Accessibility

Transcript for May 2014 Brown Bag

>> I'm just kind of betting with Mary on the number of folks that would be here, and I sort of took into consideration on where we're at in the semester and so I underestimated. So I figured if I told, her, like 15 and nobody would show [inaudible] wouldn't show up. So I told her reasonable numbers and now she can't escape. See here, thank you for being here. We really appreciate it. We're kind of pleased--We're definitely pleased to talk about the subjects and there are a number of folks in the room who aren't sitting up here who know as much or more about the program than we do. So we may be kind of calling on them from time to time or soliciting their feedback as well. But we'd like to talk about the CaPROMISE, what we're calling CaPROMISE Project, and we think it's fairly exciting project. It's in the very early stages of implementation. We've got a lot of interesting potential, but we've also come up against a number of interesting challenges that we like to kind of talk through with you as well. And so, we'll spend the next hour or so kind of going over that and [inaudible] change slides, you need to come and let him know. So this is our logo, the logo at this point. And these are all the disclaimers down below saying that the feds are not responsible for what's inside of our mouth today while we're chatting. Do you want to give a little--You want to give a little background there?

>> So, I'm Mary Guillermo. I'm one of the project coordinators on San Diego State University side. We also have Dr. Fred McFarlane who is pretty much the author of this proposal, and the project director. And we have Camille Nebeker who is also involved in the project in providing research illustrated for our program staff. So the Promoting for Readiness of Minors in Supplemental Security Income is a joint initiative involved the US Department of Education, primarily the Office of Special Education Programs, US Department of Health and Human Services, US Department of Labor and Social Security Administration. In our--In the development of this project, the key federal partners that we've been having monthly, sometimes more than monthly conference calls with are the US Department of Education and the Social Security Administration. OK.

 

back to top

 

>> They are the big partners.

>> They are the big partners.

>> But I--And I just want to throw in. This is pretty unprecedented for these four federal agencies to actually come together and say, "OK, we really need to support some projects that are going to explore ways to do things differently for better outcomes." And so, it's really a big deal to have. It's very difficult to get federal agencies to work together, number one. And so, then, to all agree that they have this common vision of what this PROMISE really is, which is making sure that we have opportunities for individuals with disabilities to be important and that there's another option than being looked at--than looking at a life on trying to live on minimal benefits.

>> So the overall objectives. There are six projects throughout the nation. And we all have the same objectives governing us. And the first objective has to be, the target population are transition age students. So, when students become involved in the PROMISE projects, they will be between the ages of 14 to 16 years old. They must be receiving social--Supplemental Security Income. And their families will also be involved. The unique thing about the PROMISE project is that in the past, there's been a lot of transition projects, but the focus have been primarily on providing services and interventions for the transition age student. What PROMISE does is it brings and recognizes the role of the family in this whole process and providing services to them as well, because that's what is going to contribute to the--are reduction of reliance on SSI and other benefits. The other objectives relate to educational attainment and employment outcomes. And the assumption is that if we increase the educational credentials of both the student and the family, if we enhance and improve the employment outcomes, again, for both students and the family, then the reliance on SSI will be reduced. And then another big piece is the interagency collaboration at the federal and state levels. And, here in California, we have our federal partners in Sacramento. But the key part will be the linkages with local services, agencies and support in the areas where the students and families are living, and establishing those collaborations will be a big piece of our effort as well.

 

back to top

 

>> If I could--I think this is maybe a little bit of a cynical viewpoint, but if we were to ask, like, what kind of a primary driver, I really--my sense is it's really that SSI piece if we can kind of bring down reliance on SSI. I think that's what the government is really looking for, we can kind of--we'll get into more details later where that may become a little bit evident. They're going to follow some folks for quite a long time and look at how they stay involved, or kind of detached from SSI. And, you know, in the early phases when Fred was kind of taking the lead in running this whole proposal, we did a little bit of this casual map in terms of, like, how many people's lives would you really have to change if you change it early on just like from a strict and a cost benefit ratio in dollars. And you don't actually have to change too many people's lives to have them transition [inaudible] security to save the government, you know, money when you think about somebody living for 60, 80 years.

 

back to top

 

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah, yeah. It wouldn't take a whole lot. You wouldn't have to impact too many folks. And so, that may be a little bit of a cynical way of looking at it, but, you know, along with getting folks off of SSI, you know, a lot of times what you're doing really is it's not simply saving the government money. You're getting people out of poverty level existence or subsistence as well. So, I think that's the big piece of it. There's a lot of other things that we're addressing along the way. So, Mary already talked about just a little bit, there are six projects that are going on nationally and we'll kind of list them for you here in a little bit, so you kind of get to see where they're operating. All of the projects are funded by Department of Education for a five-year period, we hope. I think it's really like three and two, right? So there is--Again, there's three years to kind of get up and get running and that sort of thing and then they're going to take a look at how we're doing. And if we're not doing well, then it's a three-year project instead of a five-year project. It's a three-year disaster instead of a five-year project. So, we are anticipating some of the challenges that we have and a lot of them are going to relate to recruitment, which we can also talk about a little bit later, finding the folks to participate. But we really hoping that it will be a five-year project and with some lengths then after that. And one of the things that also raises kind of an interesting set of challenges is that the federal government, the funders really wanted to see this kind of approach from a standpoint of developing evidence about sets of practices around transition. And one of the ways that they feel very strongly that you can sort of build a body of evidence is by dealing it in essence, like an experiment. So that there's going to be a control group and a treatment group. There'll be a group that gets CaPROMISE's services and there will be a group that [inaudible] to take control with a lot of people who probably think the group control will get nothing, right, or they get a placebo or something like that. Now, they're like that but they'll get the usual kind of transition services that are available to anybody in the community. And then the CaPROMISE group will get kind of a specialized set or kind of a customized set of interventions.

