WIOA & ACL Proposed Regulations presented by Ann McDaniel, Kelly Buckland and Brad Williams
This presentation provides a comparison between the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) changes affecting the IL program and the regulations proposed by ACL for implementing them.

BRAD WILLIAMS: This is going to take us a bit but I want to start by just pointing out that it takes quite a while to amend a federal act.

I mean, this has taken many of us have been waiting about ten years to get some of these changes through.

And I think it was last amended in 1999, 1998 thank you Ann.

And so this is an exciting time so we are going to take the appropriate amount of time to go over these changes and by the time that this is going to be amended again, many of us here probably won't be here.

We will be retired or on to other things.

But that's what's significant about this.

Hopefully these changes are going to last.

And there will be some consideration for moving on and doing other things for however long it's going to take for the next time around.

So okay.

To start, I will move this onto the next slide.

Up at the top it identifies the topic that we are going to discuss on these panels.

And then on the left-hand side we have the key points in WIOA which is the law.

And the right-hand side we have the key points in the proposed or the draft regs.

And then what we are going to do is we are going to discuss the topic.

It might take a panel or two or three.

But when we get done discussing that then we will open it up for discussion and questions.

Sound fair?

Okay.

I am going to get going with the first topic which is Section 701: Purpose.

And what we have here is on the left-hand side the law and it kind of identifies to promotes the philosophy of IL and leadership, empowerment, independence, productivity, of people with disabilities transitions it over to the integration and full inclusion of people with disabilities in society.

And then it connects it to the financial assistance to states.

You then transition that over to what is in the proposed regs and basically the same thing is said in the proposed regs.

But then you look at how it's connected to the financial assistance to states.

And what's really nice this time around is they very specifically say hey, who does this apply to?

And they make a long list of everyone it applies to.

And the third network that's on the list are Statewide Independent Living Councils so the purpose of the act is stated and applies to SILCs.

And the other thing I would say is do not think of the purpose as something lightly.

On Monday I am going to give a presentation that connects the purpose of the act, okay, to the third authority which is the kind of open-ended authority to statewide systems advocacy.

All right?

It's very important.

So anyone else have a comment on that?

Or are we good.

KELLY BUCKLAND: Agree with you.

Wholeheartedly.

BRAD WILLIAMS: Now, this is the end of this topic.

Are there any questions about the purpose?

KELLY BUCKLAND: I will add one comment.

Okay.

So I think we were talking earlier amongst the panel and stuff here we were talking about how I think a lot of people minimize the purpose of the act.

And I think that a lot of us minimize that congress intentionally wrote the purpose of the act and that then everything then flows from the purpose.

So the purpose actually is the most important part of this section of the law.

Because everything else comes out of that.

So the fact that systems advocacy is mentioned in the purpose is not a minor thing.

It's very, very important.

So that's why we keep calling it out.

Because congress intentionally wrote this, and they intentionally included systems advocacy in the purpose.

Just to highlight that.

So again if you look on the left-hand side this is what's in the law and it talks about the establishment of an Independent Living Administration.

And this is really again I will refer back to Brad's comments about how long it takes to get a federal law passed and how many years we were all looking for the establishment of an Independent Living Administration.

It is now the law of the land and it is there and it's very exciting.

And Brad really is also right about how important this stuff is those rules will set the tone for the independent living program for a very long time to come.

So these rules are not just government taking place.

This really is important stuff that's happening right now.

The writing of the rules is very critical.

Because the first set of rules that come out will guide rules forever.

So as long as the law stays the way it is anyway.

So we also wanted to point out that the director is appointed by the secretary of HHS and that's Mr.

Bob Williams who is actually in the room with us now.

He is the new director of the Independent Living Administration (applause) And Bob we are looking for great things from you man.

The burdens, we are going to put the burden on you.

And the principal agency is the ACL.

That's the Independent Living Administration underneath the ACL.

And the director is responsible directly to the administrator of ACL.

So I don't know how many of you have been following this.

But the ACL has created basically in their flowchart two separate administrations.

