 |
| Tom Laing, InterHab Executive Director Photo courtesy of the Topeka Capital-Journal |
The article below quoted from cjonline explains why advocates for Kansans with disabilities want the Legislature to review a decision by the administration of Gov. Sam Brownback to turn aside $22.5 million in federal grants for job-training programs that target people with mental or physical challenges eager to join the labor force.
The two-year total surrendered by the Kansas Department for Children and Families included $15 million shunned in the federal fiscal year ending in September. The state had access to $25.5 million in federal grants for vocational rehabilitation services in the year, but chose to expend less than half the total.
Kansas led the nation, in percentage terms, by declining roughly 60 percent of federal aid available to help disabled adults find jobs.
Michael Donnelly, director of rehabilitation services at the Department for Children and Families, said demand for vocational services had contracted to pre-recession levels, making it prudent to downsize expenditures. The state is required to provide a one-fifth match on the federal grants, and drawing down the extra $15 million would have cost the state an estimated $3.5 million.
“We have areas in the state that basically have full employment,” Donnelly said. “The case loads are down. We had to make a decision about returning some of those federal dollars because it was more than was needed.”
Leaders of organizations serving Kansans with disabilities argued rejection of such a vast amount was unjustified given the apparent need. In addition, they said, legislators arriving in Topeka for the 2016 session in January ought to delve into why funding was cut while less than 6,000 of Kansas’ 178,000 disabled people of working age hold down full-time jobs. About 16,000 have part-time employment.
“It would be very helpful to get different points of view out there,” said Ron Pasmore, president of the Kansas Elks Training Center in Wichita.
He said KETC discontinued a substantive vocational program because reimbursement rates from the state were insufficient to cover costs of services.
“It was essentially costing us more to do it than we were paid,” Pasmore said. “As resources became more tight, we weren’t able to subsidize it.”
However, Donnelly said Kansas providers offering training to qualified disabled people got used to large payments from the state during the recession because client demand surged. In the past few years, he said, some organizations have complained as client referrals declined and state payments fell.
“Nobody made a lot of money in the disability arena during the recession. That’s such a completely absurd comment,” said Tom Laing, executive director of Interhab, an organization dedicated to promoting independent living among the disabled.
Laing added his voice to others who want the 2016 Legislature to study the funding decision by the Brownback administration. He was surprised to learn DCF quietly maneuvered to forgo aid extending services to disabled people who want to work. DCF relinquished its hold on the $15 million in August, but made no public announcement.
Laing also said officials in DCF, particularly Donnelly, should be dedicated to making vocational rehabilitation services effective, as well as efficient.
“He should be a leader in a movement to make good things happen instead of pushing money back to the feds,” Laing said.
Donnelly said to tap $3.5 million in state general fund dollars to secure the $15 million could be a “waste” of state tax dollars. In 2005, Kansas served 14,800 disabled people with vocational programs. The recession drove the number to 17,250 in 2011. But the total declined to 14,400 in 2014, he said.
“Looking at our projections, we’re not going to spend all those federal funds. We didn’t want to match them,” Donnelly said.
Rocky Nichols, executive director of the Disability Rights Center of Kansas, said other statistics put the administration’s decision in a different light. He said the number of Kansans applying for vocational rehabilitation services dropped from 5,500 in the 2014 federal fiscal year to 4,600 in the 2015 federal fiscal year.
“The number applying for VR services was down only 16 percent. Yet, they gave back 60 percent of the federal money,” Nichols said.
He said slippage in applications for vocational assistance ought to have inspired DCF to deploy more of the federal allotment for outreach to individuals with a disability or to increase reimbursement rates to service providers.
In addition, Nichols said, he was aware of Kansans who asked DCF for vocational rehabilitation support but were told the state agency didn’t have the money.
Donnelly said organizations involved with rehabilitation services in Kansas should have anticipated the state would opt not to secure the $15 million after giving up an opportunity for $7.5 million in the previous fiscal year.
“Did we go out and say, ‘We’re giving money back.’ No. But were they getting the message that resources were decreasing? Yes, if they were listening,” Donnelly said.
He said unilateral action by DCF to avoid spending $3.5 million in state tax dollars on the federal match wasn’t tied to Brownback’s effort to balance the budget. State tax revenue shortfalls in the current fiscal year triggered mid-year cuts.
He said one of the DCF’s persistent problems was filling vocational disability counseling positions within the agency. The vacancy rate hovers between 30 percent and 40 percent, he said.
In one case highlighted by the Kansas Health Institute, an Atchison woman with disabilities had 13 case managers in four years while seeking vocational assistance.
“We recognize that our staff turnover creates difficulty for people. We’re doing what we can with what we have,” Donnelly said.
Original Article
No comments:
Post a Comment