Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
352356459
label
"Section 130 Demonstration Projects for Severely Handicapped people: Third Annual Report" [1979]
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
Source extras
naId
352356459
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
804fc50ececaf635
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s): FOIA Number: S S FOIA MARKER This is not a textual record. This is used as an administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential Library Staff. Record Group/Collection: Donated Historical Materials Collection/Office of Origin: Frieden, Lex, Collection Series: Printed Materials Subseries: Papers/Books OA/ID Number: 52127 Folder ID Number: 52127-004 Folder Title: "Section 130 Demonstration Projects for Severely Handicapped people: Third Annual Report" [1979] Stack: Row: Section: Shelf: Position: THIRD ANNUAL REPORT ON THE SECTION 130 DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS FOR SEVERELY HANDICAPPED PEOPLE June 1979 Jeffrey Koshel, Project Director Timothy Muzzio, Project Manager Joseph LaRocca Eugene Durman Brenda Chapman Robert Counts THE URBAN INSTITUTE 2100 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Summary of Findings. 1 I. Introduction 6 Definition of Independent Living Rehabilitation 6 Background 8 Recent Legislation 12 The Demonstration Projects 13 II. The Demonstration Projects 15 Institute of Rehabilitation - New York Office of Vocational Rehabilitation 16 Policy Implications 18 Department of Rehabilitation Medicine University of Washington 18 Policy Implications 22 Utah Division of Rehabilitation Services 22 Policy Implications 24 Texas Commission for the Blind 25 Policy Implications 27 Center for Independent Living 27 Policy Implications 33 III. The Clients 35 Sex, Age, Race and Education 35 Primary and Secondary Disability 36 Severity of Disability 38 Income and Employment 41 Comparison to the General VR Population 43 IV. Problem Areas for Clients 46 Equipment 47 Service Needs 53 Household Management Needs 61 Social Interaction 66 Transportation 70 Architectural Barriers 75 Living Status 80 Physical Functioning 87 V. Cost of Services 91 Cost Analysis 99 Comparing Project Costs with VR Program Costs 103 Appendix A - Tables on Client Characteristics Appendix B - Data Collection Methodology Summary of Findings The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 mandated a series of demonstration projects to see how severely handicapped people could benefit from a program of indepen- dent living rehabilitation and what costs would be encountered. For the past three years, The Urban Institute has been evaluating the demonstrations and their various approaches to service delivery. Two of the projects, Seattle and New York, concerned themselves with medically oriented physical restoration services. Two others, Salt Lake City and San Antonio, were designed to deliver independent living rehabilitation services through their state vocational rehabilitation agencies. The fifth project, located in Berkeley, is a consumer action organization which advocates for the improvement of programs and services for handicapped people. The clients served by the Section 130 projects tend to be working age (21-55 years old) males, reflective of the general population in terms of race, who have a low level of income. They depend heavily upon outside assistance for income due to their inability or lack of opportunity to work. Their education level is somewhat lower than the general population. Twenty- eight percent of the clients lived in institutions at the time of intake, and only 30 percent of these persons had outside residences immediately available to them. All clients were severely handicapped according to the criteria employed. There were wide variances in the characteristics of the clients, pointing to the fact that severely handicapped people are a highly diversified group, and each client brings to the project a unique set of characteristics requiring a highly specialized service plan. Because of such greatly diversified needs, highly individualized rehabilitation plans have to be constructed if this 2 population is to be maximally served. In this connection the new legislation for independent living, PL-95-602, requires that there be an Individualized Written Rehabilitation Program (IWRP) for each client receiving independent living rehabilitation services. Another major finding is that a client does not bring to the situation a static set of needs. Needs change over time. As. the environment changes, so do the functional limitations. As the client improves in functioning, a new set of needs emerge. Re-evaluation of the client seems extremely important if the most severely disabled are to reach their maximum level of independence. Unmet equipment needs are a major problem for clients in the projects. About 65% of all clients had equipment needs at intake. The number of needs/ client ranged from 0 to 10. The most frequent needs at intake were for ramps, trapeze/bathtub lifts, wheelchairs and transfer chairs or boards. As these needs were met, other areas of needs increased, such as the need for specially equipped autos, typewriters and tape recorders. The mean number of needs were reduced over the years and the pattern of need reduction seems to indicate that most of the more basic needs were met, although many other needs remained for these clients. Service needs followed the same general patterns as equipment needs. That is, a majority of clients had unmet service needs at intake. The mean number of unmet needs were high (4.81 per client). This mean was greatly reduced over the years to about 2.1 needs per client. If one examines the patterns of need reduction, it is seen that medically related and physical restoration services were the most reduced type of need, while non-medical/physical resotration needs (e.g., vocational placement, educational costs, etc.) were not as greatly reduced. 3 In the area of household management needs, attendant care and household financial management were the most frequent unmet needs at intake, although assistance in preparing meals and housekeeping, and assistance in shopping were cited by many clients as unmet needs. By the third year, all unmet needs were substantially reduced. except for the need for household financial management, which actually increased. Also, assistance in conducting personal business activities appeared as a need for the first time (by 13% of the population). All of these changes (in equipment, service and household management needs) seemed to be reflected in the increase in the amount of social interaction engaged in by the clients. Clients were attending more meetings, meeting more often with friends and relatives, and more often attending different forms of public entertainment. Of special interest was the fact that the frequency of clients visiting friends almost doubled. As this activity requires the integration of services and equipment provided, and overcoming of architectural barriers, it is an excellent indicator that the programs were successful in more fully integrating these persons into the mainstream of society. Two areas which remain as particularly troublesome for clients are trans- portation and architectural barriers. While use of specific types of trans- portation increased, which indicates improved transportation ability, only a slight increase occurred in the percent of clients not having a transportation problem. Over half of all clients reported some problem after being in the program for three years. Similarly, most clients reported problems with archi- tectural barriers. Barriers in the home were greatly reduced, but problems with barriers in the outside environment remained high over the years. As trans- portation and architectural barriers are areas over which clients and projects have little control, these findings were not surprising. They do indicate 4 the need, however, for more vigorous advocacy activity in making transportation systems and the outside environment accessible to the handicapped population. Living status, defined as type of housing. and household composition, generally improved for the client population. The most exciting finding was that about one-half of all clients in institutions were mainstreamed into the community. An analysis of these deinstitutionalized versus those still in institutions did not find any predictor variables of potential for deinstitu- tionalization. However, these persons who reported having a place to go were more likely to be deinstitutionalized. But even of those reporting no such place, many were deinstitutionalized. The services most often reported as needed for deinstitutionalization were assistance in preparing meals, house- keeping and/or shopping, and attendant care. A scale of living status was constructed by looking at household com- position by age appropriateness and by whether or not the client was in school. It was found that many clients improved, most did not change, and a few "worsened" according to the scale. An analysis of those who did not change revealed that substantial progress was made in other areas such as reduction in unmet equipment needs, an increase in services received, and an increase in frequency of social interaction. So although living status for some clients did not improve, other benefits were derived from being in the project. Overall, most measures of the clients' situations indicated improve client status. Many equipment, service and household management needs as well as transportation and architectural barriers problems existed at intake, but most were substantially reduced over the years. Transportation and architectural barriers problems remained the least resolved problem areas for the clients. Frequency of social interaction substantially increased over the years, and perhaps that is the best overall indicator of client improvement. 5 Information on physical functioning, obtained through Barthel and PULSES scores indicated that most clients improved in their first year of service. Physical functioning tended to stabilize after the second year. As most clients were physically disabled, improved functioning in the first year can be seen as a real and important gain for the clients. As expected, clients served by the San Antonio and New York projects did not experience improvement in their physical functioning, but gains in other areas demonstrated that all clients seemed to benefit from participation in the demonstrations. In general, it appears that costs for an independent living rehabilitation program will be higher than costs for the regular vocational rehabilitation program. Costs per client in the projects were almost double. the costs per client of the regular vocational rehabilitation program, and almost fifty percent greater than the costs per client paid for by the Trust Fund. The average total expenditure per client was $9,097 per year. Average project funds per client were $1,427 per year. This difference between project cost and total cost reflects the apparent success of the projects in utilizing similar benefits for client services. As similar benefit information is not available for the regular rehabilitation system, project information should be highly useful to both vocational and independent living rehabilitation counselors, and point to the need for more information on similar benefits. Cost data showed that most funds were expanded for purchased services. Fewer dollars were spent per client on counseling and placement activities than for clients funded through Section 110 monies or out of the Trust Funds. One major implication, then, is that manpower. needs for programs of independent living rehabilitation will tend to be greater for direct service providers than for counseling and placement staff. I. INTRODUCTION It is the purpose of this report to analyze the third year activities of five demonstration projects funded by the Rehabilitation Services Administra- tion of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. These demonstrations were designed to explore different ways of providing independent living rehabilitation services to persons typically thought of as too severely disabled to have a vocational goal. Each project collected common, periodic information on clients served, including information on clients' functional limitations and their status concerning housing, transportation, education, medical problems, employment and service and equipment needs. In addition, information on services provided and costs of these services was collected. This present report is based primarily upon these data. More specifically, the report will focus on the following questions: - How were each of the projects designed? - Who were the clients served by them? - What were these clients' service needs? - What services were provided to them? - What were the costs of these services? - How did the clients benefit from the services they received? It might be helpful to start with a discussion of the definition of independent living and the background of the demonstration projects. Such a discussion might provide insight into the reasons for and importance of the independent living rehabilitation effort. Definition of Independent Living Rehabilitation Independent Living Rehabilitation (ILR) is a concept which has evolved over time. Because of the various types of disabilities, the varying degrees of severity and the multifaceted interactions of social demographic variables, it has been difficult to define one specifice "outcome" or "goal" for a program 7 of ILR. In the 1950's the concept referred to services that would allow a handicapped individual to achieve a degree of independence from the need for institutional care and/or alleviate the need for attendant care, thus reducing burden on others and restoring a measure of dignity and self respect. Here the emphasis is placed on freeing handicapped individuals from institutional settings. Since the 1960s, this view of independent living has been gradually expanding. One not only speaks of deinstitutionalization but of freedom in the home, freedom to travel (accessibility), the opportunity to attend school and the opportunity to work. Most of these changes have come about because of the determination of the handicapped to show that these are activities desired by all people. More recently, the goal of ILR has come to refer to "the ability of the severely handicapped person to participate actively in society; to work, to own a home, to raise a family, etc. In summary, to participate to the fullest extent possible in normal day-to-day activities of everyday life. 11/ This definition not only encompasses a broader spectrum of activities, but also implies a goal orientation by the use of the word "ability," indicating that a program of ILR would provide skills and knowledge that would impart a level of function necessary to live independently. The key here is whether any entity can guarantee such a delivery, given the present cultural, sociological and legislative restrictions that impede the deliverance of this ability. It should be clear, then, that Independent Living Rehabilitation refers not only to ability, but also the freedom to engage in any and all activities engaged in by able-bodied people. Such activities include access to: all public and private buildings (stores, schools, offices, homes and apartments, etc.) ; streets and sidewalks; adequate numbers and locations of all forms 1. Rehabilitation Services Administration Information Memorandum, August 9, 1977. 8 and types of housing; adequate transportation (private and public) ; adequate health care and maintenance at a reasonable cost (this includes not only primary care but also attendant care) ; and employment opportunities commen- surate with skill and intellectual levels. Background Interest in providing services that would assist the severely handicapped in achieving an independent lifestyle dates back several decades. As early as 1959 legislation had been proposed that would extend the benefits of rehabilita- tion to persons with severe handicaps, even when no vocational objective was obvious. This and many subsequent bills contained titles relating to indepen- dent living rehabilitation services. These services referred to a variety of types including counseling, psychological and related services, physical restoration, and other related services, needed prosthetic appliances and training in such skills as would help maintain independent living. In 1961 legislation was introduced which contained a title on "Indepen- dent Living Rehabilitation Services." This bill included appropriations of $15 and $25 million for the first and second years for providing cooperative arrangements between state agencies administering the program and those agencies that administered public assistance and public health programs. The types of services proposed under this legislation were similar to those pro- posed in 1959. However, mobility and personal adjustment services were included, and the emphasis changed from the simple mention of "maintenance" to " maintenance needed to assure the availability of services, and follow- up services to insure maintenance of rehabilitation gains. There was also a shift from a limited discussion of preventing or reducing institutionalization to improving the lifestyle of the "seriously handicapped individual." This removal of situation specific goals and the addition of the qualifier "seriously" handicapped were further evidence of the direction of future legislative efforts. 9 Questions were raised during debate on the proposed legislation as to the need for these services, the need for separate appropriations and the inclusion of an "economic need" clause for rendition of services. The National Rehabilitation Association, one of the main architects of the legislation, reported that there were sufficient numbers of severely handicapped persons who could benefit from such services. The National Rehabilitation Association when asked about the need for a separate title responded, "Until experience has been gained in the administration of Independent Living Rehabilitation it is considered best to have the two separate, although administered by the same agency. This arrangement will assure that attention given to the new pro- gram will not detract from emphasis upon vocational rehabilitation." Except for counseling, psychological and related services, the bill required that a person meet a set standard of economic need. Although no clear explanation of opposition to this provision is available, it is felt that the opposition was due to the inability of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare to settle who would administer the program. Public Health, Rehabilitation and Social Services units had all expressed interest. Again, independent living legislation failed to pass Congress. Renewed efforts to authorize ILR services were begun in the early 1970s. After prolonged testimony establishing that the severely disabled without vocational potential should be provided these services, and after years of intensified emphasis on vocational rehabilitation to serve the most severely disabled, provisions were written into the vocational rehabilitation bills of 1972 and 1973. The bills had two major thrusts. The first was the authoriza- tion of a new formula grant program designed to provide service to individuals with the most severe handicaps without vocational objectives. The second was to move the VR program in the direction of serving more severely disabled 10 with vocational potential. The section of the Rehabilitation Act of 1972 on Independent Living defined its purpose: to assist the several states in developing and implementing continuing plans for meeting the current and future needs of handi- capped individuals for whom a vocational goal is not possible or feasible, including the assessment of disability and rehabilitation potential, and for the training of specialized personnel needed for the provision of services to such individuals and research related thereto. The President vetoed this bill. His Memorandum of Disapproval stated, in part: This measure would seriously jeopardize the goals of the voca- tional rehabilitation program and is another example of Congressional fiscal irresponsibility. Its provisions would divert this program from its basic vocational objectives into activities that have no vocational element whatsoever or are essentially medical in character. In addition, it would proliferate a host of narrow categorical pro- grams which duplicate and overlap existing authorities and programs. Such provisions serve only to dilute the resources of the vocational rehabilitation program and impair its continued valuable achievements in restoring deserving American citizens to meaningful employment. When the 93rd Congress convened, some changes were made in the vetoed bill, but none affected the independent living provisions cited above. On March 15, 1973, the bill was sent to the President for signature. On March 27, 1973, he vetoed the bill, citing these reasons, among others for his action. S. 7, if enacted, would result in an increase in Federal outlays of some $1 billion above my budget recommendations for fiscal years 1973-1975 I would emphasize that even if S. 7 were not fatally flawed by its large expense, I would have serious reservations about signing it, for it also contains a number of substantive defects. Among them: --It would divert the Vocational Rehabilitation program from its original purposes by requiring that it provide new medical services. For instance, it would set up a new program for end-stage kidney disease worthy con- cern in itself, but one that [can] be approached more effectively within the Medicare program, as existing legislation already provides. Vocational Rehabilitation has worked well for over half a century by focusing on a single objective: train- ing people for meaningful jobs. We should not dilute the resources of that program or distort its objective by turning it toward welfare or medical goals. 