One on aging and one on disability and independent living along with a bunch of others are under the Administration on Disability.

And Bob will not be answering to the administrator of the Administration on Disability.

He will answer directly to the assistant secretary who is also the administrator of ACL.

Basically the regs that were issued followed this stuff around the administration except for one thing.

And NCIL did call this out in our comments to the rules and that is it talks about how person centeredness applies to the IL program.

We submitted along with our comments a PowerPoint that was done by ACL and NCIL that showed the differences between person centered and consumer control.

They are not the same thing.

In fact there's quite significant differences.

So we are asking them to basically take that back out.

Because we do not think that person centeredness applies.

But everything else just basically followed the law.

I also, next slide, I also am tasked with doing the definition stuff.

Again for the most part the stuff that's in the law.

The definition of administrator, center for independent living, consumer control that was in the law basically was followed in the regs.

All right?

So they added a bunch of others and they specifically in their proposed rules were asking for us to give input on a number of those.

And so we did.

And basically we didn't end up making too extensive comments on most of these things.

We did comment on Designated State Entity because there seems to be an impression that Designated State Entity is just a replacement for Designated State Unit which is not true because Designated State Units continue to exist but they may not play the role of the designated state entity.

So there really are differences.

The DSUs did not go away.

They still remain.

You may actually have a DSU that is acting as your DSE.

So, I know it gets a little confusing.

But that is essentially what our comment was on that one.

The only other one we had a comment on is they said that for the purposes of the fifth core service in youth transition that if someone turned18 they would be considered out of school even though they may still be attending school.

Well we actually think when congress put that they would otherwise have left school they meant they left school.

Not just turned 18 so that was one of our other comments.

I think that basically covered the stuff we had under the definitions.

So are there any questions?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: You said that rather fast.

So you are saying that if the person is 18 regardless of if they are in school or not they are counted they are counted as being, if they are still in school and they are 18 they are counted as not being in school; is that correct?

KELLY BUCKLAND: That's what the proposed regs say is that they would be considered not in school if they turned 18.

We are in our comments back on rules saying that we think that that's not true.

The law says that they have to have left school.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: With the age of 18 does that not conflict with some of the other rules like a child is eligible for special ed up to the time that they are 21 and in some cases 22.

So does that 18 not conflict with the other rules?

Or is that kind of two separate things?

Or how does that work?

Because of the age difference and what some of the rules say versus what this is saying?

KELLY BUCKLAND: well, it's, there's sort of a conflict but they are really two different things because this is just basically calling up eligibility for transition services through a center for independent living.

And the reason congress put those parameters around who is eligible was because they knew there was no funding for this service and they were trying to narrow the pool of people who were eligible.

So by just saying that they are 18 broadens the number of people who are eligible.

And it increases the burden on centers for a service that they got no funding to do.

So that's why we took issue with the number 18.

There is a conflict.

Cause you can still be in school even after you turn 18.

But that means that you would still not be eligible for those services through a center.

That is basically what it means.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Kelly, could you expound and edify us on the differences between the DSU and the DSE and distinguish the relationships, the responsibilities and functioning capacities.

KELLY BUCKLAND: Absolutely.

DSU is a term used in the rehab act to define the agency responsible for administering the vocational rehabilitation program.

And you have to be the Designated State Unit in your state to do that function.

That's why they are a DSU.

DSE is the agency in the state that agrees to perform the functions of the DSE as outlined under the independent living program which are basically receiving, distributing and accounting for the funds under Part B.

And then there's some other administrative things that they would do.

Which are also listed out in the law.

But so the difference really is one is acting as an administrator of the funds under the independent living Part B program.

And the other one is the Designated State Unit for purposes of the vocational rehabilitation in the state.

Does that answer your question?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: it's kind of difficult to distinguish everything you are saying because it sounds muffled, a lot of parts of your speech is muffled.

I don't know if it's because of the sound system or not.

KELLY BUCKLAND: I don't know.

It sounds really clear here.

Is it muffled out there you guys.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: It just sounds like you are in a hollow box.