 

back to top

 

>> So we kind of alluded to these and most of you are familiar with these issues, so we'll go over this quickly so we can talk more about how we're going to address the [inaudible]. We know that SSI, you know, is kind of a path and it also becomes, "OK, well, that's where we're headed. That's our outcome." And so, if that's what you're moving on, you're not going to become self-efficient, you're going to remain in poverty and it's going to be difficult. You're going to have a disincentive to go out and work. And so, a lot of the families have learned to lower their expectation, because this is what they've been told. They've been, you know, a lot of professionals believe it. A lot of individuals believe it. If the family start to get dependent on those benefits and see if, you know, it's something I can count on, it's better than not knowing. And so, there's a lot of issues tied up to it, and which is why it's so important that we're working with the families as well as to [inaudible] younger age. And, if we look at what the goals are for education and special education and rehabilitation, we all have the same goals of people achieving a quality life with meaningful employment and meaningful engagement within the community and opportunities to access education beyond the K-12 system. So, all of those are the same outcomes that we've all talked about trying to achieve for years and years and years. And by the time the family have kids that are now ageing out of high school or ageing out of transition program [inaudible], you know, they're tired. They've been fighting for services for their kids and hopefully teaching their kids how to advocate for themselves and then they get to learn a whole new system, a whole new set of system. And, so the idea is to try to get to the families early on, feel--not let them get their dreams knocked on them. But rather keep those dreams alive and help them find the path and the support to be able to have this point out.

 

back to top

 

>> These are some additional challenges that, you know, the issues are all sort of kind of foundational idea that underlie kind of the reason why this program is important or why the feds decided to put some money behind, you know, kind of copying some new approaches. And a lot of these here on this particular slide talk about sort of the family issues and, you know, as we've mentioned earlier, you know, as Mary mentioned earlier, families are a significant component of the program here. That's one of the things that makes this project a little difficult. Some are taking place on the path is interventions are specifically focused on the youth, the transition age youth. And later on, you'll see we'll come to stop a bunch of services that are part of the CaPROMISE model and one of the things to keep in mind is that for most of these services, it's not just the service can be offered to the youth, it can be offered to the family as well, depending on the fund family need. But the slide too--This slide here just kind of raise us some additional challenges that are associated with some of the family dynamics, you know, you can probably imagine the challenges associated with just kind of going through K to 12 without any additional challenges, then you add in the challenges that might be post by this difficulties that the students has and you add in the additional challenges of, you know, other families in the household also have a disability that has to be managed. Or, you know, with families having low levels of education, low levels of community integration, low levels of workforce participation. So, there's a whole host of these sorts of challenges that we're articulating here that just serve as a foundation for explaining why this is important. Now, this is like preach to the choir a little bit because you're all aware of that. I think this underline some of the feds thinking about why this is important kind of [inaudible].

 

back to top

 

>> One of the challenges that we talked about early on in terms of recruitment of families and students into PROMISE. So, the may--One of the primary objects of PROMISE is to reduce family's reliance on SSI. And, so now we're telling parents we want you involved in this project so that we can reduce your reliance in SSI and you can see where that might be why I really don't want to get my SSI taken away from me. And so a lot of the education of parent's understanding what are working census? How does employment affect SSI? And is it possible that I can and my child with a disability can be employed? Can have a quality of life without having to rely on SSI? There's going to be a lot of education and a lot of support getting to that point but one of the challenges we're going to encounter is how do we convince the families in the first place to be open to coming with--along with us on this journey and discovering what services are effective and, you know, what can work.

>> Those first two bullets up there, I'm bothered.

>> Yeah. Yeah.

>> Medical idea.

>> Many form their course work, things you'll come across in your classes. Remember anything about the [inaudible] or somebody going off of SSI for work after they've qualified for it.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> A little [inaudible] percent. Like it has no percent. So, you think like 1 in 200 [inaudible] SSI. That's the number--you can get different numbers if you play around with things differently. But in the [inaudible] I think that was the method, a number that you hear an awful lot. You know, and it makes sense, you spend so much time kind of demonstrating how significant your disability is, get on, you fight so hard to do that. If we can understand people's reluctance to transition off by the same token, you know, [inaudible] to try to survive on a $1000 a month for the rest of your life, you know.

 

back to top

 

>> Yeah.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Is there a predictor of success or involvement that has been determined about when these people will look at [inaudible] changing my check? Because there are certain prediction that you guys have where expectations of evolvement of success at this point.