11 --Secondly, S. 7 would create a hodge-podge of seven new categorical grant programs, many of which would overlap and duplicate existing services. Coordination of ser- vices would become considerably more difficult and would place the Federal Government back on the path to wasteful, overlapping program disasters. The hearings conducted during these legislative sessions produced testi- mony to the effect that not enough was known about the numbers and types of services, and the delivery system needed to provide those services, to the severely handicapped. There also appeared to be possible duplication of existing authorities which could provide the needed services. Following the failure of the second attempt to override, the Administra- tion and the Congress worked out a compromise. The provisions establishing the new program were dropped. In exchange, the Administration agreed to conduct a study concerning the nature of existing authority and the ability of the rehabilitation community to actually serve the more severely handi- capped. Thus, the introduction of independent living rehabilitation into law first appeared in Section 130 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Although the concept was not new, the introduction of this concept into law had taken a series of legislative attempts, support from various consumer groups, and some adroit compromises. The resulting compromises directed the Secretary of HEW to conduct a comprehensive needs study of the most severely handicapped: Sec. 130. (a) The Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive study, including research and demonstration projects, of the feasibility of methods designed (1) to prepare individuals with the most severe handicaps for entry into programs under this Act who would not other- wise be eligible to enter such programs due to the severity of their handicap, and (2) to assist individuals with the most severe handi- caps who, due to the severity of their handicaps or other factors such as age, cannot reasonably be expected to be rehabilitated for employment but for whom a program of rehabilitation could improve their ability to live independently or function normally within their family and community. Such study shall encompass the extent to which other programs administered by the Secretary do or might contribute to the objectives set forth in clauses (1) and (2) of the 12 preceding sentence and the methods by which all such programs can be coordinated at Federal, State, and local levels with those carried out under this Act to the end that individuals with the most severe handicaps are assured of receiving the kinds of assis- tance necessary for them to achieve such objectives. (b) The Secretary shall report the findings of the study, research and demonstrations directed by subsection (a) of this section to the Congress and to the President together with such recommendations for legislative or other action as he may find desirable, not later than February, 1975. The first step in implementation of this section was completion of the Comprehensive Service Needs (CSN) Study, which was conducted by a large study consortium directed by The Urban Institute. The CSN study collected and analyzed large volumes of data. The CSN study documented a significant amount of unmet service needs among severely handicapped people. However, the professionals involved in the study recog- nized a need for more information--information that could only be gathered through a systematic, controlled approach. As a result, the study recommended that a set of demonstration projects on independent living rehabilitation be conducted. The objectives of these projects would be to further investigate the extent and characteristics of the severely handicapped, their rehabilita- tion needs, and the cost of needed rehabilitation services. The CNS report supported the mandate of Section 130 to investigate innovative approaches to serve severely handicapped people, and the Rehabilitation Services Admin- istration (RSA) funded six ILR demonstration projects. Recent Legislation In 1978 the Congress enacted Public Law 95-602 which, among other things, established a Federal grant-in-aid program for the provision of services and for the establishment and operation of Centers for Independent Living designed to assist severely disabled people, including blind people, to improve their ability to engage in employment or to function independently in their families and in their communities. The study mandated by Section 130 of the Rehabili- 13 tation Act of 1973 yielded data, findings and recommendations which significantly aided in the development of Title VII--Comprehensive Services for Independent Living of Public Law 95-602. The Comprehensive Service Needs Study identified the numbers of the most severely disabled people in our population, their demographic characteristics, their disabilities, housing, transportation, service and equipment needs, and other relevant information. The Demonstration Projects for Independent Living are attempting to meet the many problems faced by severely disabled people and to utilize and coordinate existing services in their day to day operations. Just as the Comprehensive Service Needs Study yielded valuable data and findings for the development of the independent living rehabilitation legislation contained in P.L. 95-602, the demonstration projects should be helpful in the establishment and opera- tion of programs and projects under Title VII of The Rehabilitation, Compre- hensive Services and Developmental Disabilities Amendments of 1978--P.L. 95-602. Of the six original projects, five provided independent living services over the three year period covered by this report. They are organized and staffed in different ways, reflecting the various organization patterns possible under Title VII of P.L. 95-602. These projects are described in detail in Chapter II of this report. The Demonstration Projects The demonstration projects, funded by RSA, were selected in such a fashion as to gather as much of the needed information as possible. Projects were funded that could address specific delivery issues as well as issues concerning specific handicapped populations. Two projects concern themselves with medical oriented- physical restoration services. One of the projects is located in Seattle, 1. Report of the Comprehensive Service Needs Study, The Urban Institute, Washington, D.C., June 23, 1975. Summaries of the findings of the Comprehen- sive Service Needs Study are contained in the November-December 1975 and the March-April 1976 issues of American Rehabilitation. 14 Washington, at the University of Washington, Department of Rehabilitation. This project is involved with physically disabled clients during and after services of the rehabilitation facility. The other is located at the Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine in New York City. This project deals mainly with the needs of individuals with progressive diseases, specifically Muscular Dystrophy. This project seeks to integrate its activities with those of the State Rehabilitation Agency. Two projects were selected to deliver ILR through their respective State VR Agencies. The Utah project, located in Salt Lake City, approaches ILR with the traditional VR counselor model. Its clients are mainly physically disabled clients. The San Antonio, Texas, Blind Multihandicapped Project acts as a residual to a State VR Agency. In this project, the clients are those who have been rejected from the Texas Commission for the Blind as "handicapped to severe. " All clients are totally or legally blind and possess a variety of secondary disabilities. The fifth project is located in Berkeley, California, at the Center for Independent Living (CIL). CIL is a consumer action organization which advocates for the improvement of programs and services for handicapped people. The CIL project uses the peer counseling model to help the handicapped learn to deal with the various problems that confront them on a day-to-day basis. In the next chapter, we provide a more detailed description of these five demonstration projects and note some of the more significant changes that have occurred during the third year. We also draw a number of policy implications that seen to be supported by the experiences of these projects. II. THE DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS The five demonstration projects, developed under the authority of Section 130 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, are organized and staffed in different ways. Clientele differ project by project as do their sponsorship, funding sources, service delivery systems and emphasis. They reflect the various organization patterns possible under Title VII of Public Law 95-602. Moreover they address the following issues which will arise in the initial years as independent living rehabilitation programs and projects are developed under Title VII of P.L. 95-602. What organizational structures are the most efficient and effective for administering an independent living rehabilitation program? What services are needed in an independent living program, and what programs and agencies should provide them? What manpower is required and at what level can case- loads be handled? What are the expected outcomes that will result from given levels of expenditures? What are the relative costs of supporting various independent living rehabilitation goals? What limits should be placed on who is served? Are there persons too severely handicapped to benefit from an independent living rehabilitation program? What are the objectives of the independent living rehabilitation programs for which reasonable account- ability can be maintained? 16 Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine - New York Office of Vocational Rehabilitation This project is conducted jointly by the Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine and the New York Vocational Rehabilitation Agency. Special staff has been assigned by both organizations to the project, consisting of the following specialists: - Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor stationed by the vocational rehabilitation agency with the IRM staff. - Physician - IRM staff. - Psychologist - IRM staff. - Social Worker - IRM staff. - Public Health Nurse - IRM staff. - Occupational Therapist - IRM staff. - Physical Therapist - IRM staff. - Architect - Consultant. - Home Economist - Consultant. The basic objective of this project has been to deliver a full range of comprehensive services to severely handicapped neuromuscular diseased patients including a thorough medical evaluation developed by the Institute's Neuromuscular Disease Center team of scientists and physicians and evaluation and intervention by a psycho-social and vocational team. Following the comprehensive medical evaluation, clients are provided medical services and equipment, as appropriate, usually on an outpatient basis. Rehabilitation is carried out with focus on the individual's home, family and work situation. Counseling in emotional adjustment to these progressive diseases, use of aids-to-daily-living, housing and transportation modification, and family counseling are included in project focus. Over the past three years, the project staff have attempted to develop a wide range of coordinated working relationships with key community agencies, especially the New York State Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, the Muscular Dystrophy Association and others as the program develops to meet the needs in the community. 17 The project accepts referred persons, age 13 and older, residing in the Metropolitan New York Area who are not able to benefit from available rehabil- itation services at present but who might benefit from special types of extended evaluation procedures and other prevocational services or who may possess potential for improving their independence in daily living. During the initial years, selected patients of the Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, applicants of the New York State Office of Vocational Rehabilitation and residents of long term care institutions made up the project's clientele. The project utilizes State Agency case service funds to provide client services whenever possible. State Agency Innovation and Expansion funds, as available, are applied to the development of new services. In addition, providers utilized by the project make service contributions supported by private and voluntary funding. The Muscular Dystrophy Foundation is currently supporting neuromuscular disease treatment and research at the Institute. Medicaid and Medicare funds are applied when possible to meet medical costs. An advisory committee, consisting of representatives from the regional office of the New York Rehabilitation Agency, selected community programs such as the Muscular Dystrophy Association, and the New York University Research and Training Center, provides guidance to the project in such areas as assessment of the goals, procedures and findings of the project and plans for dissemination and utilization of project results. For most of the clients in the project, improvement in functional capacity has not been possible, but maintainance of present capacity is possible only through the services provided by the project. Without these services they would gradually lose functional capacity and become less independent in their families and communities, and in some instances their general functional loss would result in institutionalization. 18 Policy Implications. Under Part A of Title VII of P.L. 95-602, the State Agency administering the approved State plan for independent living must use not less than 20 percent of the Federal funds received by the State for grants to "local public agencies and private nonprofit organizations for the conduct of independent living services" unless such use of Federal funds is found by the Commission of the Rehabilitation Services Administration not be be feasible in that State. This project as well as the University of Washington School of Medicine project in Seattle, described below, could very well serve as prototypes or models for medically oriented projects for independent living funded by the State Agencies under Part A of P.L. 95-602. The New York project has an advisory committee, but that committee has no consumer representation. The Seattle project does not have an advisory committee. It would seem desirable that projects funded under Part A of P.L. 95-602 have advisory or policy committees which include consumer, pro- vider, and other appropriate representation. The New York project also includes within its design the provision of rehabilitation services for independent living to individuals whose functional capacities cannot be improved but can be maintained or stabilized. It is critical that this concept be included in independent living projects and programs under P.L. 95-602, as this is particularly important for many people with multiple sclerosis, mental disorders and other severely disabling conditions that are progressive in nature and whose functional capacities decline over time. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine - University of Washington The project operated by the Department of Rehabiliation Medicine, Univer- sity of Washington in Seattle, is the second of the two projects demonstrating the role of a Comprehensive Medical Rehabilitation Center in the administration of a rehabilitation program for independent living. 19 This project is similar in many respects to the project operated by the Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine and yet it differs in many other respects. It, like the New York project, is sponsored by a medical school. While not conducting the project jointly with the State Vocational Rehabilitation Agency, the Department of Rehabilitation Medicine in Seattle operates its project in close association with the Washington State Vocational Rehabilitation Agency. In fact, vocational rehabilitation counselors who are employed by the State Vocational Rehabilitation Agency are housed with the project staff. Perhaps the greatest differences between the New York project and the Seattle project are in their staffing patterns and their respective clientele. The professional staffing of the Seattle project is as follows: - Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors - Psychologist - Physiatrist - Behavioral Psychologist - Social Work Aide/Psychometrist - Work Evaluator/Placement Specialist The purposes of this demonstration are to (1) comprehensively evaluate the rehabilitation needs of severely disabled individuals, and (2) organize state agency activities and community resources to provide increased services and care to the severely disabled. The specific procedures used by the project include: Interviewing severely disabled people to determine their medical, housing, transportation, educational, vocational, economic, and other rehabil- itation needs. Recommending and providing appropriate rehabilitation services, based on interviews and further information gathered from the individual evaluations. 20. Evaluating clients to determine their vocational training and counsel- ing needs. Traditional vocational evaluations are employed including the administration of interest, aptitude, and achievement tests and on-the-job observation. Readministering interviews and evaluations such as those described above after services have been provided to determine whether clients have benefited from the services. Rehabilitation services continue as long as the need for them is present. The Seattle Independent Living Rehabilitation Project was originally seen as an additional function of the Department of Rehabilitation Medicine's Vocational Unit. In practical terms, the staff of the Vocational Unit provide vocational rehabilitation services to those clients displaying vocational potential and provide independent living rehabilitation services for the most severely disabled clients, thereby increasing their ability to live more independently or to enter into vocational rehabilitation activities. As originally designed, priority in acceptance into the project was to be given to individuals with catastrophic disabilities, such as central nervous system disfunction, multiple orthopedic or neuromuscular disability, severe cardiac disorders, chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases, and the severely retarded and psychotic mentally ill. Severely disiabled clients from the inpatient program are placed in the independent living rehabilitation project upon their discharge from University Hospital's physical rehabilitation program (Department of Rehabilitation Medicine). Outpatient clients are accepted into the ILR program if their vocational evaluation indicates that they are not ready for vocational rehabilitation. Because of the difficulty in placing severely disabled persons in gain- ful employment, the project has found it necessary to utilize a more intensive 21 placement approach. When a client is felt to be ready, the staff arranges for vocational evaluation in the "job station program." The job station program allows clients to work in four to six different job situations for short periods of time. The client has the opportunity to sample different jobs while the job supervisors evaluate the person's work skills. At the end of the job station experiences, the staff will recommend job placement or further vocational training, or will state that the client is not prepared to re-enter employment. A related issue deals with the actual placement of the severely disabled in a job situation. Historically, most placement efforts have been dependent on "cold calling" (calling employers who are unknown to counselors) or "house accounts" (employers with whom counselors have personally dealt in the past). A broader approach is thought necessary in order to increase employment rates of the severely disabled. This approach uses "employment salespeople," staff who specialize in educating employers, consulting with them about work envi- ronment and tasks within their businesses that are suitable for severely disabled people, and psychologically preparing employers and other employees for the presence of the severely disabled worker. During the third year increasing interest and increased project activity was given to client advocacy. A major emphasis is directed towards those areas viewed as most critical and most lacking: housing, transportation and atten- dant care. In addition to "group advocacy" the project is also stressing "individual advocacy" to impart advocacy skills to the client so that if needed in the future, the client will be able to advocate independently. During the third year, the project moved toward more specialization in its service delivery. In prior years, clients were randomly assigned to 22 counselors; thus, individual counselors dealt with various types of disabil- ities. Now, each counselor works with only one type of client. Also, the project is seeking to limit its population to the elderly disabled, quadri- plegics, and