Your work has been critical to all these efforts, Nancie. Thank you.

Attached is the Settlement Agreement from Connecticut, entered into in
2007, which reflects heroic work by legal services advocates in CT and
their state agency partners. This Agreement is not uniquely focused on
persons with learning disabilities, although it certainly covers them
because it provides for better procedures to accommodate the needs of
all persons with disabilities. And on page 16 of 42, paragraph 20 c., it
provides for screening for LD and allows for but doesn't expressly
require referral for further evaluation if the screening is positive.
The Agreement also contains provisions requiring the agency to improve
readability of their written notices. 

A summary of the CT Settlement Agreement, written by Cary LaCheen at
the National Center for Law and Economic Justice, is pasted in below: 

Summary of Raymond v. Rowland settlement

Notice of rights

* All program participants were mailed a brochure of the rights of 
people with disabilities.

* A new form informs individuals of the right to have office interviews

waived and help with recertification as a reasonable accommodation.

* Application and recertification forms, and a forms listing required 
documentation, have been revised to state that the agency will help 
people with the application/recertification process of they have a 
disability and need help as a reasonable accommodation, and ask if the

applicant/recipient has a disability and needs help.

* Checklists of agency responsibilities now ask whether staff have 
explained the right to accommodations to clients.

* Notices granting, terminating, suspending, or changing benefits will

inform individuals of the right to reasonable accommodations.

* Medical documentation forms will inform clients that the agency will

help the client make medical appointments and/or obtain medical 
documentation as a reasonable accommodation.

* Posters on the right to reasonable accommodations and help during the

eligibility process are posted in all agency waiting rooms.

* Agency regulations require staff to inform household heads orally and

in writing at application, recertification, and whenever it is apparent

that the individual may have a disability and may need a reasonable 
accommodation, of the right of people with disabilities to 
accommodations and how to substantiate a request for a reasonable 
accommodation.


Readability

* The agency will review forms and notices for readability and make 
revisions to improve readability.

Reasonable accommodations

* Individuals can request reasonable accommodations orally or in 
writing, and can make the request to the worker or the ADA Coordinator.

Individuals who need help gathering documentation showing the need for

an accommodation are entitled to help if the client appears to be
unable 
to get the documentation without help as a result of a disability.

* Reasonable modifications must be provided. Examples of accommodations

mentioned in the settlement and state policy include:

* waiver of office visits and telephone interviews

* home visits (if face-to-face appointment is required)

* alternative formats for information(Braille, large print, audiotape)

* help with getting documentation

* calling visually and cognitively impaired persons before notices are

mailed out

* home visits from a social worker who will help complete forms and 
gather documentation (including medical documentation)

* If a worker believes that a reasonable accommodation (other than the

accommodations listed above) would require significant agency
resources, 
a supervisor or manager must make the decision as to whether the 
accommodation is reasonable.

* Reasonable accommodation requests made to the ADA Coordinator must be

acknowledged within 10 days and decisions made within 20 days.

* Accommodation decisions by the ADA Coordinator can be appealed in 
writing within 15 days to the agency*s Deputy Commissioner for 
Administration.

* The computer will remind staff to call clients when notices are
issued 
if calling the client is the accommodation needed.

* The computer will alert staff before a discontinuance notice is sent

for failing to provide documentation so the worker can contact the
client.

* The agency has issued regulations regulations

Documentation requirements

* The following must be documented in the client*s case record:

* Accommodation requests

* Decisions on such requests

* If the request is denied, the reason for the denial

* Computer fields indicate whether the client has a disability and the

nature of the accommodation to be provided; the disability field is in
a 
flashing color.

* The Department of Labor, which operates the employment services 
program for clients with disabilities, will revise its data system to 
record information on clients* disabilities.

Screening

* The screening tool used to develop clients* employment plan will be

revised to screen for physical, mental, and learning disabilities and 
substance abuse problems.


A avoidance of adverse actions against people with disabilities:

* Conciliation notices will state that clients have the right to 
accommodations if their disability contributes to the alleged
noncompliance

* Before taking any action on a case, the worker must review the file
to 
ensure that reasonable accommodations have been provided.

* During conciliation, the client must be offered an opportunity to be

screened for disabilities by designated trained staff will be hired to

conduct such screening

* Clients who agree to be screened will not be sanctioned during the 
screening process.

* If a disability is identified, the worker will explore the need for 
accommodations and determine if a sanction is appropriate.