TIM FUCHS: I was waiting for a break in the conversation to come move Kelly's mic up.

Why don't I do that now.

PAULA MCELWEE: This might be a good time to just remind you of what Brad said at the very beginning about how this information is laid out and clarify one thing that I think is probably going to frustrate you a little bit.

And that is that the first point is the key points for WIOA.

The second point is the proposed regs.

Comment about which went in yesterday.

Final regs are not yet available.

So the actual decision about the recommendations that have been made in all our comments may or may not have been considered.

They just got our comments yesterday and they are here.

So they were traveling.

So I kind of doubt they have gotten through all of them.

Although maybe they multitasked last night.

We don't have the answer.

So you may have to just know that when you ask well does that mean it's 18 or does that mean it's 22.

We don't know yet.

We don't know if the recommendation that was made in the proposed regs is what's going to be followed or if what's going to be followed is going to change because of the comments.

So we don't know.

KELLY BUCKLAND: So the answer to the question was the DSU is in the Rehab Act and it is who, it defines who is administering the VR program in your state.

So the DSU is tagged as the designated as the state unit to administer your VR program in the state.

The DSE is the agency in the state that is put into the state plan who has agreed to be responsible to receive, distribute and account for the Part B funds.

And there's some other administrative duties that they also agree to do.

But essentially they are just basically administering the Part B funds.

Does not mean they make decisions about it.

they have to follow the state plan.

But they receive, distribute and account for those funds.

That's the DSE.

You could have the DSU be the DSE but it's not like the DSUs go away.

They still exist.

The DSE is not replacing the DSU.

If you remember, when they was the DSU, the DSU had broader duties.

They signed the state plan.

They developed a state plan.

They had coordinated functions.

The state rehab council had to have a member on the SILC.

All of that kind of stuff that all went away in the new law.

So the limited functions they now have really are just administering Part B funds and that's who the DSE is.

But you could have the DSU be the DSE and they would continue to be a DSU even if they are a DSE they could be both.

So that was kind of the thing we tried to cull out of the rules.

They really could be both.

Any other questions?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: I got a question but I can do it off line if it's going to take too much time.

Other than the DSU, I know some Offices of Aging, who else could make a good match for the DSE?

KELLY BUCKLAND: That really is the decision that needs to be made in your state.

It could be any agency.

So really I mean AUDIENCE MEMBER: It doesn't have to be the DSU.

KELLY BUCKLAND: A lot of people are considering different agencies.

Like some are considering their Health and Human Service agency.

Some have been considering their University Center on Disability.

Some of them are doing aging.

And then I have even heard the Department of Transportation.

So there's a big, broad range of agencies being considered.

So really who would act in the best interest of independent living in your state.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Hi, this is Dawn from Iowa and I just wanted to make the comment that although the Rehab Act does state that we can choose a different entity to be our DSE right now I think in most states your DSU, DSE is voc rehab.

So even though we can choose to switch and do a different state entity and that can be anything from mucent to the Department on Aging or whatever.

I think the reality is your state may end up just telling you who it's going to be and you may not really have a choice.

So you have to keep that in mind.

You have to work with the folks in your state if you want it to change and be something different.

KELLY BUCKLAND: Well, I am not sure I agree.

I mean, you have to find a willing state agency.

But that's true.

But remember there's two signatories to the state plan that have to also agree, including the centers and the SILC.

You don't just have to go along.

So if somebody tells you it's going to be a certain agency you don't have to just go along with that.

In fact there are a number of things that we were told to put when I was the SILC director in Idaho we were told that it had to be in your state plan and we refused to put it in there and it ended up not going in.

So again remember the system's advocacy and the purpose of the act.

BRAD WILLIAMS: And I will just add on this topic the session after this session is on this topic so we can probably have plenty of discourse on this topic next session with myself and Larry.

KELLY BUCKLAND: Great.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: I can wait until the next session.

It did happen in Alaska.

