A. Full-time Equivalent (FTE)



RSA-7-OB for FY 2020Form Name RSA-7-OBAward FY2020Report Through09/30/2020ProgramIndependent Living Services for Older Individuals Who Are BlindSubmitting Organization: California Department of Rehabilitation Part I: Funding Sources and ExpendituresTitle VII-Chapter 2 Federal grant award for reported fiscal year: $3,324,910Other federal grant award for reported fiscal year: 0Title VII-Chapter 2 carryover from previous year: $1,516,435Other federal grant carryover from previous year: 0A. Funding Sources for Expenditures in Reported FYA1. Title VII-Chapter 2: $3,360,725A2. Total other federal: 0A2. Total other federal (a through e): 0(a) Title VII-Chapter 1-Part B: 0(b) SSA reimbursement: 0(c) Title XX - Social Security Act: 0(d) Older Americans Act: 0(e) Other: 0A3. State (excluding in-kind): 0A4. Third party: 0A5. In-kind: $503,593A6. Total Matching Funds: $503,593A7. Total All Funds Expended: $3,864,318B. Total expenditures and encumbrances allocated to administrative, support staff, and general overhead costs: $957,017C. Total expenditures and encumbrances for direct program services: $2,907,301Part II: Staffing FTE (full time equivalent) is based upon a 40-hour workweek or 2080 hours per year.A. Full-time Equivalent (FTE)Program Staffa) Administrative and Support b) Direct Servicec) Total1. FTE State Agency1.00000.00001.00002. FTE Contractors10.5142.7353.243. Total FTE11.510042.730054.2400B. Employed or advanced in employment?a) Number employedb) FTE1. Employees with Disabilities5324.022. Employees with Blindness Age 55 and Older269.213. Employees who are Racial/Ethnic Minorities7437.244. Employees who are Women10755.505. Employees Age 55 and Older4228.63C. VolunteersC1. FTE program volunteers (number of volunteer hours divided by 2080)14.59Part III: Data on Individuals ServedProvide data in each of the categories below related to the number of individuals for whom one or more services were provided during the reported fiscal yearIndividuals Served1. Number of individuals who began receiving services in the previous FY and continued to receive services in the reported FY: 18042. Number of individuals who began receiving services in the reported FY: 2,9533. Total individuals served during the reported fiscal year (A1 + A2): 4,757Age55-5940260-6455165-6967070.7471675-7962980-8458585-8960790-9437895-99205100 & over14Total (must agree with A3)4,757GenderFemale3,172Male1,585Total (must agree with A3)4,757Race/EthnicityHispanic/Latino of any race (for individuals who are non-Hispanic/Latino only)922American Indian or Alaska Native35Asian318Black or African American 481Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 30White2,765Two or more races59Race and ethnicity unknown 147Total (must agree with A3)4,757Degree of Visual Impairment Totally blind (LP only or NLP)455Legally Blind (excluding totally blind) 1,630Severe Visual Impairment 2,672Total (must agree with A3) 4,757Major Cause of Visual Impairment Macular Degeneration 1,516Diabetic Retinopathy 318Glaucoma772Cataracts351Other1,800Total (must be agree A3) 4,757Other Age-Related ImpairmentsHearing Impairment 810Diabetes968Cardiovascular Disease and Strokes835Cancer221Bone, Muscle, Skin, Joint and Movement Disorders 985Alzheimer Disease/Cognitive Impairment 113Depression/Mood Disorder202Other Geriatric Concerns1,216Type of ResidencePrivate residence (house or apartment) 3,431Senior Living/Retirement Community1028Assisted Living Facility171Nursing Home/Long-term Care facility104Homeless23Total (must agree with A3) 4,757Sources of Referral Eye care provider (ophthalmologist, optometrist)725Physician/medical provider237State VR agency 173Government or Social Service Agency247Veterans Administration22Senior Center821Assisted Living Facility78Nursing Home/Long-term Care facility1Faith-based organization17Independent Living center76Family member or friend670Self-referral697Other993Total (must agree with A3)4,757Part IV: Types of Services Provided and Resources Allocated Provide data related to the number of older individuals who are blind receiving each type of service and resources committed to each type of service.A. Clinical/functional vision assessments and services?CostPersons Served1a. Total Cost from VII-2 funds$56,957?1b. Total Cost from other funds0?2. Vision screening / vision examination / low vision evaluation?3663. Surgical or therapeutic treatment to prevent, correct, or modify disabling eye conditions?13B. Assistive technology devices and services?CostPersons Served1a. Total Cost from VII-2 funds$793,409?1b. Total Cost from other funds0?2. Provision of assistive technology devices and aids?1,4933. Provision of assistive technology services ?1,699C. Independent living and adjustments training and services?CostPersons Served1a. Total Cost from VII-2 funds$1,736,622?1b. Total Cost from other funds0?2. Orientation and Mobility training?4793. Communication skills ?1,1324. Daily living skills?1,5005. Supportive services (reader services, transportation, personal ?1,2666. Advocacy training and support networks?8367. Counseling (peer, individual and group)?1,2178. Information, referral and community integration9. Other IL services?2,8321,032D. Community Awareness: Events & Activities Costa. Events / Activitiesb. Persons Served1a. Total Cost from VII-2 funds$320,313??1b. Total Cost from other funds0??2. Information and Referral??4123. Community Awareness: Events/Activities?4499,871Part V: Comparison of Prior year Activities to Current Reported YearActivity?a) Prior Yearb) Reported FYc) Change ( + / - )1. Program Cost (all sources) $3,813,437$3,846,907$33,4702. Number of Individuals Served 5,6964,757-9393. Number of Minority Individuals Served 2,2351,845-3904. Number of Community Awareness Activities 899449-4505. Number of Collaborating agencies and organizations 0006. Number of Sub-grantees 17170Part VI: Program Outcomes/Performance MeasuresProvide the following data for each of the performance measures below. This will assist RSA in reporting results and outcomes related to the program.?Number of personsPercent of personsA1. Number of individuals receiving AT (assistive technology) services and training1,699100.00%A2. Number of individuals receiving AT (assistive technology) services and training who maintained or improved functional abilities that were previously lost or diminished as a result of vision loss. (closed/inactive cases only)1,15567.98%A3. Number of individuals for whom functional gains have not yet been determined at the close of the reporting period.54031.78%B1. Number of individuals who received orientation and mobility (O & M) services479100.00%B2. Of those receiving orientation and mobility (O & M) services, the number of individuals who experienced functional gains or maintained their ability to travel safely and independently in their residence and/or community environment as a result of services. (closed/inactive cases only)29160.75%B3. Number of individuals for whom functional gains have not yet been determined at the close of the reporting period.18839.25%C1. Number of individuals who received communication skills training1,132100.00%C2. Of those receiving communication skills training, the number of individuals who gained or maintained their functional abilities as a result of services they received. (Closed/inactive cases only)81772.17%C3. Number of individuals for whom functional gains have not yet been determined at the close of the reporting period.31427.74%D1. Number of individuals who received daily living skills training1,500100.00%D2. Number of individuals that experienced functional gains or successfully restored or maintained their functional ability to engage in their customary daily life activities as a result of services or training in personal management and daily living skills. (closed/inactive cases only)1,03769.13%D3. Number of individuals for whom functional gains have not yet been determined at the close of the reporting period.46130.73%E1. Number of individuals served who reported feeling that they are in greater control and are more confident in their ability to maintain their current living situation as a result of services they received. (closed/inactive cases only)2,38250.07%E2. Number of individuals served who reported feeling that they have less control and confidence in their ability to maintain their current living situation as a result of services they received. (closed/inactive cases only)80.17%E3. Number of individuals served who reported no change in their feelings of control and confidence in their ability to maintain their current living situation as a result of services they received. (closed/inactive cases only)57112%E4. Number of individuals served who experienced changes in lifestyle for reasons unrelated to vision loss. (closed/inactive cases only) 1813.80%E5. Number of individuals served who died before achieving functional gain or experiencing changes in lifestyle as a result of services they received. (closed/inactive cases only) 531.11%Part VII: Training and Technical Assistance NeedsPlease enter a brief description of training and technical assistance needs that you may have to assist in the implementation and improvement of the performance of your Title VII-Chapter 2 program in your state. The program is implemented through sub-grant agreements with private, nonprofit community-based organizations (service providers) that have expertise providing effective services to individuals who are blind or visually impaired. The Department of Rehabilitation (DOR) is the State agency that distributes grant monies to local service providers so the training and/or technical assistance focus is on ensuring consistency and accuracy in delivery and reporting of consumer services. This focus supports DOR’s primary role as the grant management oversight entity. DOR strives to provide training and technical assistance to the service providers whenever possible through teleconferences, videoconferences, program review visits, and technical assistance