Training

* The agency has conducted mandatory training for staff on the ADA and

serving clients with disabilities

* The agency has conducted training for supervisors on the ADA and 
serving clients with disabilities

* The agency has trained all TANF staff and social workers on 
recognizing disabilities and serving clients with disabilities

* The agency will train all new staff within 3 months of beginning
work

* The agency has trained fair hearing staff , and will train new fair 
hearing staff, including ALJs and fair hearing support staff

Physical improvement of agency offices and navigating the agency

* The agency agreed to make improvements to waiting rooms, hearing 
rooms, interview rooms, interior and exterior signage, floor surfaces,

reception areas, in accordance with identified principles, to improve 
client privacy, navigation, comfort to clients, reduce waiting time 
while documents are copied, and physical accessibility to wheelchair 
users. The exact nature of the improvements to be made at each office 
are within the discretion of the agency.

* The agency agreed to modify the phone system to provide automated 
answers to commonly asked questions.

* The state agency responsible for leases and physical improvements of

agency building agreed to work cooperatively with the welfare agency on

making such improvements, and to negotiate for such improvements with 
landlords.

* The agency agreed to hire greeters at regional offices who will greet

newly arriving clients and assist them with understanding forms and 
eligibility requirements, help them complete forms, schedule 
appointments, answer questions, and perform other similar tasks.

Document management

* The agency agreed to implement a document management solution, which

may include scanning or other technologies.

Implementation plan

* The agency will develop an implementation plan with goals and 
timetables for meeting the requirements of the settlement agreement.

Monitoring compliance with the settlement

* Supervisors must review all workers* knowledge of the agency*s
ADA 
policies and practices and attest annually that staff are knowledgeable

about them.

* Once the modifications to the computer system are made, which should

occur, barring any anticipated obstacles, within 18 months after the 
settlement is approved, the agency must provide plaintiffs* counsel
with 
quarterly reports for 4 * years that indicate, by each local welfare 
agency office, the number of clients found to need reasonable 
accommodations, the number provided with accommodations, types of 
disabilities they have, and information related to clients with 
disabilities whose cases may be closed.

* The agency will submit quarterly progress reports on implementation
of 
the settlement agreement.

* A year after the settlement is approved the agency will assign an 
individual to determine whether clients with disabilities are receiving

the accommodations they need to access services.

Enforcement

* The settlement agreement will remain in effect for 6 years, at which

point it will be automatically dismissed with prejudice.

* Plaintiffs can bring a motion for enforcement or contempt if
defendant 
fails to substantially comply with the settlement.

* Enforcement or contempt actions for failure to comply with physical 
improvements can be brought for six years after the settlement
agreement 
is approved; other enforcement actions can be brought for a 48 month 
period starting 18 months after the settlement agreement is approved.

* Plaintiffs must provide 60 days advance notice before moving for 
enforcement or contempt, except in emergencies, in which case
plaintiffs 
must provide notice that is practicable under the circumstances. The 
parties must make good faith attempts to discuss and resolve the
issues.



Ruth A. Bourquin
Mass. Law Reform Institute
99 Chauncy Street, Suite 500
Boston, MA  02111
(617)357-0700 ext. 333
fax: (617)357-0777
email: rbourquin at mlri.org


>>> <napayne at att.net> 1/16/2008 1:33:58 PM >>>

Thanks Ruth for providing such good summaries of how we (the system) is
progressively moving forward.  That only occurs through the outstanding
work done by you and your colleagues in the public legal advocacy
network.  As circumstance would have it I was the prime contractor to
assist California in implementing their system -- which when we have
done follow-up 4-5 years later is still moving forward.  

I do not have access to the final rulings and conditions, but I know
that Connecticut (Hartford public legal service) has just completed a
process involving the human services sytsems  -- perhaps you have access
to that and can share -- or maybe Greg Bass can be asked to contribute
to the discussion.

Nancie Payne

-------------- Original message from "Ruth Bourquin"
<RBourquin at mlri.org>: -------------- 



> Due in large part to Patti's work, I think Arkansas was ahead of the



> wave on this, and the fact that Arkansas was taking the initiative

and 

> had recognized the needs of TANF recipients with learning

disabilities 

> as a real issue that needed to be addressed was very helpful in terms

of 

> spurring OCR to make the ruling it did in Massachusetts. So thanks to



> Patti and Arkansas for blazing a trail. 

