, fiscal operational funds, location of SILC, etc.)
IV. The Independent Living Research and Utilization Program (ILRU) report on the '98 SILC Congress to be distributed to all the members of the Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation (CSAVR), appropriate congressional committees, the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA), and other appropriate entities.
Time line: Given the immediacy of reauthorization, it is imperative that '98 SILC Congress report be disseminated immediately.
ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '98
SILC Autonomy
Issue Statement:
Although the statute is clear that the SILCs are to operate as independent entities, there is ample evidence that significant numbers of SILCs are struggling with problems related to inappropriate involvement of, if not outright interference by, other organizations involved in the disability-service program. This group addressed issues of autonomy and developed strategies for fostering the kind of autonomy that increases the likelihood that SILCs will be able to act effectively to promote the highest quality of life for people with disabilities in their respective states.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
I. Develop and use a self-assessment "Autonomy Tool" which includes a method for its use and a suggested complaint process to follow in cases when autonomy is blocked by DSU or others.
Characteristics of that tool include:
. Adherence to all "Act" requirements.
. Does the SILC develop, adopt, and control its own budget?
. Does the SILC administer its funds? If not, who does, and what is the arrangement?
. Does the SILC develop, implement, and monitor its SPIL?
. Does the SILC review and monitor its own progress?
. Does the SILC manage its own personnel, i.e., develop job descriptions, hire, supervise, fire, and pay its personnel?
. Does the SILC control its membership by recommending membership?
. Is the SILC accountable for its decisions and actions?
. Does the SILC have freedom to advocate about issues of its own choice?
. Has the SILC developed statutory authority, procedures, and other systematic methods for gaining, maintaining, and protecting its autonomy.This tool needs to be refined by the group and assistance in that effort will be provided by ILRU.
. The use of the "tool" should be preceded by a SILC statement of principal with SILC mission and role.
. After using the "tool" it should be reviewed with the DSU and submitted to regional RSA.
. An appeal process if the SILC is dissatisfied needs to be developed.II. Other recommendations are:
. ILRU will distribute the assessment tool with training and support in using it. The tool's features will be annotated with statute references.
. Suggested ways to include this tool's use in development of the SPIL will be provided by ILRU.
. Peer resources will be identified using other SILCs on the issue of autonomy.
. SILCs will develop a "Memo of Understanding" (MOU) with their DSU's relative to autonomy as part of the SPIL. The MOU will identify roles, responsibilities, commitments, appeal processes, and means of resolving differences.
. Network of SILCs will advocate for other SILCs.
. RSA needs to include all advisory committees including the SILC in face-to-face, substantive reviews of state DSU monitoring. Any plan for correction involving SILC autonomy must be signed off on by SILC.III. Means of resolving complaints include:
.Ask RSA for an attorney general opinion if DSU is not complying with SPIL. Any member of Congress may be asked to request an opinion.
.Use state attorney general for review of DSU compliance.
.Every state with a problem contact their congressional representatives while reauthorization is being considered.
NOTE: Quentin Smith, group facilitator, is working on a more detailed report from the group which should be ready by the end of January. This will be distributed to all participants in the autonomy work group as soon as it is ready. In the interim, if you have questions or suggestions, please feel free to contact Quentin at (520) 299-7990 or via e-mail at: quentin.smith@internetMCI.com.
ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS OF SILC CONGRESS '98
SILCs as Systems Advocates
Issue Statement:
SILCs will develop and implement effective strategies through which they can fulfill their obligation to promote and carry out an advocacy agenda.
Recommendations:
I. SILCs will promote issues of advocacy in their state plan.
A. Get commitment from each state to address systems advocacy issues in their state plan
B. Change regulations to include an advocacy attachment
C. Work with ILRU to develop training on preparing an advocacy planII. SILCs shall develop coalitions which may include but not be limited to:
. consumers
. other SILCs
. cross disability groups
. cross cultural
. non disability
. international organizationsA. Create/connect to a national organization
B. Conduct an annual SILC CongressIII. SILCs shall educate members, people with disabilities, advocates, and others.
A. Work with resource to establish advocacy curriculum
B. Assure that all SILC plans shall contain an advocacy component
C. Support other SILCs in their advocacy efforts
D. Require and support on-going training for SILC membersIV. SILCs shall exhibit, develop and support leadership
A. Sponsor or provide leadership development activities
B. Support youth involvement in SILC activities
C. Identify and support leadership activities in state planV. SILC's highest priority shall be to secure resources necessary to implement the advocacy agenda.