We were told that the two commissioners had gotten together, the Department of Labor and the Department of Health and Social Services and that they had decided that our DSE was going to be the HHS and we talked with the independent living administration and asked what we could do and basically because you have to have a willing partner, if they say we are not going to be your DSE, and the other one says we will be your DSE, I suppose you could shop around and try to find another entity.

But in reality if VR says we are not going to do it anymore, then you have to kind of pick who is willing.

So it's still up to the state.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: So I understand the difference between a DSU and a DSE clearly.

My question is, and I think I am understanding that part of the changing the role of DSE is for greater autonomy for centers and for the SILC and clarifying that relationship and to develop a more independent role from the DSE.

But my question is, is there going to be any further language around any criteria because I will give you an example like in Oregon where SILC staff are employed by the DSU and some of those gray areas and idiosyncrasies, around the relationships that centers, that SILCs have with the DSE is there any more concise language around keeping those relationships clear so that the autonomy is protected?

Does that make sense.

KELLY BUCKLAND: Yeah.

Your question makes sense.

And it is a good question.

I think when we were crafting the law and we were working with congress on this, we really tried to give states as much flexibility as we could possibly make so that if the independent living folks in your state had a really good working relationship with the DSU which a number of them around the country did, that you can continue that.

Nothing would prevent it.

Nothing would get in the way of it.

You could continue to do business pretty much as you do now minus the fact that the DSU is no longer going to be in the function of developing the state plan.

But other than that, you can really pretty much continue the relationships in a way that you always have.

So then I think the answer to the question is no.

I mean, I think we are going to try to if you have got good relationships, why mess it up?

So I think hopefully you won't see stuff put in place just to get in the road.

ANN MCDANIEL: Maybe a second part of the answer to that is there are going to be standards and indicators for SILCs and that might be one of the ways that some parameters are set around the staffing of the SILC and the autonomy of the SILC.

That will make some of those things more clear.

Does that help.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah.

How far off are we with that language or is it there and I missed it.

ANN MCDANIEL: We are going to find that out later today.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Oh yeah.

KELLY BUCKLAND: It was supposed to have been done already.

Let's put it that way.

It was due out one year out after the bill was signed which was July.

ANN MCDANIEL: You know one of the- We have heard a few people talk about the long process and how hard it is and how much work it is to change the law.

I am thinking the folks at ACL might say the implementation of all those changes is an even longer more complicated process.

KELLY BUCKLAND: Well NCIL agrees, we have kind of said all along that we would rather see them take the time to work with us and get this right than just to try to meet some deadline that was put in there.

ANN MCDANIEL: Any other questions about that or are you ready to move on.

One more question.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: I guess we are going to have to define what a good working relationship is.

(laughter) Because in Indiana there was no discussion.

The Designated State Unit began referring to themselves as the DSE and nobody objected to it but the SILC chair who was eventually run out because she did object.

So we don't know what a good working relationship in Indiana is.

ANN MCDANIEL: Well, I would tell you that according to the administrator of ACL, the state may say who the DSE is going to be.

But it cannot be effectuated until it is in the plan and the plan is approved.

And the plan has to be signed by the chair of the SILC and at least by 51 percent of the center directors.

So there's two sides to that whole thing as well.

Yeah but still they won't send them the money if it's not in the signed, approved SPIL no matter what they call themselves.

Am I right?

And Tim is shaking his head yes.

I love it when I say something and I look at Tim and he is shaking his head yes.

Okay.

We are going to move on to Section 704 which is all about the State Plan for Independent Living.

And I just want to point out to you because I am not sure we have done that.

What's on these slides is not verbatim out of the law or the proposed regs but in your packet you have the law with all the changes under tab seven and you have the notice of proposed rulemaking.

So if you want to go in and dig into that based on these highlights on the slides, you can see the actual full language.

Okay?

So the state plan Section 704 is where some of the bigger changes in the law happened.

And according to the law you have to have an approved state plan in order for your state to be eligible to receive the funding.

The plan has to be jointly developed by the SILC and the centers.

The exact language in the law says the chairperson of the SILC and the centers but I think practicality is the chairperson of your SILC can't and shouldn't be trying to do that independently of the rest of the SILC.