> 

> Pasted in below is some information about the process in California 

> (which was negotiated prior to the OCR Resolution Agreement but after



> the Letter of Findings in Massachusetts) as described on the website

of 

> the National Center for Law and Economic Justice: 

> 

> 

> California Advocates Obtain Comprehensive New Policy on Screening, 

> Evaluating and Providing Program Modifications to CalWORKS Clients

with 

> Learning Disabilities 

> >From the December 2001 issue of the Welfare News 

> On October 17, 2001, the California Department of Social Services 

> (CDSS) issued a comprehensive statewide protocol on screening, 

> evaluating and providing reasonable modifications for all new and 

> existing CalWORKs clients with learning disabilities. The policy was



> issued in the form of an *All County Letter* by CDSS to all county 

> welfare directors and welfare-to-work coordinators in the State. The



> protocol is by far the most thoughtful and protective policy of its

kind 

> in the country, and it should serve as a useful model for other 

> advocates seeking to make welfare programs more responsive to the

needs 

> of clients with learning disabilities, who are a sizable portion of

the 

> welfare population. Given the high numbers of clients with learning 

> disabilities in TANF programs, advocates have a strong argument that

the 

> policies and procedures in the All County Letter are required by the



> Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the 

> Rehabilitation Act as reasonable modifications, because without these



> policies, clients with learning disabilities will not have an equal 

> opportunity to participate in and benefit from TANF programs. The All



> County Letter is entitled *Learning Disabilities Screening and 

> Evaluation in the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to

Kids 

> (CalWORKs) Program,* All County Letter No. 01-70, and is available at



> www.dss.cahwnet.gov/getinfo/acl01/pdf/01-70.pdf. 

> 

> The Protocol 

> 

> The protocol requires CalWORKs to screen all incoming and existing 

> CalWORKs participants for learning disabilities using a screening

tool 

> validated for use with TANF clients. Screening must be offered to all



> new clients at the time of the first welfare-to-work contract and to



> existing clients at annual eligibility redeterminations, or earlier

when 

> clients ask to be screened, disclose a learning disability or inform

the 

> welfare program that they were in a special education program at

school. 

> It must also be offered to all clients in the midst of good cause or



> other compliance determinations or the sanction process; to clients

who 

> fail to maintain satisfactory progress at welfare-to-work activities;



> and whenever a worker suspects a client has a learning disability or



> processing difficulty. County welfare agencies are also allowed to 

> screen clients who fail to progress in employment after they stop 

> receiving cash assistance. 

> 

> Clients have the right to refuse screening and cannot be sanctioned

for 

> their refusal. When a client declines or is reluctant to be screened,



> the welfare program must explain what learning disabilities are; what



> areas are tested in an in-depth assessment and who performs the 

> assessment; and the types of program modifications that are available

to 

> clients in the program that have learning disabilities. Screening

must 

> be conducted by trained designated staff, preferably those who have

an 

> ongoing relationship with the client. CDSS recommends one particular



> screening tool, developed in Washington State, but allows counties to



> use another validated tool if they provide training for staff on how

to 

> administer it. 

> 

> Clients identified through screening as having possible learning 

> disabilities must be referred for an in-depth learning disability 

> evaluation conducted by a trained professional using validated

testing 

> instruments. Clients who have been diagnosed with learning

disabilities 

> in the past, and those with suspected learning disabilities must also

be 

> referred, even if the screening did not indicated a possible learning



> disability. The welfare agency must ask clients who are referred for



> evaluations to provide records of any previous learning disability 

> evaluations, relevant medical evaluations and special education

records 

> to the evaluator, though a client is not required to do so. The

policy 

> makes clear that it is the responsibility of the local welfare agency

to 

> develop resources for these evaluations, by contracting with local or



> regional evaluators if necessary. In other words, welfare agencies 

> cannot shirk their responsibility by claiming that they couldn*t find



> anyone to conduct the evaluation. 

> 

> The evaluation must include a detailed description of the client*s 

> strengths and deficits, recommendations for additional services, 

> accommodations and assistive technology for the client. The welfare 

> agency is required to review the evaluation and take it into account



> when drafting of the welfare-to-work plan and consult with the

learning 

> disability evaluator or other specialist if they have questions about



> the evaluation. Existing plans must be modified to take account of

the 

> evaluation findings. The welfare program must give a copy of the 

> evaluation and the evaluator*s recommendations to the client and must



> discuss appropriate work activities and reasonable accommodations to

the 

> client. The policy specifies that accommodations can be paid for with



> CalWORKs funds or other funding sources if they are available and the



> client qualifies for them, including Welfare-to-Work or Workforce 

> Investment Act funds. The evaluation must be treated as a

confidential 

> medical record, though with client consent the welfare agency can

share 

> it with others on a need-to-know basis. Welfare agencies are required



> to forward it to another county*s welfare agency when a client moves,



> if the client agrees. If the evaluation indicates that the client may



> have physical, mental or other conditions, the welfare agency must 

> discuss the findings with the client, refer the client to evaluation

or 

> treatment for these conditions as needed, and develop a

welfare-to-work 

> plan consistent with these conditions. 