>> Oh, we'll get families to reduce their reliance on SSI. Well that's what the PROMISE grant is all about. It's trusting some of these ideas in terms of [inaudible] really get families off this SSI because we don't right now and we'll touch on what the intervention are that we think could make a difference in that. But there's no, you know, establishing the evidence this is--

 

back to top

 

>> Remember we're starting with kids age 14. So, in three years, they're still going to be in high school and so then in five years, they're just been be getting out of high school and they may continue in transition. But--We'll talk about later, the national evaluation team is going to continue to follow these families. Their contract is for nine years. So, they're going to--They're the ones that are going to be doing the long term follow up. Yeah. So, it's, you know, there's a lot of things that can be done early but we're not going to necessarily see some of the really big outcome potential later on. But--So it's very different, it's a very different set up. But we'll get in to more details on that.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> We've been citing so far, national. Yeah.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> This information was actually in the RSP.

>> Yeah we've actually [inaudible] RSP.

>> We've used in the RSP as background information.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah.

[ Inaudible Remark ]

 

back to top

 

>> This last in this other slide is the last one about issues just kind of one other foundational piece and really sort of letting get that sort of the gaps. Then a lot of gaps surface right around kind of the transition [inaudible]. Karen mentioned earlier people are tired, services go from well, I came to K through 12, they go from being mandated provided more or less involuntarily. They're going to be provided for somebody who is identified having disability. I mean as you know, when you transition to [inaudible] service sector, there's-- none of its mandated, right? With all fund the individual or the individual support system to kind of bring together coordinate services and that's, you know, a lot of where the gap surface within this idea that things have been coordinated from me before and they're no longer coordinated for me. So, Paul was asking, you know, are there expectations? Are there certain things that have been associated with successful transition? And these are sort of the beginning ingredients of the model. So, there have been certain things that had been--that folks believed are kind of successful. Things like case management, benefit counseling, career and work-based learning experiences, parent training and information. All of those things have been--there are some evidence to indicate that they are--they have some degree of success and kind of moving people towards the kinds of outcomes that we articulated here. But there's not a lot of proof. And, so these are ingredients that are going into the CaPROMISE model and we show you sort of our approach that's going to be tested though this project. You'll see that these are kind of foundational pieces and the idea is we're trying to put forth one model as our other states, either five states or groups of state, are also putting together a model, in essence testing it. To what extent are they effective or not effective in kind of helping people to transition off of SSI into employment and a variety of other outcomes that we're going to be, you know, we're going to be measuring are the people who are looking over our shoulder. We're going to be measuring along the way.

>> So, these interventions, case management, benefits counseling, career and work-based learning experiences, parent training and information and their request for proposal that all of the state responded to these were the areas that all projects have to incorporate into their model demonstration program. How they implement this whole range from some project to project. But these are the areas that we will require to address.

 

back to top

 

>> And, I think [inaudible] started to refer to this that they do wanted to do something that we can show some evidence. So, they wanted to set up as a randomized control trial that was with control group intervention or treatment group. And so we'll get into some of the details of how that's actually going to happen, you know, it's all computer-based so that we have no control over who gets in what group. And those will be given to us based on zip codes of certain areas that we'll talk about. Our set up is pretty unique from the other state and that we have 21 school districts or local education areas that are going to be involved all across the state whereas none of the rest of the projects are contracting directly with this sort of thing. We also have family resource centers all over the state that are associated with the district. So, it's--So, the only control variable that we have is those zip codes where those areas are and those were really identified because of the numbers. We really have enough numbers in each area so that we can have a control group and a treatment group. We'll get into more of those later. But that's how you begin to build the body of evidence rather than just saying that I know, you know, I'm [inaudible] service over there and she's doing great. So, we need more than stories. We have a lot stories that, this is the way that you build more of a body of evidence.

 

back to top

 

>> The slide here just of kind of illustrates some of the fed is thinking. So one of the things you might think is, this is such a great idea why not just offer it across the whole country like roll it out there in a kind of a uniform fashion? And I think what, you know, and you can add into this if you want. But the federal funding entities, well, one of the assumption [inaudible] are like, well the people in the states will know better maybe than we will how to best tailor customized services. So, rather than kind of implementing it in one kind of nationwide uniform format, we'll kind of let the states in essence compete for the funding and then we'll fund the best ideas. And then, I think in the background, also and we'll kind of compare them to each other as well. So, they get to kind of look at several different models. Each one is going to be put in a place that's a little bit unique in terms of context, so it will be tough to stay well, you know, what looks in Wisconsin will work in California. But they--I suspect there'll be a little bit of comparing going on.

>> And, there are some states particularly as they get [inaudible] to the east cost where they will actually have to recruit almost all of their transition age students who are on SSI compared to California where we have a larger population and we're just recruiting just a fraction of the students and so.

 

back to top

 

>> Kind of the key things I think the federal government and frankly, we will as well be looking at, these are kind of the--and these again were I think articulated in the RFP, we're looking at educational attainment, employment and earnings, total household income which kind of reflects more of a family perspective as oppose to just the individual's income. We're looking to see if the interventions not only have an impact on the individual, but how they impact the whole family. And, then a long term reduction in SSI payment which probably is priority number one but it's bullet point number four.

>> Emphasis on the long term.

>> So you talked about you're going to do the [inaudible] you mentioned that they're going to be doing evaluation nationally [inaudible] but the process is five years.

>> Yeah.

>> So, are you going to have to [inaudible] the reductions [inaudible] from the five year period? Well that's what your--

>> No.

>> No.

>> I think [inaudible]

>> If not so--

[ Inaudible Remark ]

>> Right.

>> Although we could see reduction in family by that point.