And the pieces that have to be included in the state plan in order for it to be an approvable plan are the designation of the DSE who that's going to be, strategies for providing independent living services and there's an emphasis on statewideness.

The objectives and timelines for what you want to accomplish in the plan, the establishment of the SILC designated how the SILC is established and who the SILC is.

The design for the network of centers for independent living.

We have to have, and this is not new.

We have to have a design for a statewide network of centers.

If we don't have a network of centers that covers the entire state we need to have a design laid out in our plan for how we would accomplish that if funding were available.

Steps to maximize the working relationships amongst everybody between the SILC and the centers and the SILC and the centers and the DSE and other folks that are providing services in the state.

The coordination of services and resources so that there's not duplication and you maximize what you are doing with the resources that you have.

An outreach plan for outreaching not only to unserved individuals but also un or underserved areas of your state an evaluation plan.

And this is specifically how is the SILC going to evaluate the effectiveness of the SPIL.

The plan has to promote full access to community life, and it has to be reviewed and/or revised at least every three years.

But remember that you can revise it more often than that as long as you get the signatures that you need showing the agreement.

And then the key parts of the proposed regulations around the development of the plan, you have to include the assurances in the plan that are required by the federal government.

The plan has to be approved by the administrator of ACL.

The plan has to be for a period of not more than three years.

And if there are material changes that affect the administration of the state plan, it has to be amended.

And the kinds of things that might happen that will cause you to need to do an amendment would be changes in state law that affect it, changes in how everything is organized, whether it's the SILC or who the DSE is or anything else that changes organization.

Any policy changes that have an impact on the implementation of the plan.

And agency operations.

You have to gather public input before the plan is developed from individuals with disabilities.

The plan has to be signed by the SILC chair, the director of the DSE and at least 51 percent of the directors of the centers for independent living in your state.

And it has to be submitted to the Administration for Community Living 90 days prior to the end of the previous plan.

That's very familiar.

The one thing that's very different here is that the centers are the signors with the SILC and the signature of the DSE is not intended to denote approval of the content of the plan.

What it denotes is the agreement to serve as the DSE and to fulfill those responsibilities.

One thing that's a bit different in the proposed regulations is that public input must be gathered from people with disabilities, other stakeholders and other stakeholders by holding public meetings before a draft is developed or after a draft is developed and the law is pretty clear that you have to get input before you develop a draft.

And then the same requirements apply to any amendments that you submit on your SPIL.

You have to gather public input and feedback.

You have to have 30 days notice prior to public meetings so that the public knows, is present, and has that opportunity.

And you have to provide alternate formats and interpreters for those public meetings, if they are requested.

Now, this is the section in 704 and talking about the plan that goes go into a little more depth about the Designated State Entity because your plan has to designate a state entity that is going to administer the Part B funds and disburse them according to the state plan, provide administrative support.

And that really is intended for 723 states.

Keep records, submit information to ACL that they may request and retain not more than five percent of the Part B funds to perform those duties.

Key things in the proposed regulations around this section include that that five percent cap on the DSE applies to the Part B funds allocated to the state and the required ten percent match.

So it's those combined funds together are the total that that five percent is applied to and then arrange for necessary and sufficient resources for the SILC to fulfill its duties and authorities is also in the proposed regs as a function of the Designated State Entity.

So those are the highlights of Section 704.

Are there questions.

And I see Kays hand up, and Cathy and Dawn and oh all kinds of people.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Ann, when you talk about going back to the section that says in the key points must be amended to reflect material changes, would that include material changes like a state moving from a VR commission to a state rehab council?

Is that something that – ANN MCDANIEL: That's a really good question.

I am not sure that's specifically applicable to the State Plan for Independent Living and the independent living program.

So I think it would be up to you all when you are looking at that how is that going to effect.

If they are your DSE, then what effect is that going to have on how you implement the plan?

And if you think there is an effect, then you probably need to see if any amendments need to be made to account for that.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Thank you.