requests. Technical assistance was provided to all service providers in 2020. Much of the technical assistance was consultation on strategies to meet grant performance goals and the needs of consumers as COVID-19 drastically changed traditional methods of service delivery. DOR wishes to continue receiving direction and feedback on best practices in tracking and reporting consumer services and attaining quality outcomes. This is especially relevant given the data collection requirements that began on October 1, 2020 for the new 7-OB report template. This year DOR was the recipient of Intensive Technical Assistance from the OIB Technical Assistance Center at Mississippi State (OIB-TAC). DOR staff worked with the OIB-TAC staff to develop technical assistance/training sessions for the 17 California service providers. The topics were agreed upon after the OIB-TAC met with groups of service provider staff to survey and assess the most desired technical assistance and training needs. Sessions included Community Outreach, Remote and Virtual Training, Case Documentation, and Adjustment to Vision Loss to name a few. The sessions had as many as 65 participants and were well received by the service providers, even though the training had originally been scheduled as an in-person event and was changed to a virtual training as COVID-19 began impacting travel and focus shifted to virtual training methods. The OIB-TAC also helped DOR staff in developing methods to better connect the service providers through use of quarterly teleconference calls and a listserv.Part VIII: NarrativeA. Briefly describe the agency's method of implementation for the Title VII-Chapter 2 program (i.e. in-house, through sub-grantees/contractors, or a combination) incorporating outreach efforts to reach underserved and/or unserved populations. Please list all sub-grantees/contractors.Implementation: DOR provides comprehensive independent living services (ILS) to individuals age 55 years and older throughout California through its 17 service providers. The sub-grant agreements are with private, nonprofit community-based organizations which have expertise in providing effective services to individuals who are blind or visually impaired. The services are conducted in the consumer’s everyday surroundings, either in their home, virtually, at a service provider office, or in their local community. The grant is competed statewide and open to eligible applicants providing core ILS training in home and community settings. For purposes of providing Title VII, Chapter 2 services throughout the state, DOR desires to fund providers so that there are services in each of the 58 counties within California. Awards for each county are determined by a formula based on the population of persons aged 55 and older residing in the county, along with the geographic size of the county. The exceptions are the one unserved county that did not receive any applications for service provision and one county where the service provider who received funding was unable to serve the county and relinquished the funding. Both counties are remote and have a very small population, so finding a service provider who can serve those areas was not possible. Lastly, each OIB service provider has also been given a “base funding” of $10,000 to ensure that all service providers, regardless of the number of counties they serve, will have a reasonable base of funds from which to operate. The October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020 federal fiscal year was the third year of a 5-year grant cycle and amendments to continue funding were made to all 17 service providers.Outreach Efforts to Unserved and Underserved Populations: The OIB service providers are encouraged to meet the State Plan for Independent Living (SPIL) outreach challenges by utilizing methodologies that help to ensure eligible consumers are aware of services and to focus on unserved and underserved population groups. The outreach strategies of the 17 service providers to identify local needs of sub-population groups within their geographic area have been met with innovative and effective efforts that included:providing translation services for non-English speaking populations;incorporating gender and ethnic appropriate ILS promotional information via various media: specialty publications, ethnic-specific print, television, radio and public service announcements;conducting in-person and virtual ILS informational training to eye care medical specialists and physicians serving targeted population groups in underserved and unserved communities to increase referrals for services;conducting in-person and virtual presentations at adult day health centers, health/social service organizations and homes for seniors located in unserved and underserved ethnic, linguistic, or economic communities;providing ILS information, including brochures, virtual meetings, and telephone calls, to organizations, agencies and businesses serving target populations;utilizing ‘senior mentors’ to orient and demonstrate non-visual skills to members of targeted population sub-groups living in residential facilities;attending health and disability fairs and participating in culturally based social activities and support groups by virtual and in-person methods;hiring staff and recruiting volunteers who are representative of various cultures and languages of diverse populations, to identify and respond to service barriers (i.e., transportation, geography, cultural sensitivity, translation services, etc.); anddistributing ILS information to faith-based organizations and establishments located in underserved and unserved diverse communities.Notably, two of California’s 17 service providers served over 60% of their consumers among ethnic minority groups. Six additional service providers are serving over 40% minorities. Particularly, Blindness Support Services, Incorporated (BSSI) and Access to Independence (A2I), are making concerted efforts to reach the Hispanic population of the diverse Inland Empire and San Diego/Imperial Valley areas respectively. The data reflects that 41.9% of consumers served by the 17 service providers during the 2019-20 grant year were from underserved minority populations. This is a slight increase from 41.8% in the previous grant year. Below is a list of the OIB service providers as well as a breakdown of the diversity of the consumers served by each provider including their office location and counties served.OIB Service ProvidersDiversity %Office LocationCounties ServedAccess to Independence96.7%San DiegoImperialBlind and Visually Impaired Center of Monterey County33.6%MontereyMontereyBlindness Support Services, Inc.62.9%RiversideRiverside, San BernardinoCommunity Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired57.1%StocktonSan JoaquinCenter of Vision Enhancement39.0%MercedMariposa, MercedDayle McIntosh Center for the Disabled42.7%AnaheimLos Angeles, OrangeDisability Action Center14.8%ChicoColusa, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Shasta, Siskiyou, TehamaEarle Baum Center16.6%Santa RosaLake, Napa, SonomaIndependent Living Center of Kern County50.7%BakersfieldKernIndependent Living Resource Center19.8%Santa BarbaraSan Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, VenturaLighthouse for the Blind44.1%San FranciscoAlameda, Contra Costa, Del Norte, Humboldt, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, TrinityLions Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired56.4%PittsburgAlameda, Contra Costa, SolanoSan Diego Center for the Blind36.4%San DiegoSan DiegoSociety for the Blind25.7%SacramentoAlpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, El Dorado, Glenn, Mendocino, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Sacramento, Sierra, Sutter, Yolo, YubaValley Center for the Blind48.4%FresnoFresno, Kings, Madera, TulareVisually Impaired Persons Support12.1%ModestoStanislaus, TuolumneVista Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired27.4%Palo AltoSan Benito, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa CruzB. Briefly describe any activities designed to expand or improve services including collaborative activities or community awareness; and efforts to incorporate new methods and approaches developed by the program into the State Plan for Independent Living (SPIL) under Section 704.Collaborative Activities: All 17 service providers have collaborative relationships with other organizations in their respective communities. The following are two examples submitted by California’s OIB service providers to describe some of the ways in which they use collaboration to further reach their communities. These narratives, slightly edited for brevity and clarity, give a good representation of the collaborative efforts that have been employed in many communities across the State.Disability Action Center: We worked collaboratively with many agencies to expand and improve vision services. We worked with LightHouse for the Blind, Well Connected vision support groups, Alzheimer’s Association, California Phones, Shasta County clerk/elections to name a few. We are now doing referrals to and from each other to make sure our clients are getting served in all areas to keep them independent.Society for the Blind: Society for the Blind has established partnerships with community organizations in Placerville, Roseville, Ukiah and Woodland to facilitate monthly support groups and conduct community integration activities intended to increase awareness of, and participation in, services for blind and low vision seniors. Outreach efforts have been severely curtailed during the past two quarters as a result of COVID-19, and its accompanying sheltering and social distancing requirements. Due to these guidelines, several previously scheduled presentations and group instruction sessions had to be postponed indefinitely. We did offer a specifically tailored video outreach program to 61 seniors in a residential community this past quarter and plan on continuing these activities