>> Yeah. And, we could--you could--We could be enrolling a 14 year old when there's only two, say two project years left. That's possible. So, they're--That's why they're doing, I think follow them for nine and then just kind of--I don't know how off--I don't know off the record this is, but I think [inaudible] intend to folks for a lot longer than that, like decades.

 

back to top

 

[ Laughter ]

>> Because they can't.

>> Because they--

[ Laughter ]

>> I do kind of lot more worried about my own record [inaudible] that.

>> And, ultimately obviously those--the findings are to see what can we do about the policy to help make this happen because a lot of--most of you are familiar with some of the social security administration regulations and policies. And those very, very difficult to comprehend and it seems like when you just started to get a hang of it, they change it. And so, there's been a number of proposal out in the field saying, you know, what we have to just scrap the whole system and start over again. And there's a lot of folks that look at how could you just really make--how could we simplify this and really support people that I don't know that's likely to happen but we certainly will be looking at how can this inform that policy and those kind of procedures to make it more workful.

 

back to top

 

>> So there were six cooperative agreements for the three years and hopefully everyone will get the following two years for a total of five years. And the range of awards were 4.5 to 10 million per year, and California has the largest award because we targeted the largest number of enrollment for the state.

>> So you start thinking about $50 million over five years, you get some idea, you know, dollars is just one way to quantify things, but you start to think, could that make an impact? The potential is I think there. You know, you have a program that's well-funded enough that if the model is a good model and you put that kind of money behind it, that kind of resources behind it, we should have an impact.

>> Right, and it's more than one model, you know, it's six projects, then all will have their unique models and taking the best of all these models and what we learn from them should provide some valuable direction for policy and for practice. So here are the six states or consortium of states. The consortium of Utah, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Colorado, and Arizona we're just watching because it's just amazing that you could put a proposal together even with six states involved in that. Can you imagine how many MoUs and signatures and--it was just incredible--

>> The governors start to sign up.

>> All the governors have to sign up on all of these.

>> Yeah.

>> So they have to get six governors to sign.

>>And they touched the Northern border and the Southern border. And it's been a challenge enough for us just to get our partners within the state to cooperate and collaborate. Yeah.

 

back to top

 

>> The paper works, the contracts--I mean, just the logistics. You know, people are excited. I mean, everybody is excited, everybody wants to started and there are so many pieces of paper--electronic paper.

>> Yeah.

>> That is going around that has just been amazing, they keep coming, right? And that has been our genius in trying to--try to navigate all of those different requirements and the legal language in going through not only our university but the state because the grant is actually--it's a cooperative agreement. It's actually coming to the state, California Department of Rehabilitation. We're getting a subcontract from them. And, so it's like all of these layers and layers and layers and then there's all these national groups that are interacting with each of the projects. So, you know, the number of conference calls--

>> Yeah that's right.

 

back to top

 

>> Can't even count them at this point. And we're all doing different ones. We have people on all these different groups were kind of, I think kind of break that down, what the different groups are. So, to think about doing that across the state is mind-boggling. I don't know how [inaudible].

>> Good luck to them, yes. I mean, we'll need it too, but they'll definitely need it. Just a little bit of context about the state and you're all familiar with the state. So, just, you know, we want to think about trying to provide services and we're not covering every corner of the state. We're covering a significant portion of the state with the project. Huge state in terms of square miles really different, you know, you think about kind of the urban density and, you know, San Francisco or Los Angeles and then you get out to some place like Ridgecrest or something like that, it's very different. And, one thing I thought was kind of interesting is this figure of about 117,000 SSI recipients under the age of 18. Now they're not all within our focal area. We're looking for 14 to 16 and so that number is a bit smaller. And Mary mentioned earlier that, you know, some states are going to have to basically get all of their SSI recipients to participate in order to meet their--the target number that they have set for themselves, the federal government had set for themselves. I'm skeptical about that. I don't think that's going to happen. Our numbers, we're going to have to get--yeah, it's not what we're talking about. I want to see the other projects do well, that maybe a bar that's set fairly high for them. I think if I remember right, given the number of folks that are in our age range 14 to 16, we'll have to get about 1 in 7 of those folks. And that to me, still seems like a high bar. So we're going to really going to have to get kind of cranking on our recruitment. And I think that's going to be a challenge for us as well, to get 1 in 7 to agree to participate.

 

back to top

 

>> So the state partners on the CaPROMISE Project here in State of California, Department of Rehabilitation as Karen mentioned is the lead agency in this consortium. We have Department of Education and under Department of Education we have 21 local education agencies and one consortium of three [inaudible] who will be involved in terms of providing direct services to students and families. We have Department of Developmental Services, Department of Health Care Services, Social Services and Employment Development Department. So, the representation of these departments on the project is really looking at all aspects that would be a concern to students and families as they make that transition and as they look at reducing their reliance in SSI all of those key things. And the agencies and services available through these various departments will be instrumental in providing that network of support, OK. And here's the listing of our programs partners, the local education agencies, they're look to care for you. In terms of the local education agencies, they are split into four regions, Northern California, Greater LA, Southern and [inaudible] and Southern Coastal. And, heading up each of those regions are four regional managers who were involved in the implementation of our project called BRIDGES which sort of serve as a foundation for conceptualizing the CaPROMISE proposal. And the regional managers themselves provide transition services of well-knowledgeable and respected by their local education agencies. So they will be providing direct leadership to our career service coordinators who be providing direct services at the local education agency.