victims of multiple sclerosis. This will create a situation in which the three counselors will work with 15 to 20 clients, all with similar disabilities, and who are therefore likely to have similar needs. Policy Implications. As indicated earlier, this project could well serve as a prototype for the development of projects by the State Vocational Rehabilitation Agency under Part A of P.L. 95-602. The stationing of vocational rehabilitation counselors with project staff has resulted in better understanding by the counselors of the capabilities and service needs of project clientele and severely disabled people in general, and the methods and techniques that can be employed to bring about successful job placements and/or greater independent in carrying out the tasks essential to normal family and community living. Utah Division of Rehabilitation Services The Utah vocational rehabilitation agency is one of the two State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies responsible for the operation of a rehabilitation project for independent living. This project is designed to demonstrate how to organize a comprehensive rehabilitation services program for the most severely disabled people known to the State Vocational Rehabilitation Agency who have been excluded from the vocational rehabilitation program because of the severity of their disabilites. The clientele of the project have disabilities considered catastrophic, such as central nervous system dysfunction, multiple ortho- pedic or muscular loss, muscular dystrophy, multiple sclerosis, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, severe cardiovascular conditions, severe kidney disease, 23. severe rheumatoid arthritis, deafness, blindness, and other severe neurolo- gical or orthopedic loss or disability. Some clients not from state agency closure lists are solicited from the community. Organizationally this program operates as a separate unit within the Utah State Vocational Rehabilitation Agency, utilizing all of the agencies central services. It operates on a parallel with the vocational rehabilita- tion program, borrowing, as necessary, time-proved principles, such as, the client-counselor model, where they may be appropriately applied and altered when necessary. Two experienced rehabilitation counselors function full- time in the project as well as an engineer on a half-time basis. The project develops and provides many broad services to severely disabled people that are not routinely available to all rehabilitation clients, such as assistance in mobility, communication, social activities, and those activities necessary to maintain and restore general life functions. While results of this project may not lead to a significant number of the severely disabled people achieving vocational goals, it is expected that their ability to become more self-sufficient and lead more independent lives will be greatly improved. In many cases, such improvement will reduce institutional care and a person's lessening of dependence on govern- ment and non-profit agencies. The Utah project, as well as the other projects, identified trans- portation, attendant care and accessible, adequate housing as the most necessary and pressing needs of the severely disabled. In an attempt to meet the housing need, the Utah project established a transitional living center for its clients. This is a time-proven living arrangement first widely used to deinstitutionalize mentally retarded individuals. The Utah 24 project has renovated a small cluster of housing units (sixplex) which are accessible (barrier free) and adequate for most of its clients. The purpose of the facility is to teach independent living skills to severely disabled people in order to prepare them for community living. Because it is a transitional living arrangement, priority is given to clients who are most likely to be either employed and therefore able to afford their own housing or will be capable of finding other housing arrangements. After the project had been in operation for a short while, project staff realized a great need for greater knowledge about prosthetic appliances and other assistive devices. As a result, the project employed an engineer on a half-time basis, not only for this purpose but also to assist in adaptations of various devices and equipment for project clients. Through this innovative action, an inexpensive TTY (a telephone hook-up system used by the deaf) is now used by cerebral palsy clients who have severe communication impairments. Policy Implications The Utah Project presents a prototype of the organizational structure and programs that State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies might wish to develop under Part A of Title VII of PL 95-602 for the direct provision of rehabilitation services for independent living purposes. The Utah Program is a discrete rehabilitation program and yet it utilizes in common with the vocational rehabilitation program, the central supportive services of the parent agency. Moreover, the program is operated in close association with the vocational rehabilitation program so as to benefit from the services of that program for clients who develop an employment potential. Further, many of the conditions of the state plans required under Part A of PL 95-602, such as the development and use of the IWRP, the use of similar benefits 25 and the planning and development of innovative services to meet the critical needs of severely disabled people for independent living have been met head on and fulfilled under the Utah Project. Texas Commission for the Blind The project of the Texas Commission for the Blind is the other of the two projects operated by State Rehabilitation Agencies. This project serves multi-handicapped blind people living in the San Antonia-Bexar County Texas area who in addition to being blind have one or more of the following secon- dary disabilities: chronic mental illness, central nervous system dysfunc- tion, orthopedic impairments, cardiac disorders, developmental disabilities, chronic pulmonary disorders and severe auditory disabilities. Due to the innovative nature of this project and the lack of previous historical staffing patterns for working with blind people with additional severe disabilities, the agency decided upon a team, rather than on individual counselor approach to each client. The team members included the following: (1) Rehabilitation Counselor (2) Rehabilitation Teacher (3) Placement Specialist (4) Orientation & Mobility Specialists (5) Community Service Aide (6) Visually handicapped children's caseworker (7) Supervisory & technical and consultative staff The unique needs of the blind-multi-handicapped individuals require the services of highly tranined and qualifed specialists. Also, the location of this project necessitates the employment of staff who are bilingual, and fully knowledgeable of Mexican-American cultural customs, values, family relationships, and attitudes. Specialized training was provided for project staff in these cultural matters. In this connection, it will be noted that the 1978 Amendments to the Rehabilitation Act required that State agency 26. staff be able to communicate with minority groups in their native languages, a requirement which this project seems to be fulfilling. This project is unique in that it serves a clientele quite different from most of the other projects. Where most projects are concerned with overcoming physical handicaps which result from the client's disability, the Texas project struggles to overcome experiential handicaps brought on by the client's sensory deprivations. The primary deficit (blindness) is further complicated by a secondary disability which may also be sensory (e.g., deafness), limb-related, or mental in nature. The Texas project is active in client advocacy. However, its advocacy activity is most often of the group type. Most of these clients are viewed as being unable to successfully advocate for themselves. Because of this, one full-time staff person (Community Service Aide) is responsible for securing appropriate and timely services for the clients. Although the advocacy role of the agency is essential in securing services for its clients, the rehabilitation teacher is also an asset in securing these services. There are many societies and organizations, both public and private, that cater to specific disabilities. However, few of these entities employ staff who have had experience with blind people; therefore, many are reluctant to accept a blind-multi-handicapped client even when the service to be delivered pertains to the disability an entity is staffed to serve. This is where the rehabilitation teacher becomes extremely important. The project is designed to allow this professional sufficient time to accompany the client to the service agency. The teacher works with both the client and the staff while at the agency; this in-depth involvement lessens as the client and the service agency staff feel comfortable with the situation. 27. Another important role of the teacher is to help the client transfer what is taught at the service agency to the living situation. This is very essential for individuals who have visual handicaps. As well as aiding in learning and transfer processes, the teacher also has the abilities and responsibilities to teach many skills to the clients themselves. Most often this is done in the particular environment in which the client lives, thus negating the need for client transportation or for transferring skills learned in a rehabilitation facility to a residental setting. A major occurrence for this project was the granting of a supplemental award to enable the project to take a more in-depth look at the needs of the blind-mentally handicapped (emotionally ill) client. Staff of this project are acutely aware of the lack of knowledge that exists concerning the mentally ill, especially the blind mentally ill. Due to this, the project is giving priority to blind mentally ill individuals when accepting new referrals. Policy Implications. Part C of Title VII of P.L. 95-602 authorizes grants to state rehabilitation agencies to provide independent living services to older blind individuals. In all essential aspects, this project would seem to be the kind of program envisioned under Part C and would seem to be a good model for other state agencies to replicate. The Texas project gives priority to the elderly blind; its range of services to extremely broad; it utilized all available resources and agencies; and it has developed innovation approaches to meet the multitude: of problems confronting blind people with multiple handicaps. Center for Independent Living Inc. The Center for Independent Living is a consumer-based, self-help organization founded seven years ago to help people with severe disabilities 28 maximize their opportunities for independent lives. Since its inception it has worked closely with other agencies, both public and private, on the development and expansion of programs serving people with severe disabilities. It has received financial assistance from private foundations, the general public, the California Department of Rehabilitation, RSA, and local city and county governments for its innovative programs of non-medical services and its training programs for professionals in medical and vocational rehabilitation and social services. CIL is almost entirely staffed by people with severe disabilities. Its emphasis over the years has been to develop those services that are not provided sufficiently or at all by the medical-vocational rehabilitation system but that are essential to a severely disabled person who wishes to live as independently and as pro- ductively as possible. CIL views the rehabilitation system as a network of public and private agencies in which several serious gaps exist. Psychological factors, for example, are often ignored as barriers to rehabilitation. The Comprehensive Service Needs Study survey of providers found that the motivation of the severely handicapped person was often the major reason for the failure of these individuals to be accepted into the program. The study's survey of handicapped individuals uncovered extensive despair and depression, extremely poor self- image, and general isolation. The CIL program is based on the assumption that the best way to energize and motivate such persons is through role-modeling among the disabled themselves. Included in the energizing concept are peer counseling, aggressive advocacy for full integration into society, and the attainment of a sense of full dignity as a person. The concept assumes that identification and provision of cogent services, such as attendant referral 29 pools, equipment repair, and inventories of accessible housing, depend largely on steps taken by disabled individuals themselves. Established formal agencies, both public and nonprofit, often have traditions and limitations which result in gaps and occasional insensitivity to the needs and preferences of the disabled. There will always be those whose needs are such that no public agency can address them-for example, it may take years for a recently blinded or spinal cord injured person to emerge from depression and actively seek to realize his maximum potential. Sex counseling, initiating lawsuites against landlords, and demanding action from public officials are some of the messy, controversial, and essential activities for severely disabled persons. There are questions about consumer self-help groups which need to be answered, including (1) how well does self-help work? (2) what does it cost? and (3) are there unintended consequences associated with self-help activities? The CIL project is intended to clear up the issues surrounding this innovative, but controversial, approach to service delivery. The principal objective of CIL is to show that a consumer-based organization can deliver services which may not otherwise be provided to severely disabled persons. A peer counselor approach to problems solving is an essential difference between this project and the other projects. The project is designed to facilitate independent living within the community for people with severe disabilities as well as to provide assistance in vocational exploration and job placement. CIL has developed and expanded its services to help clients establish eligiblity for services, find attendants and transportation, learn financial management and self-care, and find independent living situations in the com- munity. The experience of CIL staff members in serving the severely disabled 30 will provide valuable information on the service gaps and economic and social barriers which confront the most severely disabled. CIL staff has identified many service gaps, in response to which wheelchair repair, attendant referral, financial advocacy, and employment services have been created. Peer counselors serve as the link between existing services and the identification of new services. With client involvement, CIL hopes to see the development of new services in close cooperation with the Department of Vocational Rehabilitation and other service agencies. Possible examples of such services include ex- panded housing programs, transportation services, and training of health professionals. One of CIL's major thrusts has been in the area of deinstitutionalization. Deinstitutionalization is a long and arduous process, involving a myriad of resources, many of which are not known by the institutionalized person. A difficult problem for many institutionalized individuals is the accumulation of enough funds to move out of an institution. The greater percentage of the funds that support an individual while he is institutionalized go directly to the institution. Under SSI, an individual receives only $25 a month to cover personal needs, i.e., toilet articles, clothing, ect. This makes it extremely difficult to accumulate the necessary funds to move into a non- congregate care setting. The psychological adjustment is another difficult barrier to overcome. This is especially true for individuals who have been institutionalized since an early age. One of the primary contributors to this problem is the way decisions are made in institutional settings. Most decisions made in institutional settings are made without consulting the individual affected by the decision. This lack of experience in participating in or making decisions adversely affects the individual when he attempts to begin a life 31 of independence. In cases such as this there exists a real need for some types of assistance in making a transition from custodial care to independent living. The CIL project feels there are four critical areas to be dealt with in making this transition: (1) adequate and accessible housing, (2) adequate and accessible transportation, (3) adequate care, and (4) counsel- ing on how to organize and plan for these services. The first three services are available if an individual has the knowledge and fortitude to persevere through the endless paperwork and the sometimes long delays. The fourth ingredient is rarely available, and thus the acquisition and retention of the first three are difficult. It has- been CIL's experience that attendant care is the most problematic of the four issues listed above. The problems of attendant care are vast. The initial problem is finding adequately trained attendants. This is not an easy task, partially because of the type of work and also because of the salary that accompanies the job. In most instances, salaries are paid on an hourly basis and at a minimal wage scale. Secondary to this problem is that of finding the quality of attendants normally found to be necessary. Because a wheelchair-bound individual needs attendant care only at certain times of the day, and because. salary for an attendant is based on hourly wages, most handicapped individuals utilize more than one attendant a day. It is not uncommon to have one attendant for morning needs, one for evening meal preparation, etc., and one to aid in getting ready for bed. A tertiary problems is finding replacements wheneven an attendant is sick, takes a vacation or quits. All of these problems require the disabled person to become a good supervisor/employer. That is, the person must be able to instruct the 32 attendant, manage the attendant's time, keep accurate records of the various attendants' time in order to pay each attendant his proper wages, and dismiss an attendant if the need arises. Thus, a program such as CIL provides a needed service for those wishing to increase their independence. Finding adequate and accessible housing is always a problem for the disabled. CIL has found it necessary to provide a housing referral service which keeps a list of housing that meets the needs of the handicapped. Even with this referral service, adequate housing cannot always be found. This may be because of cost or because of distance from work, shopping centers, or other needed services. The problem of cost can sometimes be overcome by sharing an apartment or house with other disabled persons. Accessible housing is not a problem that is going away; on the contrary, it is a problem that requires constant monitoring. CIL advocates that all new units be made accessible for all people. However, due to lack of community understanding and support, most new housing continues to be prohibitive to the severely disabled. Because of this, many disabled people are restricted to those areas of the city or community where accessible housing exists. Sometimes this creates hardships for those whose work is a considerable distance from where they live. Transportation needs are being met with greater frequency than in the past. Many service delivery agencies provide accessible transportation to those who utilize their services. The Department of Rehabilitation in California provides transportation for those clients who need the transportation in order to carry out their rehabilitation plan. However, transportation for non- service-oriented activities is not always readily available. CIL attempts to fill these gaps through its van program. It also has an automobile alteration 33 service which alters automobiles (mostly vans) for use by the physically disabled. CIL is moving toward a closer working relationship with various service delivery agency. This is a adeparture from its previous posture of non- alliance with what was perceived to be the inflexible, recalcitrant system. However, over the course of this project, CIL staff have begun to work more closely with many service delivery agencies, and this, plus other changes, has caused the staff to change their posture. One of the changes involves the selection of clients from the Extended Evaluation category of the Department of Rehabilitation. Originially, CIL had as one of its objectives the selection of clients who had been rejected by the Department of Rehabilitation on the basis of severity of disability. However, since CIL began its project, the state agency has changed its emphasis and now places priority on serving the severely disabled. The result of this change in focus is that many people who formerly would have been rejected for services are now placed in Extended Evaluation status because of the uncertainty surrounding their vocational capabilities. CIL now provides peer counseling service to those severely disabled people in Extended Evaluation in order to improve the prospects for success in the rehabilitation system. This move is also seen as an opportunity to strengthen the working relationship between the two entities. Policy Implications. Part B of Title VII of P.L. 95-602 authorizes grants for the establishment and operation of independent living centers. The model for this legislation is the Center for Independent Living in Berkeley, California. Obviously, future centers that might be developed over the country with Title VII funds have a well established model in the Berkeley Center. 