ANN MCDANIEL: Sure.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Under all the key points there and you have a lot of areas covered and you have a lot of restrictions and a lot of guidelines that are very worthwhile.

The problem with it is that it is a paper tiger.

There is no process here for any appeals, there is no process here for any kind of enforcement, any kind of punitive action in the event any of these things are covered.

This situation is currently being experienced in Indiana where the state just pretty much appoints its designated unit, designated entity writes and signs off on the state plan.

Now, when that happens, what is the appeal process?

Who is going to oversee it?

What action is going to be taken and how quickly will that action be administered?

Is there something in here that you propose or should propose perhaps to account for that process?

Because otherwise this is just nothing but text on paper.

It looks real good but in action it means absolutely nothing.

You have a situation that could pop up and will pop up in other states like it is in Indiana what are you going to do then?

ANN MCDANIEL: Well, first of all we can't change any of this.

The parts of the law that's in the law that's ACL's responsibility to enforce the law for this section of the law.

The proposed regulations aren't final yet.

ACL can certainly change them so we will have to see what happens based on all the comments they have received.

I mentioned earlier there are going to be standards and indicators for SILCs and ACL will then be responsible for ensuring that SILCs comply with those.

But in terms of the broader government of your state and how things are going on, if you have a state plan that was written by the DSU, they can't submit that unless the SILC and the centers sign it.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: They signed off and did.

ANN MCDANIEL: It's not time for it to have been submitted yet.

And ACL won't accept a plan that doesn't have the required signatures on it.

I am sure of that.

Hold on, you don't have a mic.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: I have a question that's kind of come up when we talked about the changes in administration, state law, organization policy, agency operations.

What's going to happen to many states have an election for governor coming up which will affect.

Because our, I think undoubtedly our administration is going to change.

Enough people have had a gutfull of Governor Pence.

But you know, the thing is, that you could have, we have new legislators.

Everything could change.

So how does that dovetail in here?

What if a new governor comes in and they decide that they are going to change all the agency heads which they frequently do.

It's like a revolving door.

How is that being addressed?

BRAD WILLIAMS: I think I can kind of respond to both of these questions.

For folks who have been around for 20 to 30 years, you know you have seen this play out several times.

Because there's times when the laws don't necessarily change too often.

That's what I said right at the beginning.

But you do see administrations change.

You do see and have some wonderful amazing working relationships and that is what you really are thankful for.

And then unfortunately oh, I can remember 2008, 2009 very vividly in New York.

And where we almost got a close out.

We almost got to the point of five, six months without any money.

And you learn very fast what you can and cannot do in that whether laws apply or not.

Or you know you just learn that you are just not going to exist and who is going to help you or not.

But what you eventually remember is we are advocates.

We are systems advocates.

And that's what eventually turns it around.

Now, you can choose to do nothing or you can choose to do something.

And you can then decide that well, wait a minute.

If I do something or we do something about it, then that's not going to help.

But you put on your systems advocacy hat and try to do something about it and realize that there are people above you in the process.

And there are legal and administrative processes that you can follow.

And you can file an article 78.

I mean there are many things you can do administratively to get some things done.

There are many things you can do in order to get things done and apply pressure because this one is above this one and this one is above this one.

And you know, you can apply levers.

And make some things happen.

And oh, are you going to make someone feel uncomfortable?

Are they making you feel uncomfortable?

Yeah.

I guess if that's what's going to have to happen, then that is what you are going to have to do if that's what you choose.

Or you just choose to let what is happening to you happen.

But aren't we all about empowerment and systems advocacy?

You know, I think that's what you need to do in those situations when you really do not have much of an option.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Hi Ann, this is Cathy from Nebraska and I have a question.

I don't know if you are going to be able to answer it.

I was going through the form for the state plan and it's still asking for things like descriptions about the blind programs and all that.

Does this still need to really be included.

ANN MCDANIEL: That's a very good question.

And I would tell you that as long as the processes are to change laws and regulations, the process is to change things like the template for the 704 report and the template for the state plan are also very long and involved processes.