 

back to top

 

>> And the real bonus we got is the person who was identified to head it up for the California Department of Rehab became the new State Director Joe Xavier. So, he was already--he came to Washington DC. Mary and I went to the kick-off meeting with him and Jeff Rio [assumed spelling] and one of the Regional Managers [inaudible]. And so Joe is already bought into it and then, it was a few months later that he got named as the new State Director. And Jeff moved out into a higher position. So, we have the people who were instrumental in getting this passed through the California part of it, because without this because they are the actual the recipient. They were the drivers to make it happen through the California Department of Rehab. And so it was really exciting that now we've got them at the top, you know, administrative levels of it to continue the support.

 

back to top

 

>> And when you think about collaboration interagency agreement and all that type, Department of Rehab and the four regional managers that I mentioned earlier who were also involved in the writing of the proposal, they already had like a very strong relationship with Department of Rehab and so they had no qualms when they were thinking about applying to this grant, are you guys interested. And they were in there before they were even asked. And so having that foundation of relationships already established before the project was ever funded puts us at least a few steps further than if we had to nurture these relationships, in the beginning.

>> Exactly.

>> Mary, you mentioned that noble education agencies are more like the direct service is going to happen, right? So the school districts and--again, that's where the individualized services are going to be provided to the youth and their families. Can you talk just briefly about the others folks listed here, DOR, SDSU and the family--and the resource centers, what their roles is going to be in the project?

 

back to top

 

>> OK. So California Department of Rehab in terms of the lead entity, they're overseeing the contract. They're our primary point of contact to the federal partners. But they're also absolutely engaged in keeping us organized in terms of the establishing work teams. We have four work teams, we have a case management work team, we have an interventions work team, a outreach and recruitment work team, and there's --

>> Evaluation.

>> --evaluation training and technical assistance work team. And so, they've been really instrumental in helping keep all the pieces organized and helping us to move forward. San Diego state is taking the lead in developing the training and technical assistance by the program staff and the evaluation and the search pieces and--

>> We're doing the technology as well to developing the keys management system only--

>> Yes.

>> --and the website--

>> The website and the online learning modules so the--

>> And that being electronic.

>> Yes, yeah. We talked about the LEAs, the Family Resource Centers. As Karen mentioned, they are up and down California which is I think pretty unique to California model as well. And the role of the family resource center is they will be providing training and technical assistance to the career service coordinators but they will also be providing training and services and supports to the family. And the family resource centers, one of the strength of the family resource center is that this is the way for parents to parents to get support. And as Sherry Torok who is the director of the Exceptional Family Resource Centers here in San Diego, there may be instances where a career service coordinator is talking to the parent and the parent may not be onboard or just--they're having a problem connecting. And what they can do then is call the family resource center and say, "Hey, you know, I'm really having a problem here. Can we get you involved?" And maybe that parent to parent interaction can be more effective and get them to the next level [inaudible] in terms of the service coordinator to family--to parent relationship, so.

>> And they kind of gone what Mary was saying earlier, those family resource centers also already have relationships with those various school districts.

>> Yeah.

>> And so these are--I mean, the whole premise of what we're doing is built on all those established relationships.

>> And then when you think about the family piece, that's the biggest piece I think in PROMISE and when we do--we just had a boot camp, we'll talk about that later. But it was really important for us to get the family voice in this five-day training that led to carve out at least a small space to introduce to our career service coordinators, here's the role of the family and we need to put that voice in there so then they can start to incorporate that into their paradigm in terms of what's involved in their role as service coordinators for PROMISE.

 

back to top

 

>> So a real quick summary of the demonstration model and then we're going to get into some of the details of the model if we like, what are we actually going to do. So there's some core services and we'll kind of go through those. Those are sort of the heart and soul of the intervention that would be done at the families and the youth. And then you can start to see what some of our targets look like in terms of serving folks. So, the total enrollment, 3,078, that's kind of our minimum threshold, right? We're actually going to try to over them all a little bit to allow for dropout. So that's a significant number of folks to reach out to. And then about half of those are going to be assigned not by us but by somebody up the ladder from us to being in the CaPROMISE group which would get the interventions from the model and the other group will be like to use the services group [inaudible] just kind of get the typical and customized services that folks would get on their own. And those two groups will be compared, again, not by us but by somebody farther up the ladder from us. And then those--to the folks in the CaPROMISE group, they're going to get services provided by other career services coordinator. These are going to be the folks who are hired and work in through the school districts, the local education agencies to provide direct services to youth and their families. And the way that that's been structured is I think it's by 61 folks. And I think the math kind of works out to they will have over the timeframe that they have to work with folks which could be four years or less depending on when folks enroll, about a 1 to 26 ratio. So, you know, if you're custom-made with like rehab counseling and you hear a ratio of 150 to 1 or 130 to 1 or something like that, it gets pretty tough to provide individualized attention. This was deliberately designed so that there could be, you know, the career service coordinators could provide a little bit more intense support to the families with the hope that we'll kind of see that play out in long-term changes.