34 Summary of ILR Demonstration Projects Project Location Area of Concern Emphasis Geography Age Emphasis Application to P.L. 95-602 New York Medically-Oriented -Continuing health care Urban All ages - Part A, Section Physical Restor- -Equipment for greater Some under 705(a) (8) of Institute of ation Services independence and life 18 Title VII Rehabilitation maintenance Medicine/New York Severely handi- -Physical therapy State Rehabili- capped persons -Rehabilitation tation Agency with progressive counseling diseases -ADL training -Suitable housing, Functional levels recreation, trans- decline over time portation, prevoca- tional services, Long-term services genetic counseling Seattle Medically-Oriented -Group advocacy Urban All ages, Part A, Section Physical Restor- -Housing, Transpor- many 705 (a) (8) of University of ation Services tation, attendant elderly Title VII Washington, care Department of Physically dis- -Individual advocacy Rehabilitation abled clients -Specialized service during and after delivery VR services -Counselors serve 15- 20 clients with similar disabilities Salt Lake City Services to severe- -To serve clients who Urban 18-64 Part A of ly handicapped have been denied VR Title VII State Rehabili- persons through the services tation Agency State Vocational -To serve severely Rehabilitation handicapped clients Agency referred directly to project Evaluation of the -Completion of the potential demand IWRP for ILR services -Plan of services, outline. of who will provide these services -Goal client is seeking to achieve -Maximum benefits attained in ILR -Entry into ILR San Antonio Service to multi- -Team approach Urban 18-64 Part C of ple handicapped -Assessment of indi- Title VII Texas Commission blind clients vidual needs by team for the Blind consisting of coun- Evaluation of the selor, teacher, place- extent of ILR ment specialist, etc. services -Services to overcome experiential handicaps as a result of sens- ory deprivations -Evaluation of ILR needs of blind- multiple-handicapped persons Berkeley To demonstrate -To provide services Urban College Part B of consumer organi- which may not be Title VII Consumer Self- zation can available through Help Organization deliver/provide other agencies Center for needed ILR -Utilization of a Independent Living services peer counselor approach to solve To assess problems problems of severely handi- -Advocacy capped individuals from a different theoretical per- spective III. THE CLIENTS The clients served by the projects were, as will be shown, the most severely disabled. The types of clients varied considerably, however, on such factors as age, race, type of disability, and educational level. The present chapter will explore many of these differences, and similaries. The next chapter will explore the progress made by these clients over time. Both chap- ters point out, however, that the clients vary greatly in characteristics and needs, thus requiring highly individualized and unique rehabilitation plans. Sex, Age, Race and Education The 362 clients served by the projects were largely male (60% males, 40% females) with a mean age of 38. The racial composition varies somewhat from the general U.S. population, with a slightly higher preponderence of minority groups. These figures must be looked at by project as the exact composition varied from project to project, usually according to the population character- istics of the geographical location of the projects. For example, the Berkeley project had a slightly younger group than other projects as many of the Berkeley clients attended a nearby university. There was a relatively high number of Blacks (25%) and Hispanics (5.6%). On the other hand, Seattle clients were mostly white (89%) and, on the average, older than the general client population, primarily because many older disabled people received services in the last year of the Seattle project. New York, Salt Lake and San Antonio had, proportionately, many Hispanics, few Blacks, and were similar in age composition (about 38 years old). Only San Antonio had slightly more females than males. Table 1 summarizes the number of clients per project, while Appendix Table A-1 presents the age, sex and racial composition of the population by project. 36 Table 1 Number of Clients by Project, All Years Project Number of Clients Berkeley 82 New York 62 Salt Lake 71 San Antonio 46 Seattle 101 Total 362 The educational attainment of clients was, on the average, lower than that for the general population, although the percent of clients who had more than high school education was equivalent to the general population (see Figure 1). Generally, client educational status was better than status of the VR population. Why this is so is unknown, but will be explored in the final report. The projects then, are dealing with a population with low education compounding their problems in many areas. particularly in seeking and securing employment. This, taken with the fack that many are minorities, and the fact that they are very severely disabled, make this group an espe- cially challenging one for the projects. Primary and Secondary Disability The majority of persons listed "three or more impaired limbs" as their primary disability (56.8 percent) (see Appendix Tables A-2 and A-3). This percentage would be even higher (65.4%), except that San Antonio specialized in working with the blind (100 percent of their population). One upper and one lower limbs impaired (hemiplegia) accounted for 8.5 percent of the population, as did one or both lower limbs impaired. The remaining 26% were mostly blind (15%) or otherwise physically handicapped (6.5%). Overall, the large majority consisted of physically impaired persons. 37 70 65% U.S. 60 55% 51% Clients 49% VR VR 50 44% Clients 40 35% U.S. 29% 28% 30 U.S. Clients 20 13% VR 10 0 Less than High school More than high school or more high school Figure 1 Educational Attainment, All Clients at Intake, VR and U.S. Population 38 The secondary disabilities of this population made them even more difficult to work with effectively. Over half of the clients listed secondary disabilities. Of those listing secondary disabilities, 16 percent were mentally ill, 9 percent were mentally retarded, 15 percent had endocrine or cardiac disorders, or epilepsy, and 14 percent had respiratory, digestive or genito-urinary disorders. Even among those whose primary disability was not listed as three or more limbs, 13.1 percent listed this condition as a secondary disability. If this figure is added to those with the same primary disability, it can be seen that a vast majority of the population had disabilities involving three or more limbs. The other secondary disability listed included other physical impairments (16%), vision or hearing impairments (10%), and speech or other impairments (7%). This, taken with the wide diversity of other conditions, shows that this was indeed a very severely disabled population. Severity of Disability A number of criteria were used to determine severity of disability: the Barthel Scale; the PULSES profile; the presence of other severe functional limitations, and; a combination of poor employment history, severe communi- cation disorder, old age or poor education with a substantial disability. Barthel scores indicated that 246 of the 362 clients were severely disabled. This scale was designed to be used primarily with the physical disabled as a general indicator of a client's independence in mobility and activities of daily living. As many clients in the project were physically disabled, it was expected that many, but by no means all, clients would be rated as severely disabled by this scale. The figures indicate that over two-thirds of the clients were severely disabled according to Barthels. 39 6% Blind/ 7% PULSES Multiply handi- 10% capped Other Severe limitation 9% Substantial disa- bility with other fac- tors (See below) 68% Barthel Figure 2 Primary Basis for a Rating of Severe Disability* All Client Groups, at Intake * Bases were ranked, so it is important to note that the categories overlapped a great deal. Only primary bases are presented in this figure. The rankimgs were as follows: a) Barthel b) PULSES c) Blind/multiply handicapped d) Other severe limitations e) Substantial disability combined with poor employment history, severe communication disorder, old age, and/or poor education 40 Of the 116 clients who were not rated as severely disabled by Barthels, 27 were rated as such according to the PULSES profile (182 of all clients were severely disabled according to PULSES). The PULSES profile was designed to be used with the chronically ill and aged population to test their physical functioning in a restricted environment. As most clients were not in "restricted environments" (e.g. hospitals, nursing homes, institutions), it was not expected that PULSES would account for most of the remaining clients. Twenty-two of the remaining 89 clients were blind/multiply handicapped. All of these clients were from the San Antonio projects. The combination of blindness with another disability leads to many limitations, and it is generally agreed that such clients are severely disabled. In an attempt to determine the characteristics of those clients not rated as severely disabled by the aforementioned measures, data on client functioning were analyzed. Thirty-eight of the clients had a number of the other severe functional limitations on which data were collected (getting in/out of bed; sitting for more than one hour; lifting or carrying weights of about 10 pounds; stooping, bending or kneeling; reaching with both arms; using hands and fingers; taking medicine operating household appliances; using the telephone; operating a T.V., radio, or stereo, and; admitting visitors to the home). The remaining 29 clients had a substantial handicapping condition in combination with a poor employment history, severe communication disorder, older age or poor education. This section provides for an overview of why the clients were severely disabled. Chapter V (problem areas for clients) shows how their severe limitations were reflected in specific problems faced by them. 41 Income and Employment One would expect household income to be relatively low because of the mobility or lack of opportunity to work, or to obtain high paying jobs. The data in Table 2 and Appendix Table A-4 bear out this point. The mean client income was $3,516. The mean household income of clients ($7,800 in 1976) is about 70 percent of that for the general population in 1976, and that percentage decreased to 63 percent in 1978. This is probably due to the inability of income mainte- nance programs and lower paying jobs (which this population usually get, if employed) to keep pace with inflation. If the figures are broken down by race and sex, it can be seen that white males have larger average incomes than any other group, followed by white females, than black males and females, followed by other groups. (See Appendix Table A-5). This further emphasizes the difficulties encountered by handicap- ped persons who are in the racial minorities. Since, proportionately, there are a larger number of racial minority groups in the program, this problem becomes a significant one. Table 2 Mean Household Income, 1976, 1977, 1978 All Clients and U.S. Population Clients U.S. Population 1976 $7,800 $11,165 1977 $8,160 $12,063 1978 $8,100 $12,787* * Estimated, based on 1977 figure times a 6 percent inflation factor. Actual mean is probably higher, but was not avail- able at the time this report was written. 42 The findings of low income in general are not surprising in light of the fact that this population consists of persons thought not to have a vocational potential. They must rely heavily on income of other family members or on income maintenance programs for support. The findings do, however, point to the financial need of this population The fact that families of this group rely heavily upon non-wage income as demonstrated in Table 3. Table 3 Largest Source of Family Income All Clients, 1978 Number Percent Money, wages and salary 100 29 Income from self-employment 3 1 Social Security Disability Insurance 91 27 Supplemental Security Income 74 22 Old Age Survivors Insurance 12 3 Unemployment, Veteran's, private pensions, workmen's compensation 24 7 Other dividends 23 7 Aid to Families with Dependent Children 8 2 Railroad Retirement and Disability Benefits 3 1 Non Applicable/Don't know 3 1 341 100 Most of the clients relied on SSI or SSDI as their primary source of income (65 percent). (See Figure 3.) About one-half of all clients also listed this as their family's primary source of income. Less than one-third listed wages, salary and income from self-employment as their largest source of family income. Of those persons, very few (5 percent) listed such income as their own (clients) primary source of income. (Appendix Table A-6 presents this data broken down by sex and race.) 43 Surprisingly, 18 percent of all clients were employed at intake. This includes full time, parttime, and sheltered employment. About one-third have never worked, while 47 percent have worked in the past, but were not presently employed. Appendix Table A-7 breaks this information down by sex and race. The fact that many have never worked, taken with low average educational attainment means that many in this group have low or no work skills. If employment is to be a goal for these persons, extensive vocational training will have to be provided. Comparison to the General VR Population If one compares the characteristics of the project population to those of clients rehabilitated in the VR program (see Rehabilitation Services Administration Information Memoranda RSA-IM-77-71, June 8, 1977, and RSA-IM- 77-21, December 22, 1976), one can see many differences. Obviously, the project population is more severely disabled. Fourty-one percent of those rehabilitated in the VR program were listed as severely disabled. The entire project population was at least severely disabled and many were totally dependent according to PULSES and Barthel indicators. Severity may also be reflected in the fact that 57 percent of the project population had primary disabilities involving three or more limbs, while only 1.5 percent of the VR population had such a condition. The clients in the projects were older (mean age of 38 as compared to 32 in the VR population). Sex and racial characteristics were almost identical. The project population had a significantly higher percentage of clients who had completed a high school education (55 percent VS. 42 per- cent). The mean family income was substantially higher for the project population ($7,800 vs. $3,200). 44 The reasons for the income differences are not entirely clear. Perhaps part of the reason concerns the fact that the definition of income for use in the R-300 (the survey of the VR population) is vague. It is left to the client to decide what is and what is not income (salary, SSI, SSDI, etc.). Some guidelines are given, but in the end, the decision is up to the client. "It is suggested that the counselor make no effort to give the individual any instructions or definitions as to what constitutes a 'family' or what should be in- cluded or excluded from 'income,' but merely ask the question " (RSA R-300 Manual, 1974). The counselor may use some guidelines which are included in the R-300 Manual if the client asks questions, but he is not required to do SO. In the projects, the sources of income are listed on the reporting form and gives the client a better understanding of what is considered income. A more important factor may be related to the number of clients living with parents or others. Only 8 percent of the project population lived alone, while twenty-four percent of the VR population lived alone. Potential house- hold income should be lower for one-person households because of fewer potential wage earners. For project clients living alone, mean income was only $3,630. It may also be the case that more of the project clients than VR are living with parents as their degree of severity disability leaves them highly dependent. It is known that about one-third of the project clients live with parents. The comparable statistic for the VR population is unavail- able. If a higher percentage of project clients are living with parents it may help to explain their higher mean household income. Parents are more likely to have been on the work force longer and at higher income levels than spouses and others the client may be living with, and certainly would be higher than client's income if he were living alone. 45 Some support was found for this argument. Mean household income for those living alone was substantially lower than for those living with others $3,630 VS. $10,040). If this difference holds true for the VR population, it helps to explain the mean income differences between project and VR clients as the VR population has three times the number of project clients living alone. IV. PROBLEM AREAS FOR CLIENTS The clients who were in the projects were more severely disabled than those in the regular vocational rehabilitation program. Typically, they remained unserved by the vocational rehabilitation agencies. Consequently, little was known about their needs and to what degree their functioning in society could be improved. The Comprehensive Service Needs Study made one of the first attempts to determine their needs, and demonstrated that need was great, especially in the areas of transportation, equipment, service provision and in household management. Information on needs collected by service providers can substantially add to the knowledge base on the most severely disabled population. Information on change over time can demonstrate how independent living rehabilitation programs can improve client functioning, and which areas remain a problem for clients even after the provision of services. The projects of the present study collected client information on needs and problem areas on a yearly basis for each client in the program. This information was collated by The Urban Institute and analyzed to provide information on what problem areas can be expected in serving the client group and how needs can be reduced through the provision of services. The results verify the finding of the Comprehensive Needs Study that the needs of this population are great. They also show that significant improvements can be made for clients in their functioning, and that several problem areas remain, even after extensive rehabilitation service has been provided. 