Narrative: j. 2.

As described above, DRS’ direct client services units located at DRS’ Nitro location will continue to be critical for DRS to meet the needs of individuals with disabilities identified under the unserved and underserved portion of this assessment, including individuals with disabilities who live in the rural part of the State, blind and visually impaired individuals, and the deaf and hard of hearing.  The DRS Environmental Modifications Unit provides consumer services to assure they have the highest level of independence in and around their home and work by providing evaluations, technical assistance, and modifications.  The continual maintenance and improvement of direct client services units located at DRS’ Nitro location will be necessary to maintain its operation in the most efficient and cost-effective manner possible.

RESULTS FROM THE SURVEY OF CRPS/CSPS

DRS conducted a survey of CRPs/community service providers (CSPs) with acknowledged vendor status to provide services (including supported–employment services) to DRS consumers across the state. The survey was conducted as a part of the statewide comprehensive needs assessment study of persons with significant disabilities in West Virginia.

DRS distributed the survey via email to 62 DRS–acknowledged CRPs/CSPs to collect input on their provision of services to West Virginians with significant disabilities, their level of communication with DRS, ways in which DRS could improve services or service delivery, and what the CRPs/CSPs urgently needed to better serve West Virginians with significant disabilities. Forty surveys were returned to DRS, for a response rate of 64.5 percent. Surveys were returned from CRPs/CSPs working with DRS offices across the state.

Service Provision

In each of the six DRS districts, all nine categories of services were reported as being provided. Services were also reported as being provided in all 55 counties in West Virginia, with the exception of Pendleton and Clay counties. All nine services were reported as being provided in 43 out of 55 counties (78.2%). Excluding the two unreported counties (i.e., Pendleton and Clay), the remaining counties were reported to be provided with between four and eight CRP services. Additionally, in several counties, various services were reported as provided by multiple CRPs. However, based on records in the DRS CRP directory, all nine categories of CRP services are provided in all 55 counties.

Communication and Liaison Contact

Thirty-nine out of 40 CRPs (97.5%) provided a rating of their communication with DRS. Options ranged from Excellent to Very Poor. One CRP gave a rating of Very Poor and 34 of the 39 CRPs (87.2%) gave a response of Good or better. When asked whether a DRS liaison counselor was in contact on a regular basis, 29 of 37 CRPs responded yes, while 8 CRPs responded no (78.4% and 21.6%, respectively). Three CRPs did not respond to this question.

DRS Improvement

Thirty-six of the 40 CRPs gave comments regarding specific things that DRS could do to improve services or service delivery. The most common theme found in the comments was that of outreach, including outreach to high schools and businesses. Another common theme involved improvements in communication, including frequency and quality of communication. The increased frequency of communication included recommendations of regular meetings and trainings with DRS staff (e.g., “….Regularly scheduled local meetings with DRS and the CRP would enable us to discuss clients, problems, solutions more in depth….”). Perhaps related to the theme of communication was a theme of consistency. Some CRPs expressed issue with the consistency in the way different counselors handle solutions (e.g., “…each DRS Counselor wants services done differently and documents completed and submitted differently making the process rather confusing.”).

CRP/CSP Needs

Thirty-four of the 40 CRPs gave comments on what the CRP urgently needed to better serve West Virginians with disabilities. Funding and referrals (which generate funding for CRPs) were, by far, the most reported needs. Funding need comments ranged from the convenient (e.g., “A consistent stream of referrals would make it possible for us to recruit and employ job coaches….”) to the necessary (e.g., “[CRP name] needs more referrals to continue providing quality VR services….”) As seen in these examples, the CRPs reasons for funding needs also ranged from general to specific.

Other, less commonly addressed themes that could be found in the comments included needs for more transportation help and better relationships with employers to facilitate placement. Other topics were mentioned as well, and some comments merely stated that there were no pressing needs at this time.

Conclusions Based on the Survey of CRPs/CSPs

No less than four services were reported, by CRPs, as being provided in each of West Virginia’s counties, with the exceptions of Pendleton and Clay counties. According to DRS’ records of CRP information, Pendleton County is served by four CRPs and Clay County is served by five CRPs. Only one of these CRPs responded to the survey but did not indicate serving either county in the survey, which is discrepant from DRS records. Despite this deficiency, all nine CRP services were reported as being provided in all six DRS districts and three-fourths of all West Virginia counties.

Over 85% of CRPs reported a Good or better rating of communication with DRS and only one CRP rated communication with DRS as being Very Poor. This is somewhat contradictory with the fact that only 78.4% of the CRPs claimed that a DRS liaison counselor was in contact on a regular basis. This raises the slightly counter-intuitive idea that communication does not have to be frequent, or even regularly occurring, in order to be good. Comments regarding communication (which were provided by nearly all of the respondents) reflected this at times, suggesting that communication was good when it occurred. At other times, comments indicated that the lack of regular communication was indeed a problem.

Comments on DRS improvement focused on outreach, improved communication, and consistency among DRS counselors’ requests. Comments on CRP needs generally emphasized funding and referrals, requesting that DRS continue to provide (or provide more of) each. This is only logical, as CRPs require these things to remain in existence. Some CRPs though, made it clear that funding from DRS specifically allows them to provide the services that they provide.

CRP SERVICE RESPONSES FROM DRS FIELD STAFF SURVEY

The five most commonly reported gaps for employment/CRP services were:

Vocational Evaluation (37, 37%) -- Beckley-2, Charleston-7, Clarksburg-3, Elkins-2, Fairmont-1, Huntington-7, Keyser-5, Lewisburg-1, Logan-1, Marshall-1, Martinsburg-2, Moorefield-2, Oak Hill-1, Point Pleasant-2, Princeton-1, Romney-3, Summersville-2, Teays Valley-1, Weirton-4, and Weston- 1.

Job Placement (31, 31%) -- Beckley-2, Charleston-4, Clarksburg-2, Elkins-2, Huntington-3, Keyser- 4, Lewisburg-1, Logan-2, Marshall-1, Martinsburg-2, Moorefield-1, Oak Hill-1, Point Pleasant-2, Princeton-1, Romney-2, Summersville-2, Teays Valley-2, Weirton-3, Welch-2, and Weston-1.

Job Development (28, 28%) -- Beckley-2, Charleston-5, Elkins-4, Huntington-3, Keyser-4, Lewisburg-1, Marshall-1, Martinsburg-2, Moorefield-1, Oak Hill-1, Point Pleasant-1, Princeton-3, Romney-2, Summersville-2, Teays Valley-1, Weirton-3, and Weston-2.

Trial Work Experience (25, 25%) -- Beckley-1, Charleston-4, Elkins-3, Fairmont-2, Huntington-3, Keyser-2, Lewisburg-1, Logan-1, Martinsburg-1, Oak Hill-1, Point Pleasant-2, Princeton-2, Romney- 2, Summersville-2, Weirton-4, Welch-1, and Weston-2.

Extended Supported Employment Services (24, 24%) -- Charleston-2, Elkins-2, Huntington-5, Keyser-4, Logan-1, Marshall-1, Martinsburg-1, Point Pleasant-2, Princeton-1, Ripley-1, Romney-2, Spencer-1, Summersville-2, Weirton-3, and Weston-1.