as we work on connecting in new ways with additional partners in our service area.The examples above give a good idea of how our service providers make a remarkable effort to connect and collaborate with as many programs in their service areas as possible, while promoting and modeling practices that allow OIB consumers to live more independently and integrated in their communities.Given the significant challenges of COVID-19 the service providers reported that they have been working to revise curricula, streamline new virtual service delivery strategies, and develop new virtual methods of doing business. The service providers are adapting and modifying their services to ensure that consumers are served in the safest and most effective manner, both today and into the future.DOR continues to provide technical assistance and consultation to service providers on strategic planning of delivery of comprehensive ILS services. Most service providers deliver a wide variety of services and are always seeking ways to better connect with each other, others in their community, and especially with the OIB consumers in their service areas. To promote collaborative relationships, DOR has connected some of the service providers when questions come in about things that another program may do particularly well. Service providers have sent staff to learn best practices from other service providers across the munity Awareness and Expansion of Services: All 17 service providers participate in community awareness events and are looking to expand services in their respective communities. The following service provider narratives, slightly edited for brevity and clarity, describe some of the diverse ways they have been expanding their services and/or share and bring awareness to their community about the services available and the unique needs of seniors who are blind or visually impaired. Center of Vision Enhancement (COVE): The COVID-19 pandemic caused COVE to make major changes to outreach and expansion efforts. In-person meetings and gatherings halted. COVE kept one staff member on-site to receive calls. Staff made phone calls to clients and arranged to help them get needed items, such as food deliveries. Since the Braille and Talking Book Library closed and clients who did not use the Braille and Audio Reading Download (BARD) service could not get books, staff downloaded books onto flash drives and sent the books to clients. COVE began weekly Adjusting to Sight Loss sessions via Zoom. This allowed persons even without internet access to connect and persons living in outlying areas who have found it difficult to attend in person meetings before, now joined in on a regular basis. Staff also began connecting with and participating in Zoom meetings with other non-profit community service providers to build relationships and promote COVE programs and services for OIB consumers.The Dayle McIntosh Center (DMC): As a direct result of the COVID-19 pandemic the OIB team took new approaches to conduct outreach and to participate in community awareness activities. Emphasis was placed on virtual outreach activity in order to share about OIB program services. Information regarding available OIB peer support groups and services was shared with community organizations through the Orange County Aging Services Collaborative (OCASC), which DMC participates in monthly. The OIB staff are also members of the Strategic Plan on Aging subcommittee, which focuses on technology issues, and on the Policy subcommittee. The OCASC is comprised of over 40 aging services, non-profit organizations and city/county entities which serve older adults. The group has demonstrated to be an extremely helpful tool to keep abreast of emerging aging issues in Orange County, and a method in which to reach many aging service organizations in order to promote DMC’s OIB program.Another outreach activity which took place in the month of June, was the submission of an OIB article to The Globe newspaper, which is the local newspaper for the Laguna Woods retirement community. The Globe is circulated to the over 18,000 residents of Laguna Woods and can be found throughout the community, in the clubhouses, club meetings and social service programs. As a result of submitting the article to The Globe, the OIB program received several referrals and new interest in the Laguna Woods Vision Club hosted by the OIB instructor via DMC’s conference line. The Laguna Woods Vision Club averages a participation of 15-20 consumers and prospective individuals in need of OIB services.OIB staff participated in a Zoom event, which was hosted by the Marketing and Admissions Professionals for Seniors (MAPS) of the San Gabriel Valley. The event was attended by over twenty-five Los Angeles County based senior related businesses. Such as, marketing directors of assisted living facilities, home care agency staff, concierge doctors, Medicare plan representatives and many more providers. The OIB staff had the opportunity to introduce themselves and