47 To aid the reader in understanding the masses of data collected, this chapter has been broken down into several areas, as follows: Equipment Needs Service Needs Household Management Needs Social Interaction Transportation Architectural Barriers Living Status Equipment A major barrier to the ability of a client to leave his home and engage in work or social activities is the lack of needed equipment. If equipment such as weheelchairs, helpers for limbs, hearing aids and the like are not in the possession of clients who need them then those clients will be restricted not only in social functioning, but also in basic life activities such as getting in and out of bed, going from room to room, or being able to communi- cate with others. Equipment needed then, may be used as a partial indicator of functioning. If client equipment needs are basic (helper for limbs, wheelchairs, etc.) it would generally indicate limited functioning. If, on the other hand, they are not basic (e.g., specially equipped autos, artificial limbs for cosmetic purposes), it can be assumed that most of his minimal functioning is intact. This section will explore equipment needs by examining both the number and types of client equipment needs. It is important in this section to note the difference between "need" and "unmet need" as the protocol questionnaire asked questions on each. "Needs" will refer to equipment needed by the 48. client regardless of whether or not he has them. "Unmet need" will refer to equipment needed, but not obtained by the client. Unmet need is a more potent indicator of client status as it relates more directly to client problems or limitations. This chapter will focus on unmet needs, although reference will occasionally be made to need. The protocol asked questions on need for and use of the following types of equipment. Helper for upperlimb Manual wheelchair Helper for lower limb Trapeze or bathtub lift Artifical limbs/hands Hospital bed Back brace Specially equipped autos or Cane, crutches, walker other motorized vehicles Transfer chair or board Aids for vision Typewriters Seeing eye dog Tape recorders Hearing aids Ramps Speech aids Special telephone equipment Respiratory aids Motorized wheelchair Dentures Others The first step in the analysis was to examine the number of unmet equipment needs. Three methods of analysis were used--Mean number of unmet needs, range in the number of needs, and number of clients who experienced a reduction in the number of unmet needs. All approaches show that unmet equipment needs were reduced over the years, and indicate that the projects were successful in meeting such needs, although a number of needs remained. Table 4 presents the mean number of unmet equipment needs over the years. Table 4 Mean Number of Unmet Equipment Needs, at Intake and in 2nd or 3rd Year 1976 and 1977 intake groups (combined) 1976 intake groups intake 1.55 intake 1.19 2nd year 0.79 3rd year 0.85 49 The mean number of unmet needs decreased substantially over the years, as verified though the use of correlated t tests (for the'76 + '77 intake groups, t = 7.08, df = 276, significant at .05 level; for the '76 intake group, t = 2.26, df = 128, significant at .05 level). A separate analysis on the '76 group between years 2 and 3 showed no siginificant difference in mean number of unmet needs (t = -0.43, df = 128, not significant). It appears that the projects met most client equipment needs in the first year of the client's program. It is also of interest to note that the projects were able to reduce the needs of the 1977 intake group to the same level after the first year as the 1976 intake group, even though the average need of the '77 group was substantially higher (2.10 for the '77 group at intake as compared to 1.19 for the '76 group at intake). There are two possible reasons for the discrepancy. Either needs were actually the same at intake for both groups, but were not fully reported for the '76 group, or the needs were different because of a more severely disabled population. The characteristics of the populations were similar in terms of demographics, and type and degree of severity. This casts doubt on the latter hypothesis. It is likely then that the number of needs were the same, but were not identified at intake and hence not re- ported. As projects gained experience in identifying need, they were more likely to report them at intake. Finally, it should be noted that an average of 0.85 unmet equipment needs existed for the 1976 intake group in their third year. Part of the reason for this is the appearance of non basic needs in latter years. As basic needs are met (wheelchairs, helpers for limbs, ect.) other needs may become possible. For example, some clients would not consider a specially 50 equipped auto a need until their necessary helpers for limbs become available. More discussion on basic and non basic needs is presented when types of needs are discussed, hence this point will not be elaborated here. Table 5 presents the number of clients with unmet service needs, by number of unmet equipment needs. Table 5 Number of Clients with Unmet Equipment Needs, by Number of Unmet Equipment Needs 1976 and 1977 Intake Group Number of Unmet 1976 intake group 1977 intake group Equipment Needs Intake 3rd year Intake 3rd year 0 47 50 25 66 1 23 31 22 25 2 7 13 19 13 3 10 7 14 6 4 6 3 11 3 5 6 1 6 1 6 3 - 4 - 7 - - 1 - 10 - - 1 - As can be seen, the range in number of equipment needs is quite large from 0 to 10. The shift in range in numbers of unmet equipment needs is obvious. Clients in general had fewer needs after being in the program for any length of time. The data verify the analysis of the means presented above. That is, needs were reduced. The 1977 intake group had more needs at intake, but were reduced to the same level as the '76 group, presumably because of the projects gained experience in need identification. It also verifies that substantial unmet needs remain for these clients. The most important fact brought out by Table 5 is that there is a wide range in the number of equipment needs by the clients. This fact taken with the finding that the kinds of equipment needs were varied (to be presented later in this section) indicates that the client group was diversified, requiring highly individualized rehabilitation plans. 51 To analyze unmet equipment needs on a more individual level, Table 6 was constructed to show how many clients experienced need reduction. As can be seen in the first year of service provision, 44% experienced a reduction in the number of needs, while 40% remained the same and 16% experienced an increase. (Of those who remained the same, about three-quarters had no needs at intake or in year 2.) The later two percentages may be a result of change in perceived need as the client progresses through the rehabilitation program. That is, as the client has his basic needs fulfilled, other, non basic needs emerged. Information to verify this contention is presented below. Table 6 Number and Percent of Clients who Experienced Change in the Number of Unmet Equipment Needs 1976 and 1977 intake groups New Change Number Percent Reduction 118 44 No change 108* 40 Increase 45 16 *75 of these clients had no unmet needs In general, then, it has been shown that the number of unmet equipment needs were reduced over the time the client was in the project, which indicates improved client status. Some questions remain however, on why certain clients had more needs after being in the projects, what types of needs existed, and how those needs changed over time. These questions can be answered by analyzing the types of unmet needs reported on the protocol data form. There were a variety of equipment needs by the clients. The actual number of each type of needs were small, and to present them may lead to misleading comparisons. However, by looking at general trends one can discern 52 a definite pattern concerning the change in types of unmet needs over the years. Two categories of needs are presented below-basic and non basic. The Urban Institute created these categories only for presentation in this report. They are not, in reality, mutually exclusive, but rather, general categorizations. The inclusion of certain items in one or the other cate- gory may be open to question, and because some items are listed as non basic, it is not meant to say that they are not important, or that for some people they are not basic. For example, an artificial limb may be important for some persons, but more often than not the limb is provided for cosmetic purposes it is usually not essential for basic life functioning. The categories of basic and non basic equipment needs are as follows: Basic Non Basic Helper for upper limb Artificial limbs Helper for lower limb Typewriter Back brace Tape recorder Cane, crutches, walker Ramp Transfer chair or board Special telephone equipment Motorized wheelchair Hospital bed Wheelchair, manual Specially equipped autos Trapeze or bathtub lift Seeing eye dog Aids for vision Dentures Hearing aids Speech aids Respiratory aids Mean numbers of basic and non basic equipment needs are essentially the same at intake (basic needs mean = .70, non basic needs mean = .78, t = 1.23, df = 270, n.s.). At year two however, there were fewer unmet basic needs (mean = .12) than non basic needs (mean = .23) (t = 3.09, df = 270, sig.). It was also found that more non basic than basic needs emerged from year 1 to year 2 (non basic mean = .25, basic mean = .15, t = 2.23, df = 270, sig.). 53 No significant change occurred between years two and three for the 1976 intake group. It appears then that the basic needs were focused upon by the projects, and that as those needs are met, more non basic needs tend to emerge. Information on specific types of equipment needed is not presented here as the numbers of clients in need of each type of equipment are small and figures on them could be misleading. It can be said, however, that all equip- ment types were listed at least once, and the most frequently reported unmet equipment needs at intake were wheelchairs, transfer boards, trapeze or bath lifts, ramps, specially equipped autos, special telephone equipment and hospital beds. As was demonstrated previously, the basic needs tended to be met more often than the non basic needs. In fact, only non basic needs increased in frequency over the years--typewriters, tape recorders and specially equipped autos. The projects were successful in getting needed equipment to clients. The mean number of equipment needs were significantly reduced over the years and most clients experienced a reduction in the number of types of equipment needed. A significant number of needs remained for some clients, even after three years, but an analysis of the types of unmet needs re- vealed that this was largely due to the fact that after the basic equip- ment needs were met, new needs emerged because of the clients' increased potential to use them. Service Needs Unmet service needs followed the same general patterns as unmet equip- ment needs, but there was generally even greater improvement in this area. Basic medical and physical needs were almost eliminated while other needs were reduced. 54 The protocol questionnaire asked questions on need for and provision of the following types of services: Surgery Vocational placement Hospitalization Receipt of tools, equipment Physical therapy Psychological therapy Occupational therapy Home modifications Dental therapy Social services Speech or hearing therapy Therapetic recreation Other medical treatment Sex therapy or education Visiting nurses Family member counseling Prosthetic devices Family member training Vocational counseling Other Vocational training Educational cost As with equipment needs, three ways to examine the number of unmet service needs will be presented--mean numbers of unmet needs, range in the number of needs, and number of clients who experienced decreases in the number of unmet needs. The figures will show that unmet service needs were reduced over the years, which indicates that the projects were successful in meeting client needs, although there were a number of unmet needs even after a client had been in the program for three years. Table 7 presents the mean number of unmet service needs over the years. Table 7 Means number of unmet service needs at intake and in second or third year 1976 and 1977 intake groups (combined) 1976 intake group Intake 4.81 Intake 3.98 2nd Year 2.12 3rd Year 2.13 The mean number of unmet service needs were cut in half over the years. Correlated t tests verified that a significant number of unmet needs had been met (for the '76 and '77 intake groups, t=11.4, df=267, signifi- cant at .05 level; for the '76 intake group, t=5.08, df 128, significant 55 at .05 level). A separate analysis showed that no significant reduction in mean number of unmet needs occurred between the second and third year for the 1976 intake group (means were 2.31 for second and 2.13 for third years, t=0.80, df-128, not significant at .05 level). As with equipment needs, then, most need reduction occurred in the first year the client was in the program. The projects were successful in reducing the number of unmet service needs in the first client year for the '77 intake group to the same level as the '76 intake group in year 2, even though the need of the '77 grouping was greater at intake. The unmet needs of the '77 group was reduced from 6.2 to 2.03, while the reduction for the '76 intake group was from 4.26 to 2.31. It is probable, as with service needs, that the reported need at intake was greater for the '77 intake group because of projects' ability to identify needs earlier, due to gained experience in problem identification. As with equipment needs, there was a substantial number of unmet service needs for some clients even after three years (mean number of service needs was 2.13 in the third year). Part of the reason concerned the appearance of non basic service needs in the third year. A discussion of the types of service needs will show that almost all basic service needs were met while other service needs either remained or appeared after the first year. Table 8 presents the number of clients with unmet service needs by number of unmet service needs. As can be seen, the range in number of unmet service needs is very large--from 0 to 18. The shift in the number of unmet needs per client is great. Clients in general had fewer needs after being in the program for any length of time. The data in this table 56 Table 8 Number of clients with unmet service needs by number of unmet service needs, 1976 and 1977 intake groups Number of unmet 1976 intake group 1977 intake group service needs intake 3rd Year intake 2nd Year 0 22 38 9 44 1 12 23 6 16 2 12 11 8 10 3 12 16 10 17 4 7 8 12 10 5 5 8 6 7 6 6 4 7 6 7 5 3 4 2 8 3 1 16 - 9 4 2 5 - 10 1 - 4 2 11 3 - 1 - 12 3 - 2 - 13 - - 2 - 14 5 - 4 - 15 2 - 4 I 16 - - 2 - 17 - 1 - - 18 - - 1 - 57 also verify the analysis of the mean number of unmet needs presented above. Needs were reduced substantially, and the projects appeared more successful in reducing the needs of the '77 intake group than the '76 intake group, presumably because of gained experience. A substantial number of unmet needs existed even for the clients in the program for three years. The uniqueness of table 8 shows that there was a wide diversity in the numbers of unmet service needs by the clients. This finding taken with the fact that the kinds of needs were varied, further indicates the large diversity of the client group, and indicates that rehabilitation plans for them must be highly individualized. To analyze unmet service needs on a more individual level, table 9 was constructed to show how many clients experienced a reduction in the number of unmet needs. Seventy percent experienced a reduction, while 13% remained the same and 12% increased in number of unmet needs. The latter two percentages may be a result of change in perceived need as the clients progressed through their rehabilitation program. That is, as basic needs were fulfilled, other needs emerged. It is not possible to determine this with absolute certainty, but information on change over time in type of severe needs seem to support this contention. In general, then, it has been demonstrated that reduction in unmet service needs followed the same general pattern as reduction in unmet equipment needs, but that reductions were even greater for service needs. 58 Table 9 Number and percent of clients who experienced change in the number of unmet service needs 1976 and 1977 intake groups Need Change Number Percent Reduction 189 70 No change 50* 18 Increase 32 12 *23 of these clients have no unmet needs The number of unmet service needs was reduced which indicates improved client status. As with equipment needs, questions remain on why certain clients had more needs after being in the projects, what type of needs existed, and how these needs changed over time. An analysis of the types of unmet service needs and then changes over time will help to answer these questions. The numbers of unmet needs by type of service are presented in table 10. In absolute numbers, the greatest unmet service needs were for vocational counseling, vocational training, vocational placement, psychological therapy and therapeutic recreation, followed by physical therapy, occupational therapy, home modifications, social services and family member counseling. Other areas of great need included other medical treatment, visiting nurses, sex therapy and family member training. Areas of least need in- cluded surgery, hospitalization, dental therapy, speech or hearing therapy, prostatic devices, educational costs, receipt of tools, equipment or license, and other. Over the years, substantial progress was made in reducing all needs. In fact, the only needs that were not reduced by one-half were: speech or hearing therapy, prosthetic device, vocational training, educational cost, vocational placement, home modifications, social services, sex therapy or education, therapeutic recreation and family member counseling. 59 Table 10 Number of unmet service needs by type of service 1976 and 1977 intake groups 1976 intake group 1977 intake group Type of unmet service need Intake 3rd year Intake 2nd Year Surgery 2 1 6 3 Hospitalization 1 - 8 1 Physical Therapy 26 11 49 9 Occupational Therapy 21 9 45 8 Dental Therapy 15 7 27 10 Speech or Hearing Therapy 7 4 11 2 Other Medical Treatment 20 - 23 1 Visiting Nurses 21 5 24 6 Prosthetic Device 10 8 17 12 Vocational Counseling 39 16 53 9 Vocational Training 31 19 47. 21 Educational Cost 19 15 20. 10 Vocational Placement 30 23. 36 20 Receipt of Tools, Equipment or License 12 3 10 5 Psychological Therapy 30 12 34 17 Home Modifications 23. 25 47 31 Social Services 23 14 39 9 Therapeutic Recreation 31 29 55 21 Sex Therapy or Education 23. 14 29 21 Family Member Counseling 22 13 32 12 Family Member Training 21 6 22. 1 Other 8 3 6 3 60 As with equipment needs, service needs were divided into basic and non-basic to determine if it was the basic needs which tended to be met first, with non-basic needs emerging later. The service needs are cate- gorized as follows: Basic and Non-basic Needs Basic Non-Basic Surgery Dental Therapy Hospitalization Speech or Hearing Therapy Physical Therapy Vocational Counseling Occupational Therapy Vocational Training Other Medical Treatment Educational Costs Visiting Nurses Vocational Placement Receipt of Tools Psychological Therapy* Home Modifications Social Services Therapeutic Recreation Sex Therapy Family Member Counseling Family Member-Training *Included as non-basic because of extremely low incidence of Mental/emotional disorders in the client group. Psychological therapy, while important, tended to be a supportive service for the population. The results of the analysis were more complicated than those of equip- ment needs. There tended to be more non-basic needs at intake in absolute number. When one looks at number of needs not met after one year of service provision, it was found that there were fewer non-met basic needs than non basic needs (0.12 vs 1.1). This does not prove that basic needs were more frequently met, because there were fewer basic needs at intake. However, far more non-basic needs emerged over the years, than basic. The mean number of non-basic needs which emerged were 0.66, and the mean number of basic needs were 0.11 (t=7.91, df=270, sig.). There were 600% more non-basic than basic emerged needs. Like equipment needs, then, 61 non-basic needs emerged at a greater rate than basic needs. Almost all basic needs were met, while a substantial number of non-basic needs re- mained after one year of service. The figures followed the same pattern between years two and three for the '76 intake group. The projects were successful in getting needed services to clients. The means number of unmet service needs were significantly reduced over the years, and most clients experienced a reduction in the number of services needed. Some needs remained, even in the third year. An analysis of types of unmet needs revealed, however, that this was due to the emergence of non-basic needs, after the basic needs had been met. Types of needs varied greatly from client to client, but greatest needs at intake were for vocational counseling, vocational training, vocational placement, psycholog- ical therapy and therapeutic recreation. Areas of least need reduction over the years included the need for therapeutic recreation, home modifications, vocational placement, educational cost, and prosthetic devices. Household Management Needs For many severely disabled persons, complete independence may not be possible. Some will always be dependent upon others for assistance in house- hold management activities such as financial management, shopping, preparing meals, and so forth. However, by providing those services, the quality of life for these clients will be improved. For example, provision of these services may prevent the institutionalization of a person, or it may allow a person the time to seek employment or attend school, or permit one to move to a setting where employment or school opportunities are better. An important piece of information for independent living rehabilitation programs, then, is how many clients need assistance and what type of assistance is needed. 62 Data were collected concerning the need for five types of household management, which are listed and described below. This information was collected only for those clients not in institutions, as those in institu- tional settings presumably secure these services when needed. Financial Management: Clients' ability to manage his assets sufficiently to meet monetary obligations. This includes, but is not limited to, bud- geting financial resources, balancing check- books, etc. This area is a consideration for disabled individuals who have been dependent on another to perform this func- tion, but are now ready to attempt living in an independent housing arrangement. Conducting Personal Clients' ability to arrange his own daily Business: schedule or to secure his own housing, transportation, etc. This is an activity which many disabled people may not have participation in. Many require assistance in arranging services to meet the requirements of living independently. Preparing Meals and This is one area in which many severely Housekeeping: disabled people are thought to require assistance. As with any household, these activities are necessary to sustain health and provide an accommodating atmosphere in which to live. Attendant Care: Assistance in such activities as getting in and out of bed, dressing toileting, bathing, etc. Attendant care is considered by dis- abled people as one of the most needed services, especially for those who have limb impairments. Shopping: The clients' ability to enter places of business and to select and purchase goods necessary to maintain an acceptable life style. Information on these needs will be analyzed in two primary ways. First, the numbers of needs and numbers of clients with needs will be examined. This will provide for a gross picture of client status at intake and their 63 changes over the years. Secondly, the types of needs will be examined. This will provide a picture of what independent living rehabilitation pro- grams will be faced with in terms of types of household management needs required to serve this population. Table 11 presents the percent of clients with needs and unmet needs, by the number of needs. Table 11 Percent of clients with household management needs and unmet needs, by number of needs. 