> 

> When a client is diagnosed with a learning disability during the good



> cause or sanction process, the welfare agency must consult with the 

> evaluator and determine if the client*s disability contributed to his



> or her failure to participate. If so, the client must be considered

to 

> have good cause and cannot be sanctioned, and the welfare-to-work

plan 

> must be modified to take account to the evaluation findings. 

> 

> The protocol discusses a number of reasonable modifications clients 

> with learning disabilities may be entitled to, including a waiver of

job 

> search for clients with verified learning disabilities if the program



> determines that job search will not be beneficial for the client; 

> shortening job search if it turns out not to be beneficial; and

allowing 

> clients to participate in the primary welfare-to-work activity, or

all 

> welfare-to-work activities, for fewer hours. 

> 

> The History of the Protocol 

> 

> Advocates played a large role in getting CDSS to develop and issue

the 

> protocol. More than a year before the All County Letter was issued,

CDSS 

> established an Advisory Workgroup on Learning Disabilities to make 

> recommendations to the State about how to improve services to

CalWORKs 

> participants with learning disabilities. The Workgroup included 

> representatives of CDSS and county welfare departments, the State

agency 

> that oversees community colleges, the Employment Development

Department 

> of the State Unemployment Insurance program, and the Department of 

> Rehabilitation, legislative staff, and other advocates, including

Jodie 

> Berger from the Welfare-to-Work Advocacy Project of the Legal Aid 

> Society/Employment Law Center in San Francisco. 

> 

> The group met monthly, and had guest speakers on topics such as how

to 

> define learning disabilities, the validated screening instruments 

> available, and the types of program modifications often needed by 

> individuals with learning disabilities. The goal of the group was to



> identify a series of recommendations for CDSS on how to identify and



> evaluate CalWORKs participants with learning disabilities and how to



> remove barriers to full participation by these individuals in the 

> CalWORKS welfare-to-work program. Most of the recommendations made by



> the group were adopted by the State. One interesting fact is that a 

> number of the state and local government officials who participated

in 

> the work group had learning disabilities themselves or had children

with 

> learning disabilities. Advocates engaging in policy advocacy on 

> disability rights issues should keep in mind that disabilities cut 

> across gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, political parties and 

> socioeconomic groups. Sensitivity to disability issues can come from



> many quarters. 

> 

> 

> 

> Ruth A. Bourquin 

> Mass. Law Reform Institute 

> 99 Chauncy Street, Suite 500 

> Boston, MA 02111 

> (617)357-0700 ext. 333 

> fax: (617)357-0777 

> email: rbourquin at mlri.org 

> 

> >>> "Patti White" 1/16/2008 12:13:44 PM 

> >>> 

> Arkansas has not had a similar civil rights case, probably because

our 

> Department of Human Services (DHS) was well aware of Ruth Bourquin's



> lawsuit and its nationwide repercussions. DHS partnered with our 

> interagency LD training initiative, Bridges to Practice, in 1998, and



> proceeded to participate in the training for five years to educate

their 

> staff about appropriate and effective service provision for their 

> clients with learning disabilities. 

> 

> DHS began mandatory LD screening of all Transitional Employment 

> Assistance (TEA) clients in July 1999 using the Washington State 

> 13-Question Screener. In addition, they contracted with Arkansas 

> Rehabilitation Services (ARS) to provide follow-up diagnosis. If the



> client needed a GED, ARS included all tests required by GEDTS as part

of 

> the evaluation in order to request and receive accommodations on the

GED 

> tests. 

> 

> I should add that the interagency training is no longer happening,

and 

> I have no idea how the issue of learning diabilities is now being 

> handled in local DHS offices in this state. The agency underwent some



> drastic administrative changes a few years ago, and the last I heard,



> they were using the disabilities kiosk approach for their clients

with 

> disabilities, including learning disabilities. That's basically a 

> section in the office with a computer where the person can search for



> local resources. 

> 

> As with all training, though, there were a lot of people who

completed 

> the training and continue to apply what they learned to their

clients. 

> I still hear from some of them, and I know it has made a difference

in 

> some local offices despite any support or lack thereof from the

state. 

> 

> Patti White 

> 

> Patti White, M.Ed. 

> Disabilities Project Manager 

> Arkansas Adult Learning Resource Center 

> 804 Madison 3120 

> Huntsville, AR 72740 

> prwhite at madisoncounty.net 

> http://aalrc.org/resources/ld/index.aspx 

> 800.569.3539 ph/fax/tty 

> ---------------------------------------------------- 

> National Institute for Literacy 

> Learning Disabilities mailing list 

> LearningDisabilities at nifl.gov 

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to 

> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/learningdisabilities 

> Email delivered to napayne at att.net 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CTraymondsettlementagreement.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 1343485 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/learningdisabilities/attachments/20080116/f8643ef3/attachment.pdf