 

back to top

 

>> So we shared with you earlier the PROMISE outcomes and that's more long-term. The CaPROMISE key outcomes that we listed here are more realistic in terms of what we're starting for the completion in the next five years. And so increased educational attainment is one and that's not just, you know, going onto full secondary education. It comes down to we want to take look at interventions that will keep students in schools to reduce the dropout rate and keep them in there for as long as that service is available to them. Increase access to community services, again, linking families to services at the local level so that they can begin to start navigating that whole network of support before they ever leave the school system so they'll be more prepared once the student is there in the community and also, services available to the families. Improved employment outcomes. For every student that will be receiving CaPROMISE services, they will be in one page and one unpaid employment. And so that will be the minimum and that's not preventing us from providing more employment experiences before they ever leave the school system. Exploration, understanding utilization of SSI work incentive. Again, educating the parents and the student about what these work incentives are and helping them work it so that it's working in their favor and improving their understanding of financial and benefits planning. That's the key piece when we're looking at reducing reliance on SSI and other benefits to take a look at, OK, how do we plan, what tools are available to parents and students and training them under utilization of each tool that we'll talk about later. And then again, this is long-term, it's the post-program reduction and SSI payments which will not be reached [inaudible].

 

back to top

 

>> So here's the, you know, the next level slides are going to kind of zero in on what are the key--what are the core services, what are the things that are--we're going to try to do to make a difference to kind of take us towards delivering these outcomes. And you understand these better than I do. So I know you finished talking, but could you just address each one briefly?

>> OK. So the CaPROMISE core services, the case management services/transition planning, that is one of the key differences between the CaPROMISE services group, the treatment group versus the control group. And that all these fees, students and families will have career service coordinators to help them navigate the whole system, to help them access resources, to connect them to the family resource center and transition planning. We are designing an individualized career action plan which will be in addition to the transition plan and education plan that students are mandated to have when they are receiving special education services. And the ICAP will sort of be the blueprint individualized to each student in terms of what their goals are in the area of education, employment, community, independent living and what are the steps that we're going to take to accomplish that. To support the career service coordinators, we are creating a data management system that will help them track that and we're actually designing that not just as a way for them to document but really as a tool that will keep the career service coordinators connected with each of the student as they work through their individualized education, ICAP, individualized career action plan. The next core services is--

>> Financial planning.

 

back to top

 

>> Is the financial planning and benefits counseling. The other difference between CaPROMISE and the usual service with the control group is that the career service coordinators are going to an extensive credentialing training to become career work incentive counselors. So they receive--they'll receive a three-day preliminary training and then that will be followed up in August and September with a five-day training that's provided by Cornell University that will focus specifically on Social Security benefits that will be followed up by online modules, practice sessions and an exam that will then get them credentialed as work incentive practitioners. And this is a credential that's available nationwide. And that will give them the skills they need in order to help parents understand and navigate through the whole benefits planning. The other two available to career service coordinators and the families is DB 101 which is Disability Benefits 101. It's a website that's developed by the World Institute on Disability, WID. And there are several calculators available from DB 101 that will walk them through different scenarios in terms of work incentives and when they're employed, how does that affect their benefits and, you know, a way for you to take a look at how their--how the dollars are affected. In fact, you can access DB 101. It is a website that's available to you and there's some really good information or resources available there. Accumulation and financial literacy will be something that we'll be looking at in the next year or so in terms of developing training for service coordinators to help parents [inaudible].

>> And the other thing I think just before it's mentioned, many of you are aware when we were running the California's Medicaid Infrastructure Grant, the California Health Incentives Improvement Project. And so, that DB 101 was really targeted and improved and customized during that project so we're able to build on a lot of the efforts that were done statewide under that project because that was funded for many years but it came to San Diego State for about five or six years. And that was what's developed the whole talent notion of limits website which gives a lot of information, the transitions toolkit. So, a lot of the efforts that we did under that in connecting with across system and looking at infrastructure and connecting even with employers will be able to build on those efforts as well. So, it's kind of nice when we can see, you know, it's not just, OK, we did this project and it's done and now we're doing project, so it's done, but we're really building over several decades of work that are able, you know, we're able to leverage including all the work we've done in the transition area and the point of transition which has been going on for, you know, I think for15 years. So, that--I think that's why we get really excited about this because we were building on such a history of relationships of proven practices, of, you know, growing evidence on how to do this kind of work that we're hoping it all comes together under this, right?

>> So, the next intervention core services have to do with career and--Camille?

 

back to top

 

>> I'm just looking DB 101 and so it's publicly available. And so, the usual approach is matched up, but how [inaudible] career service coordinator deliver this [inaudible].

>> The key difference will be that the career service coordinators are trained on DB 101. So they can actually sit down with the family and walk them through it, you know, side by side, whereas someone going onto the website, it'll take a while to figure out, you know, how to put all these information. So, I think that will be the key pieces, the career services coordinator working with the parent.

>> Yeah, the parents.

>> Yes, yeah.

>> And helping put it in a context is meaningful. And even though DB 101 was designed that it should be really accessible for everybody and the language is supposed to very accessible and it was always, you know, we wanted to have--we want Aunt Martha to be able to use it with all these kind of the slogan. But it really was designed to be used in partnership with professionals and consumers to try to help make sense of it. You can plug in all the numbers but what does that mean and how do you apply it to your life? And that's where the CSCs are really going to be critical.