1976, 1977 and 1978 intake groups. Number 1976 Intake Group 1977 and 1978 Intake Groups of Needs Intake 2nd Year Third Year Intake (Unmet (Unmet (Unmet (Unmet Needs Needs) Needs Needs) Needs Needs) Needs Needs) 5 0% ( 0%) 0% ( 0%) 9% ( 0%) 4% ( 0%) 4 5% ( 0%) 11% ( 0%) 13% ( 0%) 17% ( 0%) 3 18% ( 0%) 13% ( 0%) 38% ( 0%) 24% ( 1%) 2 14% ( 3%) 16% ( 2%) 12% ( 2%) 17% (12%) 1 20% (25%) 21% (13%) 9% (15%) 13% (24%) 0 42% (72%) 39% (85%) 19% (84%) 25% (63%) As can be seen, 58% of the '76 intake group and 75% of the '77 and '78 intake groups had household management needs at intake. Only 28% and 47% of those clients had unmet needs at intake. Most of those clients with unmet needs had one or two unmet needs. Over the years, the '76 intake group experienced substantial reductions in unmet needs. Only 16% had unmet needs in their third year. It is important to note that needs increased for that group while unmet needs decreased, possibly reflecting project experience in identification of needs as was the case for service and equipment needs. This possibility is supported by looking at the data of the '77 and '78 intake groups. Their percentages more closely resemble 64 the '76 clients in their third year than the '76 group at intake. Similar phenomena occurred with equipment and source needs, which further supports this possibility. Another way to look at changes over the years is to look at the number of clients who experienced increases or reduction in the number of needs over the years. This information is contained in Table 12. Table 12 Number and percentage of clients experiencing increase, decrease or no change in number of unmet household management needs 1976 and 1977 intake groups 1976 and 1977 Intake Groups, 1976 Intake Group, Intake vs. Second Year Intake VS. Third Year Fewer Same More Fewer Same More Number 74 178* 19 Number 31 80** 20 Percentage 27 66 7 Percentage 24 61 15 *162 of these clients **79 of these clients had no unmet needs. had no unmet needs. As can be seen from the data, most clients who experienced a change in number of unmet needs had a decrease. Of those who experienced an increase, it is possible that some of those additional unmet needs occurred as a result of gained experience by the project in the identifi- cation of needs (previously discussed), or because of the same possibility addressed in the service and equipment needs sections. It is possible that as more basic needs are met, new needs arise (See sections on service and equipment needs). The percentage of clients with each type of need/unmet need are presented in Table 13. 65 Table 13 Percentages of clients with needs and unmet needs 1976, 1977 and 1978 intake groups Client Group/Year 1977 and 1978 1976 Intake Group Intake Groups Intake 2nd Year 3rd Year Intake (Unmet (Unmet (Unmet (Unmet Type of Need Need Need) Need Need) Need Need) Need Need) Financial Management 17% (16%) 22% (15%) 29% (20%) 32% (23%) Personal Business 0% ( 0%) 0% ( 0%) 13% ( 1%) 8% ( 1%) Preparing meals/ Housekeeping 38% ( 0%) 37% ( 0%) 72% ( 0%) 57% ( 1%) Attendant Care 30% (25%) 42% ( 6%) 66% ( 7%) 54% (32%) Shopping 38% ( 7%) 37% ( 6%) 66% ( 6%) 56% ( 3%) As can be seen, all services were needed by a substantial portion of the clients at intake, except for assistance in conducting personal business activity. The percent of clients who needed each service increased over the years. Again, it is of interest to note that '77 and '78 intake group needs were more similar to the '76 group in their third year than at intake (presumably due to project experience in identification of needs). The projects were successful in reducing unmet needs in all cate- gories except for financial management which increased slightly, although the proportion of unmet needs to needs was reduced. This information, taken with information on number of unmet needs shows that substantial progress can be made in meeting the unmet household management needs of this population. Financial management is one area where unmet needs are least likely to be met. The reason for this is not known, but it is apparently an area which should be further explored by groups providing independent living rehabilitation services. 66 Social interaction Types of social activities engaged in, and how often a person participates in them, are good indicators of integration into the mainstream of society. As stated in the Comprehensive Service Needs Study,* "A person's career and life style are frequently the basis for judging his success or failure. An individual's development of a sense of competency is reinforced and strengthened by achievements in work, in quality of life, and in the level and satisfaction of social interaction with others. This is. no less true for the handicapped population, and the limitations imposed by a severe disability can significantly hinder the development of personality, self-concept, and competency." The Comprehensive Service Needs Study demonstrated, via a survey of the most severely disabled, that the severely handicapped are a generally isolated population, and that their participation in social activities is quite limited. Most activities are restricted to contact with family members with whom they reside. One objective of an independent living program, then, should be to increase the social participation of this population. The protocol questionnaire used in the demonstration project collected yearly information on social interaction including types of activities engaged in, and how often clients participate in them. All categories related to the one month period before the questionnaire was administered. The categories used were: Friends/relatives visit client School/Vocation Training Client visits friends/relatives Shopping Attend religious services Volunteer work Group meetings for disabled Wage/Workshop work Other group meetings Other Public entertainment Report of the Comprehensive Service Needs Study, The Urban Institute Washington, D.C., June 23, 1975. 67 From this information, two measures of improved social interaction were constructed: 1) change in percent of clients engaging in activities over time, and 2) change in frequency of participation. This section will analyze social interaction, using these measures by looking at types of activity engaged in, by constructing scores based on a summary across categories. Improvement over time can be used as an indicator of general improvement by the clients. Figure 3 displays the percent of the '76 intake clients who engaged in selected social activities at intake and in year three. As can be seen, there were increases in all categories over the years, especially in the percent of clients who visited friends. The increase in that area was great--from one half to nearly three quarters of the clients. This is a particularly impor- tant finding as that activity involves the use of many skills (transportation, mobility, using equipment, etc.) and overcoming environmental barriers--it is a good measure of client's integration of learned independent living skills. The clients increased in participation in other areas too, albeit not to the same extent. If scores are constructed based on the number of activities engaged in over time, the means presented in Table 14 are derived. Table 14 Mean number of social activities engaged in over a one month period 1976 and 1977 intake groups* '76 and '77 intake groups '76 intake group intake 2.56 intake 2.34 2nd year 2.91 2nd year 3.18 3rd year 3.07 3rd year 3.07 (t=5.93,df=267,sig) (t=4.56,df=129,sig) (t=1.23,df=129,n.s.) *Work and school activities were eliminated from analysis as they have been reported upon by a separate analysis elsewhere in this report 68 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 , Friend visits Intake 84% client 3rd Year 87% Client visits Intake 50% friend 3rd Year 72% Public Intake 36% entertainment 3rd Year 47% Intake 33% Shopping 3rd Year 58% Attend Intake 26% church 3rd Year 29% Attend meeting Intake 14% of disabled groups 3rd Year 28% Attend other Intake 7% group meetings 3rd Year 3% Volunteer !ntake 5% services 3rd Year 9% 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Percent of Clients Who Engaged in Selected Activities in Past 30 Days (1976 Intake group, at intake and 3rd year) Figure 3 69 Mean increase in number of activities engaged in was significant (at the .05 level) for all comparisons except from year 2 to year 3 for the '76 intake group. These second and third year results could be due to a ceiling effect. As clients engage in more types of activities, there are fewer left to engage in. Considering that at least three categories of activities are probably areas of low participation by the general population (volunteer services, attend group meetings--of disabled, or other), there remains a possible range in scores from 0 to 5. The ceiling effect, then, is a real possibility for explaining the non-significant increase from year 2 to 3. The information on frequency of engaging in activities show that significant increases did occur from year 2 to 3. While numbers of types of activities engaged in did not increase, frequency did, which helps to support the ceiling effect contention. Scores were constructed to measure the frequency of participation in the activities listed. There was a range of possible scores from 0 to 4 (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 or more times in the past month). These scores were added across categories and weighted as a percent of those activites actually engaged in (this was done as a "don't know" category was included as a pos- sible answer). The possible range in scores then is 0 to 100. High scores are not expected as many of the activities are types which are not engaged in frequently by the general population (previously discussed). Since similar information is not available on the general population, the impor- tant factor is degree of increase in participation, not the actual score. The mean scores on participation are presented in table 15. 70 Table 15 Mean scores on frequency of participation over a 30-day period in social activities 1976 and 1977 intake groups '76 and '77 intake groups '76 intake group intake 23.09 intake 22.60 2nd year 26.03 2nd year 28.10 3rd year 30.11 3rd year 30.47 (t=5.15,df=245,sig.) (t=4.82,df=110, sig.) (t=3.27,df=117,sig.) The means show that clients participated more frequently in social acti- vities, the longer they were in the program. Progress was made not only in the clients first year, but also from year 2 to year 3. This finding tends to support the ceiling effect contention on why the numbers of types of activities engaged in did not increase from year 2 to 3. Clients had fewer types of activities left to select from, and as a result, means did not change. Fre- quency of participation in those activites did however, increase significantly. As social intéraction is an important measure of integration into society, it can be said that the projects were successful in making progress in returning these clients into the mainstream of society. Both types of activities engaged in, and frequency of participation increased over the years. Transportation Transportation ability is of vital importance to people in general, and perhaps more important to the handicapped in particular. The ability to get needed medical services, rehabilitation, education, to get to work and to engage in recreation depends largely upon transportation ability. Without transportation, the severely handicapped are isolated and their potential for improved functioning is severely reduced. This section will examine the transportation needs and abilities of the clients in the demonstration projects. 71 Four types of transportation indicators were obtainable from data collected in the protocol questionnaire--number and percent of clients having a transportation problem, type of problem, type of transportation used, and problems in attending or wishing to attend school or work. These indica- tors will serve as the format for presentation on the transportation abilities of the clients. The data on percent of clients who have a transportation problem is presented in table 16. Table 16 Percent of Clients who have a Transportation Problem 1976 and 1977 Intake Groups 1976 and 1977 Intake Groups 1976 Intake Group Intake Year 2 Year 2 Year 3 72% 68% 65% 52% Seventy-two percent of all clients had a transportation problem at intake. Little progress was made in the first year of service in reducing the per- cent of clients with transportation problems. For those clients in the program for three years, however, substantial progress was made in reducing the percent of clients with problems (from 67% at intake to 52% in the third year). Although substantial progress was made, the majority of clients still had problems. Although the percent of clients with transportation problems remained high, progress was made in reducing the number of clients having specific types of problems (see figure 4). Roughly three quarters of the '76 intake clients reported having problems in each of the following areas: getting in and out of auto; getting on/off public transportation; traveling near Getting in and Intake 45% out of home 3rd Yr. 25% Getting in and Intake 77% out of auto 3rd Yr. <49% Getting on/off bus, Intake 84% train, other mass transit 3rd Yr. 66% Traveling near distances Intake 74% 72 for routine purposes 3rd Yr. /52% Traveling far distances Intake 77% but within urban areas 3rd Yr. >53% Traveling to Intake 68% other cities 3rd Yr. 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Percent of Clients Reporting Specified Type of Transportation Problem, If Problem Exists, Intake vs Third Year (1976 Client Group) Figure 4 73 distances, traveling far distances, and; traveling to other cities. Almost one half of those having problems had difficulty even getting in and out of ones home. By the third year significant reductions were experienced in the percent of clients having those problems. Problems in getting in and out of one's home were cut almost in half, and most other areas were reduced by one-third. One may have difficulty in transportation but still be able to get around, so these figures may not reflect significant improvement. It is possible that a client would have improved ability to get in and out of autos, for example, but that client would still have a problem. To get another picture of change in ability, types of transportation modes used by clients were compared over time. To construct a score which would be statistically comparable, a client received a rating of 1 if he used the specified type of transportation, and a zero if he did not. The mean client scores by type of transportation are presented in table 17. Significant increases were found in the areas of wheelchair use, use of regular public transportation, use of adapted buses and minibuses for the disabled, and in transportation arranged by the agency. Other areas did did not significantly change (except for walking, which decreased from year 2 to year 3, the reason for this is not known). The general tendency over all categories however, was for scores to increase. So, while every score did not significantly increase, taken as a whole, improvement did seem to occur, with those cited above (wheelchair, public transportation, adapted buses, arranged by agency) changing the most. Transportation problems related to going to or wishing to go to work or school were reduced, although the problem was still great. Seventy-eight Table 17 Mean Client Score on Transportation Used 1976 and 1977 Intake Group 1976 and 1977 Intake Groups 1976 Intake Group Type of Transportation Intake 2nd year t df 2nd year 3rd year t df Walking 0.35 0.35 0 245 0.40 0.31 2.74* 117 Wheelchair 0.70 0.75 3.03* 245 0.71 0.75 1.27 117 Drive Self 0.06 0.08 1.67 245 0.08 0.11 1.35 117 Non-Auto motorized vehicle 0.06 0.08 1.00 245 0.09 0.06 1.39 117 74 Relative or friend drives 0.72 0.76 1.37 244 0.78 0.82 1.22 117 Regular public transportation 0.17 0.25 3.18* 245 0.26 0.25 0.53 117 Adapted buses, minibuses 0.09 0.16 2.78* 245 0.07 0.17 3.09* 117 Transportation arranged by agency 0.45 0.61 5.26* 245 0.60 0.58 0.51 117 *significant at the .05 level 75. percent reported transportation problems in wishing to or going to school in the third year (this was down from 88% at intake). Of those with such a problem in the third year however, most had assistance available to them (79% of those with such a problem, up from 67% in year 1). For those desiring to or actually working, 71% still had a transportation problem in year 3 (down from 82% at intake). However, the percent of those having assistance available to them was lower for those still having a transportation problem (49%, as compared to 55% in the first year). Taken together, the data lead to the conclusion that transportation ability did improve significantly for the clients in the projects. Substantial problems remain however, and it appears that transportation problems remain one of the most serious for this population. Architectural Barriers There were three sections on the protocol questionnaire relating to architectural barriers. The first asked if architectural barriers existed in the home, and if so, what was made difficult due to the barriers, and what was needed to eliminate the barriers. The second section asked what kinds of special arrangements were, or would be necessary to work, if the client worked, or would like to work. Internal accessibility and external accessibility were 2 out of the 12 items which could be checked. The other items were not related to architectural barriers. The third section was the same as the second except that it pertained to those clients attending, or wanting to attend school. Tables 18 and 19 show that a higher number of clients had architectural barriers in the home after they had been in the program for 1 or 2 years. 76 Table 18 Table 19 Had barrier in year 2 Had barrier in year 3 Total at Total at Yes No intake Yes No intake Had barrier Yes 27 9. 36 Had barrier Yes 9 6 15 at intake No 15 187 202 at intake No 10 82 92 Total in Total in year 2 42 196 year 3 19 88 Number of clients with architectural Number of clients with architectural barriers in the home, at intake, and barriers in the home, at intake, and after 1 year after 2 years (76 and 77 intake groups) (76 intake group) A series of correlated t tests show that the number of clients with barriers in the home were not reduced significantly over the years. Scores for these tests were computed for clients in such a manner that having barriers in the home equals 1, and not having barriers equals 2. When mean scores from the '76 intake groups were compared between intake (1.64) and year 2 (1.69), the mean scores were not significantly different (t=0.62,df=129). Likewise, means between years 2 (1.71) and 3 (1.69) were compared and no significant difference was found (t = 0.33, df = 129). If will be noted that the number of clients who gained barriers over the years was quite high. These results may be an artifact of the manner in which the clients responded to the question. That is, it is possible that clients who seemed to gain architectural barriers over the years, had barrier in all years, but did not respond appropriately. Also, it is possible that as the client pro- gressed through his rehabilitation program, the expectations he had of himself changed to include activities never expected before. There may be problems in meeting those expectations (including architectural barriers). In this case, improved status is reflected in an increase in problems (or increased in architectural barriers). Finally, there is the possibility that the number of 77 clients reporting barriers increased because of the number of client who were deinstitutionalized. Presumably, few if any architectural barriers exist in the institutional setting. When a client leaves such a setting, he finds that architectural barriers do exist. That the increase in numbers of persons reporting architectural barriers may be an due to the manner in which the clients respond to the question, may be reflected in that the data on problems caused by the barriers and modifications needed to remove the barriers indicate that problems and barriers were reduced over the years (figure 5 and 6). The data of figure 4 show that the problems caused by barriers were reduced; especially for those clients in the program for three years. Figure 5 shows that the percent of clients in need of specific modifications was reduced over the years. It appears then, that although the percent of clients who report architectural barriers in the home remained high, the problems caused by barriers and number of modifications needed to reduce the barriers decreased, indicating improved client status. A second measure relating to the problems of architectural barriers concerns problems in going to or wishing to go to work and/or school. Acces- sibility to buildings was second only to transportation in this area. Eighty- three percent of all clients going to or wishing to attend school reported that external accessibility was a problem, and 79% reported that internal accessibility was a problem. For work, 70 and 66% reported external and internal accessibility problems. Responses did not change over the years. By year three, 84% reported external and internal accessibility problems for schooling. Seventy-six and seventy-two percent reported external and internal accessibility problems for work (up 4 and 3 percentage points from responses when they entered the program. R Service 57% LEGEND Getting in and out 42% of residence 41% 76 (1) +77 (1) 30% 76 (2) +77 (2) 76 (1) 58% 76 (3) Moving from 57% room to room 63% 39% 50% Going from thresh- 48% old to street 37% 34% 37% Doing home making 33% activities 39% 78 34% 75% 67% Bathing 76% 57% 62% 55% Toileting 59% 45% 33% 31% Grooming 35% 28% 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Problems Caused by Barriers in the Home, if Barriers Exist (Intakes vs 2nd and 3rd Years) Figure 5 79 60 54% 52% 50 Percent of Clients Reporting Specified Type of Modification 40 38% 30 28% 26% 24% 22% 20 13% 11% 10 8% 0 YEAR 1976 1978 1976 1978 1976 1978 1976 1978 1976 1978 TYPE OF Ramps Wider Household Elevators Ground Floor* MODIFICATION Doorways Appliances Type of Modification Needed to Eliminate Architectural Barriers in the Home if Barriers Exist (1976 intake group, 1976 and 1978) Figure 6 *Cannot modify, should move to ground floor. 