inform the others participating about the OIB Program. As a result, the OIB staff were invited to participate in another MAPS event which will focus on bringing together senior-related businesses in the Valley area of Los Angeles County.C. Briefly summarize results from any of the most recent evaluations or satisfaction surveys conducted for your program and attach a copy of applicable reports.Service providers report quarterly on program outcomes. The evaluation of the reporting requirements for OIB is an in-house program evaluation activity. Careful documentation of service provision and consumer outcomes helps measure performance and effectiveness and identifies technical assistance needs. Furthermore, the evaluations augment accountability, strengthen quality assurance, and identify where program policy revisions are needed. The evaluation process includes all components of the data collection requirements established by the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA). When monitoring programs, DOR focusses significant time on reviewing services, methods of service delivery, successful outcomes, and consumer satisfaction. Overall, the OIB service providers report a high percentage of consumers who are very satisfied and feel more independent because of the services they received. Ongoing virtual and on-site (when possible) monitoring will continue to promote accurate documentation of outcomes and follow-up with consumers to ensure they are completing services and meeting goals. This review process also allows DOR to consult with the service providers on many of their program aspects, helping ensure that the objectives established in grant agreements are being tracked and adjustments are made with a focus on providing comprehensive OIB ILS services.DOR has developed and implemented the use of Performance Improvement Plans (PIP) and Corrective Action Plans (CAP) to address service provider performance issues. The well-established grant deadlines and individual service provider performance indicators are evaluated and if the service provider is not meeting these a PIP is developed collaboratively with timelines and expected improvements. If the desired indicators in the PIP are reached, the PIP is terminated, and the service provider continues with business as usual. If the desired indicators are not reached a CAP is collaboratively developed with more detailed timelines and progress indicators. If significant performance improvement is not seen, then the service provider may be terminated. The service providers have been actively engaged during this process and DOR has seen improvements from all service providers when utilizing these tools.D. Briefly describe the impact of the Title VII-Chapter 2 program, citing examples from individual cases (without identifying information) in which services contributed significantly to increasing independence and quality of life for the individual(s).Below are a few examples of OIB service providers’ narrative reports, slightly edited for brevity and clarity, about their consumers.Blindness Support Services: A consumer got very depressed during the pandemic because she was no longer receiving books on tape from The Braille Institute. Under our OIB program, the consumer was introduced to BARD mobile. She participated in remote training to receive assistance on how to use BARD mobile, including searching for and downloading books. After a few attempts, the consumer was able to successfully download books on her iPhone. She cried tears of happiness because she is now able to use her phone to listen to books.Independent Living Center of Kern County (ILCKC): A married couple met ILCKC staff through a rural outreach presentation at a senior center. Due to cataracts and age-related vision loss, both consumers have severely low vision. The consumers wanted to obtain information on assistive technology (AT) devices and services, alongside learning the accessibility features for the visually impaired on their cell phones. The consumers informed staff that they were having difficulties seeing their mail and other printed documents. Staff demonstrated various magnifiers. After trying various magnifiers, the consumers were provided magnifiers that assist them in reading with their current level of vision and promote their independence. In addition, staff donated a 20/20 pen to each consumer. Shortly after staff met with the consumers, the COVID-19 pandemic hit. Due to this, staff began providing bimonthly phone calls to the consumers. During one of these phone calls, one of the consumers informed staff that they have been able to read mail and doctor visit summaries because of the magnifiers that were provided. Staff later received a call requesting assistance with insurance and transportation issues. Due to their residence being in the rural Kern County area; they were not eligible for regular medical transportation. Staff acquired and relayed information on how to get authorization from their doctor and request