And they have not done anything with that yet in terms of giving us a new form and new instructions that reflect the changes in the law.

So obviously the plans that we are in the process of writing are not going to fit neatly into the template that we have to work with.

And Brad and I were talking about this earlier today.

All I know to do is to write the very best plan we can write based on the law.

And make it fit in as best we can.

We are hoping to get some guidance from the independent living administration on that.

But if we get it great, and if we don't we are still going to have to make it fit and follow the law.

And chapter two is no longer part of this whole piece because they stayed at RSA and they are not part of our state plan.

So I would ignore that part.

But that's the best thing to do, use your best judgment based on what you know the law says and what you know has to be in the plan.

And make it fit the best way you can make it fit.

That's my answer.

And Tim is shaking his head yes and he has his thumb up.

KELLY BUCKLAND: And I am shaking my head yes too.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: So Ann that means for that section ANN MCDANIEL: And Bob has his hand up too.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: So that means for that section I could put Ann McDaniels said I could.

ANN MCDANIELS: Sure.

That will make them laugh when they get your plan.

They will probably need a laugh about then.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: I just had a quick question.

This is Dawn from Iowa again on page nine of the powerpoint under the key points in the proposed regs where they talk about public input must be gathered from and it has that list and one of them is by holding public meetings.

And I know you just said the regs say either or but actually the law says it needs to be before the SPIL is developed.

But I don't know that the law says, that input has to be gathered via a public meeting.

It just says that input has to be gathered, correct.

ANN MCDANIEL: Correct.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: From people with disabilities so it's a little misleading when I read this it makes it look like you have to have a public hearing.

Whereas in some states ANN MCDANIEL: Well, that's what the proposed regulations say.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Right.

That's what the proposed regs say but thats not, the law doesn't say that you have to have a hearing.

Just that you have to gather.

There are other ways to gather input from the disability community other than a public hearing so that's my question.

ANN MCDANIEL: I would interpret it the same way you do.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: As a matter of fact like in Idaho we never did hold a public hearing.

We held public forums where we got like facilitated input from people but we never held a public hearing.

They were in our opinion kind of like a waste of time.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Kris from Utah.

We are getting some questions where is it written anywhere that we can point to that designates exactly what systems advocacy is?

And what other advocacy is?

I mean, we think we know but we are getting questions.

They want to be able to read that in writing in the regs and in the law where it designates what that is.

KELLY BUCKLAND: Okay.

So there was a proposed definition of systems advocacy in the proposed rules.

Did you all see that?

NCIL didn't agree with it.

We think it's too narrow.

There's actually parts of it that I think are applicable.

But what we chose to use as what we thought a good definition of what systems advocacy was is actually in the law that talks about the uses of Part B funds.

You all know there's like 13 uses of Part B, 13 different things you can do with Part B money.

One of them is to develop model policies and then I am paraphrasing, and share those policies.

Now I will read it verbatim.

It's actually seven duties not 13, I don't know why, it used to be 13?

So number five is to conduct studies and analysis, gather information, develop model policies and procedures and present information approaches, strategies, finding conclusions, and recommendations.

This is important to call out recommendations to federal state and local policy makers.

That's legislators you guys.

So we are supposed to be making recommendations to policy makers and it refers back to, this is all coming out of the purpose of the act.

Remember.

So when you are up at the legislature making recommendations to them based upon your analysis of stuff, you are actually doing what's in the law.

You are not lobbying.

You are following this part where it talks exactly about what you can do with Part B money.

So somebody says, oh, you are lobbying.

Well, no.

This is allowed with the Part B funds.

So we suggested they use this as a definition of systems advocacy.

That's just what we pulled out.

NCIL felt this was apropos.

ANN MCDANIEL: I see a few more hands.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Okay.

Well, part of my question I think has been kind of answered with the assurances on the SPIL.

So if I heard it right I am supposed to just put in there the best that I think it fits in.

Because there are certain areas in there that I just don't want to put in any more on those assurances so I will just be taking that out.

I mean, are the assurances like standard language that's already in there?