A. Identify and address specific line items in SILC budget which support this advocacy agenda
B. Coordinate with other organizations to achieve their advocacy agenda.
Steering Committee Report and Minutes
January 15,1998
Houston, Texas
A. AGENDA
1: Identification and Selection of Officers: Our initial Goal was to define the various positions that will be necessary for us to begin to conduct business and run meetings. We all agreed on the need to have three officers as a preliminary step to forming this organization. It was recommended that we allow these officers to request information and interact with other agencies in behalf of the NATIONAL SILC. These officers were voted on by a show of hands during our initial meeting and they are:
2: Identifying and Setting Meeting Times and Methods: Our discussion centered around defining a method to support future meetings within our individual states. We also discussed the frequency of meetings for the next few months and agreed that we will meet via conference calls MONTHLY, (we will meet via conference calls on the fourth Monday of each month at 4 P.M. Eastern Standard Time). The next full meeting will occur on February 23rd at 4 P.M. We also agreed to share responsibility for hosting the conference call across all of us provided that each states ful SILC was in support of this idea philosophically and financially. During the discussion, South Carolina, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Alaska agreed to support a conference call and the rest of us have agreed to investigate this desire in their own state and present their findings during our next meeting. Chairperson: Patrick Reinhart-Alaska
Vice Chairperson: Lydia Kirschenbaum-New Jersey
Secretary: Cris Clay-California
We also took a show of hands regarding the presence of E-Mail and accessibility of such communications formats designed to support quick access of information and for direct communications across all of us.
Patrick from Alaska has agreed to investigate whether or not ILRU can support our conference calls financially.
B: GOALS FOR THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE
1. We will need to draft a basic Mission Statement for review and consideration by the full National SILC's approval. This assignment included identifying the purpose of the organization, selection of committees, etc. All of these issues were briefly discussed during our initial group get together during which we developed this list of reasons for our development. (Patrick has possession of the master list of WHY's). John Eckert of Illinois, Brian Dale of Utah and Patrick Reinhart of Alaska, all agreed to collaborate and develop a first draft of this document for discussion and review during our next meeting. 2. We agreed that a small committee should be formed to look into National SILC's merger into other entities such as the NCIL or the National Associations for DD Councils. Some of the objectives of this committee will be: (a) find out facts about each organizations, (b) define what we want from associations with other organizations. Ann Meadows of West Virginia and Tom Osborn of Montana will work together to accomplish the above goals for our next meeting. 3. Debbie Wisniewski of Wisconsin agreed to take the Pro's and Con's list regarding affiliation with other organizations that we generated during our initial meeting and look carefully into these issues and report back to us during our February meeting. She will distribute these two lists to all of us before the next meeting for our review. 4. We talked briefly and agreed upon our basic goals for the NATIONAL SILC. These goals involved the following for the time being: (a) our goal is to do research and seek information. This information would then be taken back to each individual state's SILC for their opinions and or recommendations. (b) We will make recommendations and seek support for national agendas defined by our group. (c) Our major goal is to refine our goals on a national level for each state to develop plans for the future to respond to the national issues at hand. 5. It was agreed that each member representing a region of the country should select an alternate member to participate in meetings and committees as well as the steering committees
Dear SILC CONGRESS '98 Participant,
We wish to thank you for your participation in the SILC CONGRESS '98 held last week in Houston. Bob had told us to expect a task-oriented, hard-working, even-tempered group, and he could not have been more accurate. Indeed, the products of the conference--the set of issues and recommendations--are clear evidence of these qualities.
As promised, we are sending you the four sets of issues and recommendations developed by you and your fellow participants. As you will recall, the next step involves you reviewing the issues and recommendations with your SILC members and having a resolution passed expressing your SILC's endorsement of them. As was suggested, we have included a separate page containing a statement regarding your SILC's endorsement of these issues. Please return this to us by April 15, 1998.
Three other items are also enclosed:
· A printout of your contact information for the final participants' list. Please review this, make any necessary corrections, and return it to us, preferably by fax (713.520.5785) by February 5. Soon after, you will receive a final participants' list.
· A brochure which provides an explanation of independent living to people generally unfamiliar with the concept.
· Information of independent living training opportunities available through the IL NET: NCIL/ILRU National Independent Living Training & Technical Assistance Project.
Finally, check our web site for information about the SILC CONGRESS '98, including the materials in this mailout--and some of Dawn's photos: http://www.ilru.org/silcs.
Again, Dawn, Gina, and I greatly enjoyed the time we spent with you and your SILC colleagues, and we look forward to a long and productive association with you. Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can be of any assistance.
Cordially,
Laurel Richards
Director of Training
The mission of the IL-NET is to provide training and technical assistance on a variety of issues central to independent living today--understanding the Rehab Act, what the statewide independent living council is and how it can operate most effectively, management issues for centers for independent living, systems advocacy, computer networking, and others. Training activities are conducted conference-style, via long-distance communication, webcasts, through widely disseminated print and audio materials, and through the promotion of a strong national network of centers and individuals in the independent living field.
Substantial support for development of this publication was provided by the Rehabilitation Services Administration, U.S. Department of Education. The content is the responsibility of ILRU and no official endorsement of the Department of Education should be inferred.
ILRU
is a project of
TIRR Memorial Hermann
[About
the IL-NET] [ILRU
Directory of CILs/SILCs] [IL
Information You Asked For] [SILC
Information]
[Publications]
[IL
Video Lending Library]
[Contacting
IL-NET] [Join
our mail lists]
| Home | Projects | Publications | Training | What's New |
©2005-2012 ILRU Program, All rights
reserved
Contact Us: IL
NET or ILRU
713.520.0232 (V/TTY); 713.520.5785
(Fax)
Last Modified: 03-23-05