80 It appears that problems can be substantially reduced in a client's home, but as might be expected, eliminating barriers in the outside environ- ment is more difficult. Recent laws require any agency or institution which receives federal funding to make modifications so that their facilities are accessible to the handicapped. Progress appears to be slow. The individual projects have little to do with making schools and places of employment accessible, so these results could have been anticipated. These results point out the great need of this group for elimination of architectural barriers in the community. Living Status This section explores the living status of the clients, as well as the patterns of change over time. Living status refers to type of housing and household living arrangements (whom the client lived with). Information from these indicators can show general client improvement as it demonstrates how many clients were deinstitutionalized, how many clients lived in "age appropriate" types of household, and how many improved or worsened in living status. As indicated, living status was compared over time to see what improve- ments had been made in that area. To make meaningful comparisons, the data were analyzed in two ways. First, the numbers of clients in each type of housing arrangement were compared over the years to provide for a gross indicator of change. Secondly, a scale of living status was constructed so that changes on a more encompassing level could be analyzed. Table 20 presents the percent of clients by housing categories. -68 81 Table 20 Percent of Clients by Housing Category '76 and '77 Clients '76 Intake Group '77 Intake Group Type of Housing Intake 2nd Year 3rd year Intake 2nd year Owned home 34% 38% . 41% 38% 35% Rented home 13 9 7 9 10 Owned apartment, condominium, trailer - - - - - Rented apartment condominium, trailer 23 32 39 24 32 Rented room 2 2 2 2 2 Institution 21 20 12 26 21 As can be seen, steady gains were made in the percent of clients who lived in an owned home (the '77 intake group decreased by 1 percent, possibly due to error), and in a rented apartment, condominium, or trailer. Slightly fewer people lived in rented homes while the percentage in rented rooms and owner apartment, condominium and trailers remained stable. The percentage of clients in institutions decreased steadily over the years. From the data presented then, it can be said that significant progress was made in deinstitutionalizing the client population and that there was general improvement in housing status. The finding that many were deinstitutionalized is important as this was one important concern of the projects. In an attempt to analyze the reasons for such a high percentage of clients being deinstitutionalized, a number of comparisons were made between those deinstitutionalized, and those who remained in institutions. Statistical tests of significance were not performed due to the low sample sizes. Instead, general trends were analyzed. 82 No comparisons were possible based on type of disability as almost all clients, whether deinstitutionalized or not, were physically disabled. Generally though, over one half of all clients in institutions had impairments involving three or more limbs, and 14% had impairments of 1 or both upper limbs. The visually impaired accounted for 14% of the population. Age appeared to make little difference in whether or not a client was deinstitutionalized. The mean age of all clients ever in institutions was about the same as for the general client population (38). The only exception to this finding was in the 1978 client group. The Seattle project launched an effort to work with the elderly disabled in that year. As a result, about three quarters of the Seattle institutionalized population was over 65. Data were collected on whether or not a client in an institution had a place to go if he or she were to be deinstitutionalized. As could be expected, of those who had a place to go, more were eventually deinstitutionalized (23 deinstitutionalized, 13 not). Of those who had no place to go, most were not deinstitutionalized (17 deinstitutionalized, 39 not deinstitutionalized), but a substantial number of them were deinstitutionalized. It is of interest to note that the majority of clients in institutions reported that they had no place to go if they were to be deinstitutionalized. Since availability of such a place is important for deinstitutionalized, the lack of a place to go could be a critical problem for some disabled people who are institutionalized and for whom deinstitutionalization is feasible. Of those clients who entered the program in 1976 and who were institutionalized, Barthel and PULSES scores were compared over time according to whether and when they were deinstitutionalized. In 1976 (year 1), scores were similar regardless of whether they were or were not ever deinstitutionalized (Barthel average = 37.9, PULSES average = 16.7). Mean scores fell into the severely handicapped 83 group. In 1977 (year 2), 8 clients were deinstitutionalized and their PULSES and Barthel scores improved (Barthel average = 67.6, PULSES average = 12.8). No significant changes occurred for those still in institutions regardless of whether or not they eventually were to leave the institution. In 1977, those who had been previously deinstitutionalized improved further in their scores (Barthel average = 68.7, PULSES average = 11.5). Those who were deinstitutionalized in 1977 improved also (Barthel average = 42.2, PULSES average 13.0), while those who were not deinstitutionalized experienced no significant change in their scores. It appears then that Barthel and PULSES scores are not good indicators of deinstitutionalization potential, as scores while in the institution were similar regardless of whether or not they were eventually deinstitutionalized. Clients who were deinstitutionalized improved in functioning after they were deinstitutionalized (changes were generally from a rating of severely disabled to moderately disabled). It is not possible to determine whether the changes were simply because of the changed environment or whether the client actually improved in his functioning, although the latter seems to be the case as scores were higher after the second year of deinstitutionalization than after the first year of deinstitutionalization. The only exception to these findings were for clients in the Berkeley project. Barthel and PULSES scores for clients who eventually were deinstitutionalized were better than scores for those never deinstitutionalized. The reason for this anomaly is not known. Because it happened in only one group, and because of the small sample size (8 institutionalized clients in the Berkeley sample), it is unclear whether this represented a real change. Clients were asked if they could live in the community if certain services were available. There were few responses to the following items: 84 household financial management, assistance in personel business activity, and counselor/follow-up services. This seems to indicate either that these services were not needed, or that it was not known if they were needed. Assistance in preparing meals, housekeeping and/or shopping and attendant care were reported as needed by three quarters of the institutionalized population if they were to be discharged. In summary, it was found that about one-half of all clients who had been in the program for two or three years were deinstitutionalized. Improved Barthel and PULSES scores after deinstitutionalization suggest that there was some improvement in their living status. Type of disability, age and PULSES and Barthel scores while in the institution were found not be be good predictors of deinstitutionalization potential. Having a residence readily available to go to seemed important for deinstitutionalization, however many who reported no such place were deinstitutionalized. It was also found that the majority of the institutionalized had no such residence immediately available. If these physically disabled clients are to be deinstitutionalized, it appears that assistance in preparing meals, housekeeping and shopping, along with attendant care are among the most needed services. To conduct a comprehensive analysis of the living status changes of noninstitutionalized clients, a scale was developed that combined living status with age variables and whether or not a client was in school. The scale is not intended to be a definite scale as some may aruge against some of the scoring features. Rather, it is intended to be a general index from which scores can be constructed, and comparison made. The scoring features are listed below. 16 208/33.00 in .00 7220 6 $ & 9 13 in y d76.0 The 1198 65 268/17 75.00 1420 $ 0 85 Score Definition 1 under 18 years old and living alone, or (low) over 18 years old, not in school, and living with parents or other related persons 2 over 18 years old, in school, and living with (medium) parents or other related persons, or under 18 years old, and living with unrelated persons 3 under 18 years old, and living with parents or other (high) related persons, or over 18 years old, and living with unrelated persons, or over 18 years old, and living alone or with spouse Using this scale, the numbers of clients who increased, decreased or remained unchange in scoring over the years can be tabulated. Table 21 presents this information. Table 21 Number of Clients who Increased, Decreased or Remained Unchanged in Living Status Score 1976 and 1977 Intake Groups '76 and '77 intake groups '76 intake group intake vs. year 2 year 2 vs year 3 A. unchanged, over 18 years old, living with spouse or alone 60 44 B. Improved 33 10 C. Unchanged, but not in "A" above 148 66 D. Worsened, and, not 18 years old and living alone or with spouse 13 9 E. Worsened, and 18 years old and living with spouse or along in year 1 14 1 Mean, time 1 and time 2 2.01, 2.12 2.26, 2.25 t test results t=2.04, df=155, sig. t=0.33, df=80, N.S 86 As can be seen, significant improvement was made in living status between intake and year 2, and no significant changes in mean score were experienced between the second and third years. Generally, most improvement occurred between intake and year two. As living status is an important indicator of independent living, comparisons were made on four selected variable to determine if improvements were made in other areas for those clients who remained unchanged in living status, and were not over 18 living with spouse or along (no comparisons were made on those regressed as the number of those clients was small). As most activity ocurred between intake and year 2 in living status (and in other problem areas addressed in this chapter) the '76 and '77 intake groups were combined and compared between intake and year 2. Table 22 presents the results. As the table shows, substantial improvements were experienced by these clients in most areas. They were engaging in social activities more often, they had received more services, and their unmet equipment needs were reduced. Their transportation scores however, remained essentially unchanged. Table 22 Means of Change Indicators between Intake and Year 2, 1977 and 1978 Intake Groups Those who experienced no change in living status, and who scored less than 8 on living status Intake 2nd Year t value dt Social Interaction Scores 21.6 25.1 2.89* 139 Services Received 3.8 5.9 5.15* 147 Unmet Needs 1.9 1.1 4.44* 147 Transportation Scores 19.3 18.7 0.53 *indicates significant at the .05 level 87 It appears that many clients experienced an improvement in living status. Of those who did not change status, other important benefits were derived from participating in the program. This section has shown that substantial improvements were made in housing and living status. Many clients were deinstitutionalized. Predictor variables for deinstitutionalized were not found. Those who reported having a place to go if they were to deinstitutionalized were more likely to leave institutions, although a substantial number of those reporting having no place to go were also deinstitutionalized. Barthel and PULSES scores were not good indicators of deinstitutionalization potential, but significant improvement in scores were experienced once the institution was left. If clients are to be deinstitutionalized, the most needed services appear to be assistance in preparing meals, housekeeping, and shopping, along with attendant care. Among all clients, regardless of whether or not they were ever in institutions, substantial progress was made in improving living status as defined by the indicator developed. Even among those who did not change in living status, other progress was made such as increased services, decreased unmet equipment needs, and increased social interaction. Physical Functioning Two formal scales of independent living were used by the projects--the Barthel index and the PULSES profile. The Bartel index is, perhaps, the most commonly used measure of physical functioning. It is a well tested instrument for establishing the degree of physical limitations, although its use as a scale to measure change over time has not been rigorously tested. Scores can range from -2 to 100 and measures the following physical functions: 88 Drinking Getting in or out of chair Eating Getting on or off toilet Dressing upper body Getting in or out of tub Dressing lower body or shower Putting on brace or Walking 50 yards on level ground artificial limb Walking up or down one flight Grooming of stairs Washing or bathing If not walking, propelling or Bladder continence pushing wheelchair Bowel continence The PULSES profile, like the Barthel index, has been widely used to establish the level of disability. While it includes a separate measure of sensory capacity (the Barthel index does not), it cannot effectively capture improvements in a sensory handicapped individual's ability to cope with his disability. It should be noted that an improved PULSES score occurs when the PULSES index is lower. Thus changes in PULSES which show improved client functioning will be recorded as a negative number. The categories measured by the PULSES profile are as follows: Physical condition Sensory functioning Self care dependent Excretory functions on upper limb function Intellectual and emotional Self care dependent adaptability on lower limb function An analysis of changes in scores on both scales over time is presented in Table 23. Table 23 Average Changes in Measures of Functional Capability 1st to 2nd year 2nd to 3rd year 1976 and 1977 groups 1976 group Barthel PULSES Barthel PULSES Berkeley -5.01 - .14 - 1.00 -1.40 New York -5.60 .99 - 6.10 - .43 Salt Lake City 8.29 - .74 - 1.94 -1.35 San Antonio -2.41 .37 -14.12 1.58 Seattle 6.70 -1.37 .41 .17 All Programs .84 - .32 - 3.44 - .58 89 It was argued in the second year's report on the demonstrations that the data of San Antonio and New York projects should not be included in the analysis of Barthel and PULSES. The San Antonio project contains only blind/multiply handicapped persons. Neither scale adequately measures sensory limitations, so the scales could not be expected to accurately measure change for those persons. The clients in the New York program have muscular dystrophy as their primary disabling condition. Since muscular dystrophy is a progressive disease, deterioriation in physical functioning would be expected. If one examines the remaining projects, it can be seen that the Seattle and Salt Lake City clients increased markedly in both their Barthel and PULSES scores in the first year. Between years two and three Barthel im- proved slightly for the Seattle group and worsened slightly for the Salt Lake group, while PULSES scores did the exact opposite. These changes in the third year were very slight and could well be due to measurement error. If one recalls changes in most areas addressed in this report, it was found that most changes occurred in the first year of the project. Barthel and PULSES scores seem to follow the same pattern for this group. Most improve- ments in physical functioning seemed to occur in the clients' first year of services. The data on the Berkeley clients were puzzling. The Barthel scores indicate worsening conditions while the PULSES scores indicate slightly improved functioning. If the '76 intake group scores are compared, scores improved in the first year. The '77 intake group scores, on the other hand, worsened. The reasons for this are unknown. Considering that there were only 15 clients in the '77 group with ratings on both years, the reason may have to do with the small sample size. 90 Barthel and PULSES data on New York and San Antonio clients reveal that both groups worsened in physical functioning over the years. This was expected with the New York group as their clients consist of persons with progressive disease (muscular dystrophy). The San Antonio group also worsened. As their client group is ill adapted for measurement by this scale, interpretation of the findings is difficult. Even though both groups scored worse in these scales over the years, the data in the body of the report indicate that almost all persons, regardless of what project they were in, improved in other areas (social interaction, unmet needs, etc). There appeared to be other benefits for many clients aside from or regardless of physical functioning skills. It should also be noted that the rate of deterioration may well have been slowed by the service provided to the New York and San Antonio clients. Without relevant control groups, however, this hypothesis could not be tested. V. COST OF SERVICES The Urban Institute staff analyzed the costs of services as well as the source of funding for each client in the Section 130 demonstration projects. Ten broad categories of services to individuals were examined: counseling; diagnostic and evaluation; physical and mental restoration; training; placement; maintenance; services to family members; transportation; aid and attendant services; and other. These service categories are essentially those required under program regulation guides for the regular VR reporting 1 system. Several cost categories have been added or expanded in an attempt to capture the unique characteristics and emphasis of the Section 130 demonstration projects. Obtaining service cost information in a format compatible with the reporting format of the regular VR program was an attempt to facilitate comparisons between the VR program and the Section 130 demonstration pro- jects in terms of the types of services and costs needed to effectively service the severely disabled. It should also provide valuable information to assist in identifying the types of services and the program design needed to effectively serve the severly disabled. In addition to requesting services provided which utilize project funds, we have also gathered information on services funded through other programs, including the regular VR program. These other funding resources or "similar benefits" are a key part of an effective rehabilitation program. 1. See Program Regulation Guide (RSA-PRG-76-38, August 18, 1976) for a detailed description of reporting requirements. 92 as the basis for analytical study. The effectiveness of particular types of services in meeting the needs of clients will be addressed. Appearing below are definitions of each of the cost categories for which we expenditures: Counseling Personal/Adjustment Counseling: Includes salaries and related expenses of all personnel providing counseling services or supervising their provi- sion or providing consultation in their provision. Included in this cate- gory are counselors, interviewers, case aides, consultants, district and local office supervisors, psychologists, social workers, and other profes- sional personnel engaged in such activities as the processing of referrals, determination of eligibility including acceptance for extended evaluation to determine eligibility, development of an individualized written rehabili- tation plan, and assessment of particular needs and problems confronting individual clients. Vocational Counseling: Includes all counseling expenses directly related to determination of vocational goals and assessment of vocational potential of clients. Counseling for Family Members: Includes costs of providing counseling ser- vices to family members in understanding the nature and constraints of the disability affecting a family member, effectively utilizing family resources, understanding the role they should take in assisting rehabilitation, as well as the roles of the client, counselors and other participants in the VR program, etc. Other Counseling: Include any counseling activities not included in any of the above categories. 