 

back to top

 

>> I think that--just real briefly. If you look at, and Mary hasn't gotten to all the aspects of the model yet and we'll kind of go through them kind of quickly to make sure we have some time to talk. All the aspects of the model, if you are highly involved, knowledgeable, have a lot of time, highly motivated, you could access all of these things without being a PROMISE project person, I would argue. So, I think really what we are sort of really looking at is this idea of when it's coordinated for you, when you're working with a knowledgeable person, when they're kind of working with you and kind of motivating you, helping you kind of see what your future could be like, I think that's really what's getting tested more so than, you know, any one sort of the town.

>> Yeah.

>> Now, any other questions?

[ Inaudible Question ]

>> So, the question is--

>> Is the opportunity [inaudible]?

>> So, the question is what are the qualifications to become a career service coordinator?

>> Yes.

 

back to top

 

>> When we first started, we thought we could write the description for the career service coordinators, also thinking about our rehabilitation graduate students. We didn't have that luxury. We were told that it would take a year if we wanted to pass a new job description through each of the LEAs. And that was they're being positive with a year. And so, what it ended up being is the LEAs were given a description of what career service coordinators will be expected to do. And then, they went back to existing job description and see which was the best fit. For some, there were people in existing positions that they--once they got their contracts, were able to move into the career service coordinator positions. For others, they are hiring outside of the LEA. So, it ranges in terms of how the LEAs are approaching, the hiring of the CSCs, and their experiences will range in terms of experience with transition students, experience with students with disability and we're just getting to know some of these career service coordinators now as we start the training process.

 

back to top

 

[ Inaudible Question ]

Yes, yes. Yeah, they are--they will be employees that's [inaudible] education. OK. So, real quickly, the third core service has to do with employment, and it's listed here. But again, the key outcome minimum is one paid and one unpaid employment for students in the CaPROMISE group. The next core service is the parent training and information and back to where the Family Resource Center will come in and we've talked about that a bit already. So, here's some additional information in terms of what will be available in this area. And then--and unless, you always have to have in other to cover all the basis. And so, are they services support range from leadership, training activities for youth, activities to engage employers, and so this would be for the career service coordinators to help in the job development aspect. Health behavior management and wellness service, again, thinking about the whole family dynamic and the whole person that's not just employment, it's not just education, it's the whole person. Assistive technology will be a big piece particularly as service coordinators start job development. And what are the different ways that we can use technology when it comes to helping a student build their resume, you know, all these different types of technology that can be utilized, and then looking at independent living as students think about transition. It's not just transition into employment and education, its transition into about life, you know, and what kind of skills do they need to develop so that they can live independently or interdependently in the communities that they choose.

>> Tanya [assumed spelling], in the interest of time, can I just skip forward four slides?

>> I got a question on one. What happens if the Department of Rehab moves to the Department of Labor from Education? What would be the impact to students for them, what would you think?

 

back to top

 

>> What would the impact--your question is, what would the impact--be on the program if RSA moved to the Department of Labor?

>> I know. I don't think it's the [inaudible] projects. It'll affect a lot of other things. But specifically [inaudible]. So, this is funded out of the Office of Special Education Programs, it's not funded by the RSA.

>> So, use RSA though.

>> Hopefully, they have a lot of other dust flying around that they have to deal with before they focus in on this. [Inaudible Remark]

>> Exactly.

>> Yeah.

>> They're part of it any ways, so.

>> Yeah.

>> We're not going to worry about that. A lot of times, we're pretty worried about this.

>> So, in the interest of time, we skipped ahead a few slides. They were primarily talking about the evaluation which focuses on the targets we already discussed earlier and just kind of mention the idea that we're involved in kind of assessing things for five years and then there's a national evaluator we're going to follow people for nine years and then Social Security might follow these folks for a long time but they haven't clarified that with us yet. One of the things we wanted to talk about briefly are just some of the challenges that we found or we run into as we've kind of gone along, trying to build this thing up from scratch and managed stuff a lot of that, that stuff a lot of that I think. And that there are a variety of concerns that have been listed here but these are some of the ones that we saw as kind of key challenges, getting people to collaborate, first of all, when you think about the federal level of collaboration is sort of already established before they order these projects of getting the states involved. Just getting agency-designed MoUs with each other.

 

back to top

 

>> And that's still in progress.

>> Yeah.

>> That's presented in challenge and there's a number of agencies, 22 local education agencies, just a sheer number of agencies. This has been a little of a challenge.

>> Although to the credit that--and I have to mention Sylvia Hoggatt who's at Department of Rehab in Sacramento, in terms of the collaboration, not at the high level department head. But when we look at Department of Rehab, the local education agencies, the regional managers, she has been just incredible in keeping us all in the same page. We mentioned conference calls and any time you walk--especially in the third week of the month, when conference calls everyday, every afternoon. But, you know, as much as we complain about those conference calls, it really keeps all the key individuals up-to-date on what changes are being made, what are some of the barriers we're confronting today? And helping us to work through all those pieces, so every--no one really feels like they're out of the loop. And that's been a key piece and the collaboration is making sure that everyone, you know, is always up-to-date. And, you know, it's not a perfect picture but a lot of effort has been devoted to keeping that collaboration in line with communication.