transportation. The consumers later informed staff that they are now receiving medical transportation services.Valley Center for the Blind (VCB): The consumer was referred to VCB by her medical provider after losing her vision suddenly. VCB reached out while she was still in the hospital to provide support and information prior to her return home where she lives alone. The consumer’s main concern at the time was how she was going to be able to live independently. In the initial appointments with our Independent Living specialist the consumer was provided with important information and training about taking and receiving medications, using public transportation in the area for appointments, and educated on what sort of equipment she needed to stay independent at home. Another issue the consumer was having was answering incoming calls from doctors and other resources alike. This caused anxiety because she felt like she was missing important calls that concerned her healthcare. In response to this concern, VCB provided AT training that focused on answering and making phone calls and using the Assistant feature to access text messages from family, who do not live in the area. This proved to be a game changer. Because of this training, the consumer can manage her doctor’s appointments and stay in touch with family while remaining independently in her home.Visually Impaired Persons Support (VIPS): A consumer’s daughter contacted VIPS because of her father’s increased sight loss due to macular degeneration. At 92 he still wanted to maintain his independence and stay in his own home. His vision loss made it difficult for him to pay his bills and prepare meals. In working with the consumer, it was determined that a video magnifier would be beneficial. VIPS was able to provide a video magnifier on a long-term loan through our AT lending library. After training on the video magnifier in his home, the consumer was able to read bills and other important information that he was unable to before. Because of the video magnifier, the consumer can continue to pay his own bills, maintain his finances and access important documents. The consumer also participated in ILS training one on one in his home. He did not feel safe preparing meals on his own because of his vision loss. He learned how to safely use knives with a cut resistant glove, how to use low vision measuring tools, and new cooking techniques specific to the things he likes to prepare. The consumer now feels comfortable preparing his own meals again. The consumer reports that he is thrilled to be able to continue taking care of himself and remain independent in his own home.E. Finally, note any problematic areas or concerns related to implementing the Title VII-Chapter 2 program in your state.In most years DOR sees very few reports of issues from the OIB service providers. The issues tend to be general in nature and are often common to all service providers across the State. This year was different with the COVID-19 pandemic. All OIB service providers had to adjust to providing remote and virtual services rather than the traditional in-person services. The service providers mentioned that this was especially difficult as changing modes of service delivery took time and significantly impacted outreach efforts. Additionally, virtual training requires significantly more communication time as skills and techniques need to be explained, rather than showing tactile shortcuts during in-person sessions. As a result, the number of consumers served was significantly less for this grant year.A continuing challenge for most of the service providers, that was mentioned again this year, was lean budgets and small cash reserves. A challenge that was mentioned by some service providers is the high cost of doing business in California. The minimum wage for California is increasing annually with a target of $15.00/hour by 2023. This has impacted all OIB service providers as they continue to absorb this increase while the Title VII-Chapter 2 funding allocation has remained relatively flat for several years. As the service providers adjust to new, higher costs of doing business, they also are trying to maintain the same levels of service in their communities. Many of the service providers specifically mentioned seeking additional funding to supplement their OIB programs as the funding levels are not adequate to meet the demand for their services. Most service providers additionally report that since the beginning of COVID-19 it is costing more to serve each consumer due to the increased time required to train by virtual methods as discussed above.Part IX: SignaturePlease sign and print the name, title and telephone number of the IL-OIB Program Director below.I certify that the data herein reported are statistically accurate to the best of my knowledge.Signed byJoe XavierTitleDirector, California Department of RehabilitationTelephone916-558-5800Date signed12/29/2020 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download