Because this is the first time that I have ever actually put a SPIL into the system.

ANN MCDANIEL: They are standard language.

That's part of the template.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Okay.

It feels wrong to say yes to some of those.

Just FYI.

KELLY BUCKLAND: So you will all remember the legal analysis that NCIL got from an attorney about the law.

One of the things that they cited actually in their findings was that it's their interpretation that essentially ACL cannot disapprove a plan unless something in it is illegal.

So our best suggestion to you is that you look at the law.

And follow the law.

And as long as the law, as long as you are complying with the law with the stuff that you put in your SPIL it shouldn't get disapproved for that.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah, it's just those assurances and if there are already standard language that is in the template, that is the only thing.

Because so many of those assurances still say that the DSU jointly develops the plan.

ANN MCDANIEL: Right and none of that has been adapted.

KELLY BUCKLAND: And that would be against the law.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: And I don't want to say yes to that.

ANN MCDANIEL: Vicki and Tim both have their hands up can you get a mic up here.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: And I have one other question after that for you guys.

Has it been determined what 51 percent of the centers really means, Part C, Part B, everybody, whatever.

ANN MCDANIEL: Well, there's language in the proposed regulations about that.

And I will look for that while they talk to you about assurances.

KELLY BUCKLAND: I know what it says.

I can remember what it says.

The proposed rules say that that would be anyone who meets the definition of the assurances, the standards and assurances in 725 regardless of funding which is what NCIL had recommended.

Now, I think we put in the rules or in our comments, I am not sure, but that there needs to be some sort of process by which you determine whether or not they actually are complying to 725.

ANN MCDANIEL: Does that help Cathy?

TIM BEATTY: Hi there everyone, I am Tim Beatty from the ILA.

I am going to be presenting on this on Tuesday more in depth.

Ann is correct.

The template is old.

It has old terms and old citations in there.

Unfortunately we can't change the template until the final regulations have been released.

So we have asked for an extension from OMB on the template so we can submit it this year to get it in in time to get your funding we did post the I sent out an announcement in early December that the request to extend the template was filed in the federal register.

You had 30 days to make comments on the template extension request.

The comment period closed last Monday.

So at this point OMB will move forward with reviewing a request to extend this so that we can go ahead with the current template and I will talk more on Tuesday how you can work with the current template to get everything in there.

But Ann is correct.

If it says DSU ignore it assume you are talking about the DSE there.

ANN MCDANIEL: Thank you Tim.

Just one more question and then we probably need to move on.

Five minutes until break.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: I just have a question about the comments from persons with disabilities or whatever you were supposed to get for the plan either before or after.

Is there going to be some kind of guidance to the SILCs and also the CILs on how to handle that, like a third party evaluator or something?

Because I know if you send out a survey or something if there's not pretty strict regulations on how that's handled.

With a good computer I could generate 60 things, 600 people I would want to make comments and if I want to see a specific thing.

So you had mentioned before all these universities and stuff that you have disability centers or whatever.

Maybe we could plug in with them to be some kind of requirement more of an official vehicle instead of just kind of hit and miss we are going to comment but how do we know where those comments are really coming from if we don't have an independent receiver or sender on that information.

ANN MCDANIEL: Right.

And I don't know if there will be guidance around that and I am looking at Tim and Vicki to say will there be guidance on that.

Did you say maybe?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: There just might be a way to dovetail in these college organizations all over the country that have disability centers.

ANN MCDANIEL: We have expressed to ACL that some guidance to help us through the weeds of writing a plan that fits in a lot of old boxes is going to be doable for us and hopefully they are going to give us a little bit of guidance as we move through this process.

JUDITH HOLT: The university centers, which every state and territory has one a couple of states have more than one are also under ACL and are strongly strongly, I just came from the meeting in DC, being encouraged to work with the CILs and the SILC and to partner with them because we have a lot of common agendas.

We also have a lot of research and evaluation capacity.

So I would encourage you to actively explore that.

ANN MCDANIEL: So it sounds like they are being encouraged to and will likely offer to be resources for you.