 

back to top

 

>> Developing data management has also been a challenge. There are number of partners involved, you know, we have certain things that we need to track that are related to the goals. The federal government wants certain information. Their contractor wants certain information. Some of that information is very sensitive information. Some of it is maybe less so. So, it's kind of developing one system that everybody can use and then making sure that we're capturing everything that we need to capture is challenging. In addition, how it's stored and moves around. And, you know, we have people's Social Security numbers, which we're going to have and things like that. Just keeping all of that stuff in a way that's secure as possible, get still--having it. It's posing some real challenges. And then primarily Minah Oh and her folks over here attended for--this [inaudible] is right outside this wall here, I have really been kind of wrestling with that.

 

back to top

 

>> And just the security clearance, I mean we all have to go through security checks, that's still a process, finger-printing, I mean, how many do we--

>> 125.

>> 125 people to who get the security clearances, you know, it's that kind of stuff that, you know, we keep finding out more and more layers of things that need to be done and they could be done at the university level but then they have to be done at the state level, and now we find out they have to be done at the federal level. You know, and so there's all these different moving pieces. And really, everybody just have to--just don't keep it started with the work, you know, works get started

>> Yeah.

>> So--I--There is no shortage of motivation and excitement across the group. It's--

>> Yeah.

>> That's what's really great.

>> Yeah.

>> We just got to keep--

>> Keep moving forward.

>> Moving and what [inaudible], that's going to happen by June 1st.

>> Probably July 1.

>> Oh it's going to be July now. OK.

>> There was another piece added about it.

>> Yeah, two institutional reviews, two committees for the present human subjects to kind of work through, plus I know [inaudible], a third one, there's a third one looking at the federal level. So that's a lot of fun. You know, just kind of the challenges to kind of get past. We will get past them. This isn't the fun part, you know--

>> Process.

 

back to top

 

>> Getting the CSC up to a level of confidence given that Mary talked about it in terms of they're becoming in with different levels of expertise, different backgrounds and that kind of stuff. It is going to be uniformed set of confidence, and that we want them all to have. And so, there's some training, they come down here for training. They're going to be going to see them for training. You're going to be training them online. You're going to be assessing their training needs, all of that for the staff is another--it's something that can be dealt with but it's just--it's a process that's interesting.

 

back to top

 

>> And I think another component that's really unique. I know we're pretty much out of time, but I just want to point out the kind of the discretions that we've had with Camille, who is teaching about research to people who are used to doing research. And so, this whole deal of empowering all these CSCs to be able to do this work, to be able to conform to the integrity of the research designed, is it's something that's pretty unique. And if we're going to work at really making this all happen according to plan, then the people who are going to actually be doing the--on the ground work with the families and the students, need to understand that model and they need to understand what the research is all about. And so, Camille's part of the boot camp as well in teaching people how to really interface with that and give them the skills and more so I think the confidence in how to make this happen. So, I think that's another really, you know, at a certain level unique piece that we just can't assume with the studies in the normal job description of any of these folks.

>> And so, we're kind of at the end of our time, I'm certainly happy to stick around and answer questions if folks have it. If you want to kind of see more about the PROMISE at the federal level, the ed.gov/promise website will gave you that. If you want to learn more about the California project, capromise.org is where you can go. And I've already registered a complaint with Dr. McFarlane about the pictures on the front page. They show, use in various work settings that it's all like at the mall or at a restaurant or a [inaudible], get somebody in front of the computer or something, you know. I know. I know you are. And you didn't put the pictures up there, I know that, but you were conveniently hear from me to say, "What is this?" Well, the prime mover and shaker behind this is actually in the back of the room, he didn't want to get up here and talk, right? He--

 

back to top

 

>> Wait, who told him?

[ Laughter ]

[ Inaudible Remark]

>> Me, it's been my fun thing. And that--And so, the FD has used IRB, had said, "We want to watch what you're doing." And then the state has an IRB and they--so we're having to kind of deal with both at the same time and that's fine. And then Fred told me the other day that the Feds want to look at it as well. OK, well it's a good practice, I guess.

>> [Inaudible] I've been teaching one of the [inaudible] and partnerships in the grant items and this is such a wonderful example of new complexity and alleged partnerships exponentially.

>> Yeah.

>> And I can't imagine a grant more complicated. And I will be adding to my note would be even with simple grant having both monthly or weekly conference calls for a time consuming that this importance [inaudible] and I'm just glad we got to all business.

>> So--And like our call this week with the big interventions group, I mean we were kind all feeling like we probably all needed an intervention. And--But you could tell, they will clear this ship and people were saying, you know, "OK, it's starting to become more clear. I'm starting to get the picture of this." And we've been having the calls for how many months now?

>> Three months.

>> Three months?

>> Yeah.

>> It's on there.

 

back to top

 

>> You know, like every three weeks and that it was--you can tell people are getting more comfortable with each other. People are willing to say, "I don't know we have a clue what you're talking about." There's parents, you know, people from the parent center on the call, along with the regional managers, along with--and so, the conversations are getting much more familiar, they have a lot more laughing going on. There's a lot more, "Oh my God. Now, what are we going to--," you know, "How do we do this?" And--But people are getting it. And that's taken a while, because we can't all meet face to face all the time. We've got to make those kind of conversations work. And this week was really kind of different. I think people are, you know, were starting to see some movement and because we're all struggling with, "How do we get our game around all of this?" You know? It's huge.

>> It's huge.

>> That's fine.

[ Applause ]

[ Silence ]

 

back to top