93 These sources and the program they represent are as follows: SSI BEOG SSDI Private Foundations or Associations (specify, e.g., M.D.A., Easter AFDC Seals, etc.) General Assistance Other VR Funds (I & E, Extended (State Programs) Evaluation, Regular Program) VA Family Medicaid Self Medicare Other Title XX Don't Know Workmen's Compensation Reporting of data on the cost or value of similar benefits has to date not been consistently reported within the State-Federal VR system. To really determine what is needed to successfully rehabilitate a client, valid infor- mation on the types of services funded through other agencies or programs is essential. The additional VR funding needed to design a program of inde- pendent living for the severely disabled is often overstated given the poten- tial for effectively utilizing similar benefits. Categorizing costs by source of funding should aid in identifying the extent to which more appropriate use of existing federal, state and private programs can minimize the budget impact of an independent living program. Cost forms are completed quarterly for each client. Actual costs or expenditures for each service are provided except when actual figures are unavailable; only then is an estimate of the approximate cost used. This data, together with the other information on client characteristics, serves 94 Diagnostic and Evaluation Medical Diagnosis: Includes medical and surgical examination, psychiatric evaluation, dental examinations, consultations by specialists in all medical specialty fields, inpatient hospitalization for study or exploration, clinical laboratory tests, diagnostic X-ray procedures, trial treatment for differen- tial diagnosis, stabilization on drug therapy, or determination of treatability in the case of emotional disturbance, and other medically recognized diagnos- tic services. Psychological Evaluation: Includes psychological tests and measurements including psychological profiles, assessments of social functioning, role definition and other psychologically recognized diagnostic services. Intelligence Testing: Includes various forms of intelligence and achieve- ment tests. Physical Functioning Tests: Includes tests of ability to perform basic physical functions, including personal care, local travel capability and ability to utilize various forms of physical functioning equipment and aids. Work Evaluation/Work Adjustment: Includes evaluation of work potential including an assessment of the extent to which medical, psychological, intelligence and physical functioning factors would affect potential work adjustment. Work samples, work progress and achievement and aptitude tests would also be included. Other: Includes all other diagnostic and evaluation services unique to the project or not included under any of the above categories. Physical and Mental Restoration Surgery and Treatment: Incl udes medical, surgical, and psychiatric treat- ment as well as payments (a) to physicians (general practitioners or special- ists, including surgeons and psychiatrists) for home, office or hospital 95 visits in connection with treatment of clients and (b) to clinics or hos- pitals for physicians' services when they are not included in bills for hospitalization. The cost of assistant surgeons and anesthetists not in- cluded in costs of hospitalization, should be charged to this category; also the cost of drugs, biologicals and supplies incident to treatment. The cost for surgery may include pre-operative and post-operative care. This classification also includes costs to dentists or dental clinics for dental services (exclusive of dental examinations) such as fillings, extrac- tions, bridges, orthodontia, oral surgery, prophylaxis and treatment of the gum or related tissues. The costs of optometrists and visual services are also charged to this account. Physical Therapy/Occupational Therapy: Includes costs of physical therapy and occupational therapy performed under medical direction as well as the costs of speech or hearing therapy, which is medically directed (i.e. pro- vided in a facility under medical direction and under medical supervision). All other forms of disability management such as travel training for the blind should be included. Prosthetic and Orthotic Devices: Includes the cost of artificial limbs, braces, hearing aids, glasses and artificial eyes, contact lenses, surgical applicances such as belts, trusses, corsets, elastic stockings, arch supports, orthopedic shoes, suspensories, crutches, and hand and power operated wheel chairs and dentures. Costs of repairs to prosthetic appliances should also be charged to this account. Hospital and Convalescent Care: Includes payments to hospitals for the cost of inpatient or outpatient hospital services in connection with medical or surgical treatment and with payment to convalescent or nursing homes for clients including room, board, nursing home care and other services provided 96 by the facility under agreement with the VR program. This category should also indicate payments to hospitals or related facilities for special nursing services rendered to the client during his hospital stay and not included in the hospital bill. Medicine and Drugs: Includes costs of all medically prescribed drugs and medicines except for costs incurred incidental to confinement in hospitals. Other Restoration: Includes all restoration services that cannot be properly classified under any other subcategory. Training Personal Adjustment: Includes all forms of training designed to facilitate personal adjustment to a disability. Examples are literacy training, mobility training, lip reading, braille, training in the use of artificial limbs or appliances, personal grooming, and training in social sensitivity and any other training designed to enable the client to personally adjust to social situations which may hinder rehabilitation potential. Vocational Training: Includes all forms of training, specially designed to facilitate client's adjustment to an employment situation such as work conditioning, developing work tolerance, or assistance in filling out job applications. College or University: Includes costs of tuition, fees, books and training materials for courses of instruction leading to an academic associate, bac- calaureate or higher degree whether the education program is full time or part-time. Business School or College: Includes costs of tuition, fees, books and training materials needed for courses of instruction which leads to a cer- tificate and usually provides specific job-related instruction but does 97 not include broad-based academic courses. Skills to be obtained may include office practices, typing, accounting, bookkeeping, etc. Business training which leads to an academic associate or baccalaureate degree should be in- cluded under college or university training. Elementary or High School: Includes any fees, books or special training materials needed to assist client in completing elementary or high school courses. Vocational School: Includes courses of vocational or trades training defined as training which may lead to a license or certificate and provides specific job skills but does not include broad-based academic courses. Skills to be obtained may include welding, woodworking, metal working, TV repair, electrical wiring, product inspection, etc. On-the-Job-Training: Includes any costs in connection with on-the-job train- ing for a client. Under these programs the client usually works for wages while learning the skills of a particular job. Other Training: Includes any training costs which cannot be appropriately classified under any of the training categories above. Placement: Includes all costs associated with the placement of the client in a gainful occupation and necessary follow-up either before or after case closure. Maintenance Basic: Includes maintenance necessary for day to day living typically pro- vided by public assistance or support payments. Maintenance payments out of VR funds should be minimal in this category. Supplemental: Includes supplemental cash transfers to clients necessary to derive the full benefit of other VR services. It would include expenses incurred for job interviews or employment at home or away from home up to 98 receipt of initial paycheck. Additional basic support to assist a client in travel status while obtaining services for a short term training program are further examples of other factors which require maintenance funds beyond those normally anticipated in public welfare programs. Services to Family Members: All services to family members other than coun- seling for family members should be included in this cost category. Examples of services include: joint training of a spouse or other family member in operating a small business enterprise; transportation costs to enable a family member to accompany the handicapped individual to various community resources, e.g. medical clinic, social agency, etc.; relocation cost to enable the family to accompany the handicapped individual to a new place of rehabilitation or employment; child care service, family planning services, housing services and protective care services. Transportation: Includes reimbursement of client or direct payment for client transportation to VR centers, hospitals, social service agencies, and social or recreational centers. Costs of modifying VR transportation equipment or client automobiles and costs of transportation attendants or chauffers should also be included in this category. Aid and Attendant Services: Includes costs of full or part time attendant services needed for the client to remain at home or to accompany client in activities outside home. Day care until the client reaches ability to func- tion independently in home situation, meal services or occasional use of attendant for bathing or housekeeping functions should be included. Other Home and Environmental Modifications: Includes home and environmental modi- fications necessary to assist independent living within the home. Installa- tion of grab bars and ramps; widening of doors; modifications of kitchens 99 or bathrooms are examples of items to be included in this category. Coordination of Services: Includes costs incurred by project to arrange for services from other agencies. Counselor time, phone calls and the costs of accompanying clients through the administrative rigors of other programs should be included. Other Equipment: Teletype terminals for the deaf, recording requipment, two way television systems and other specialized equipment would fall into this category. Other: This category would include any other services to clients that can- not be classified in any other category. Examples include: reader services for the blind; interpreter services for the deaf; tools, equipment, initial stocks and supplies; and business or occupational licenses. Cost Analysis Of the two types of cost reported, project and other funds, the former is the best avàilable estimate of what a program of independent living rehabilitation would cost. Total cost (project and other) includes costs funded through already existing sources, so many of those costs would not be incurred by a new independent living rehabilitation program. Using total cost to estimate total resources from all funding programs would likewise not be accurate, as some major services were received by clients prior to entry into the program. For example, SSI and SSDI bene- fits were received by many clients before they joined the project. Those who gained SSI/SSDI payments after entry into the project were entitled to those payments regardless of entry into the project, so this expense should not be seen as an increased load for SSI/SSDI. Rather, enrollment of these clients on SSI/SSDI roles should be viewed as increasing the 100 effectiveness of the program (i.e., getting benefits to those who are entitled, and should receive them). A similar argument could be made for medicaid/medicare expenditures. That is, most expenses would have been incurred regardless of whether or not the clients were in the program. Increased costs in medicare/medicaid reflect simply the providing of services to those who need medical services and are already entitled to them. Other programs, such as Social Services and Title XX, would experience an increase in numbers of people served, and would use up some of their resources. As it is impossible to specify exactly which costs would be additional costs to other programs and which costs would have been incurred anyway, it would be best to state only that some additional costs would be experienced by other programs, but the exact amount is not known. To estimate the direct cost of setting up an independent living reha- bilitation program, cost/client was compared between the projects and the vocational rehabilitation program. The best comparisons for present pur- poses would be between average project cost per client, and average per client cost in vocational rehabilitation funded through section 110 money and funded through the Social Security Trust Funds. Comparisons with the Trust Fund should be particularly interesting as Trust Fund clients are typically more severely disabled than section 110 clients, and thus would be more similar to project clients. Table 24 presents this information. If one examines patterns of expenditures, one can see a difference in how funds were utilized. As previously noted, a lessor percentage of funds was spent on counseling and placement for project clients, and average cost in this category was lower. Much more money was spend in 101 Table 24 Average Client Cost Per Year, Project and VR Programs Demonstration Project VR Program (1977) Project Trust Service Total Funds only Sect. 110 Funds Counseling and Placement Average/Client $ 296 $238 $320 $363 % of funds 3% 17% 41% 38% Diagnostic and Evaluation Average/Client 528 118 81 88 % of funds 6% 8% 11% 9% Physical/Mental Restoration Average/Client 3,957 313 105 165 % of funds 43% 22% 14% 17% Training Average/Client 379 166 176 176 % of funds 4% 12% 23% 18% Maintainence Average/Client 2,192 37 51 50 % of funds 24% 3% 7% 5% Services to Family Members Average/Client 56 34 1 1 % of funds 1% 2% 0 0 Other Average/Client 1,688 518 38 121 % of funds 19% 36% 4% 12% (transportation) 268 (aid/attendant service) 607 (other)* 813 - - - Total Cost/Client $9,097 1,427 771 963 *Includes: Home and environmental modifications, coordination of services, other equipment and miscellaneous. 102 the diagnostic and evaluation, and restoration services categories. It is also of interest to note that the trust funds spent more on these categories than Section 110 funds. Again, the pattern of the more severely disabled incurring a higher average costs can be seen. The largest difference, however, was for expenditures in the "other" category. Section 110 spent the least amount in this category both in actual dollars per client and in percentage of case funds. Trust fund costs were substantially higher than section 110 funds, while project costs were the highest. These costs seem to indicate that many non-traditional services will be required to meet the néeds of the most severely disabled. The cost questionnaire separated out transportation costs and aid/ attendant services costs from "other" costs as it was thought that these would be major cost categories. Transportation costs were indeed high-- about one-sixth of all "other" expenditures. Project costs for aid/atten- dant services on the other hand, were quite high. It appears that the projects were successful in funding other funding sources to meet this high cost. Another notable difference in costs was found in costs for services to family members. As the clients in the projects were highly dependent upon others for many functions, this funding is not surprising. Higher costs in this category should be expected when new independent living rehabilitation programs are established. 103 Comparing Project Costs with VR Program Costs Even though the cost data developed for the projects has some gaps and a limited time frame, several major findings concerning potential costs of a larger scale independent living program are apparent. First, the average cost per client in an independent living program can be expected to be sub- stantially higher than for clients in the traditional VR program. Table 24 compares demonstration project costs with average levels of program costs in the VR program. Comparisons are available for both Section 110 clients which represent a general caseload and for Social Security Trust Fund clients which cover a more expensive severely disabled caseload. Clearly, the average project cost in the demonstrating projects exceeds VR program costs. Looking at program costs alone the average cost per client in the demonstration projects is nearly double the cost of Section 110 clients and more than 50 percent higher than the severely disabled trust fund clients. While only program costs for the VR coaseload are available, we were able to obtain total costs per client including use of all major similar benefits for the demonstration project clients. The total cost of all services flow- ing to the average client was $9,097. $7,670 or more than two-thirds of these costs were similar benefits. The heavy use of similar benefits suggests that any new independent living project should carefully examine the approaches used in the demonstration projects to secure all available similar benefits and keep project costs down. In essence the costs associated with use of similar benefits should not be viewed as potential costs of an indepen- dent living program. In many cases the client was already entitled to and 104 perhaps already receiving such benefits from SSDI, Medicaid, etc. Another striking difference between the demonstration project costs and the regular VR program is in allocation of costs among services. Counsel- ing and placement services, for example, represent about 40% of program services costs in the VR program. In the demonstration projects, the average cost for counseling services were lower and represented only about 17 per- cent of total program costs. Training is another service area that is much more prominent in the VR program. Demonstration project funds were much more heavily concentrated in physical/mental restoration and other ancillary services which include transportation and attendant services. Clearly an expansion of independent living programs will have a differing impact on the structure of case services and the types of manpower and material needed to serve the clients. While the cost differences noted above are of significant magnitude to support these findings, some caution should be used in attempting to make precise cost estimates of an independent living program. It should be noted that the costs represent only the first two years experience in the demonstration projects and may reflect some initial start-up costs. It is also possible that a larger scale independent living program may generate some economies of scale which can lower the cost per client. Even if adjustments are made for such factors, the available evidence still suggests, substantially higher costs per client in an independent living program and a different allocation of costs among service. 105 Again, it appears that costs for an independent living rehabili- tation program will be higher than costs for the regular vocational reha- bilitation program. Project cost per client in the projects were almost double client cost funded through the regular vocational rehabilitation program, and almost one third greater than the cost of clients paid for by the Trust Fund. It may be useful to examine total expenditures to get an idea of service patterns. The average total expenditure per client was $9,097 per year. Average project funds per client were $1,427 per year. If one compares average total cost by project, it can be seen that San Antonio had the largest mean expenditure, followed by Seattle, Salt Lake City, and Berkeley. New York had the lowest mean expenditure per client. In exploring the reason for the differences in cost, two categories of cost account for a good deal of the differences--Physical and Mental Restoration, and Mainte- nance. For example, San Antonio had clients who required hemodialysis. In the 1977 intake group alone, 4 clients required such treatments, averaging over $40,000 per client for one year. This increased the percent of funds for restoration spent on the 1977 intake group. On the other hand, New York reported no maintenance costs for any year. As maintenance costs were averaging over $2,000 per client in other projects, this substantially re- duced the reported total expenditures of New York. If expenditures for maintenance and physical and mental restoration are subtracted from total expenditures, average costs for clients are more similar (See table 25). 106 Table 25 Average Cost Per Client by Project Excluding Maintenance and Restoration Costs. Project Average Client Cost/Year San Antonio $ 3,189 Seattle 3,039 Salt Lake 2,714 New York 2,538 Berkeley 1,955 The low Berkeley figure may be misleading, as it is based on only one client group (first-year costs for the 1976 intake group) while the others are based on three client groups (first and second-year for the 1976 intake group, and first year costs for the 1977 intake group). If one reviews the data on client total cost per project, it can be seen that the vocational rehabilitation projects were the highest (Salt Lake City and San Antonio). This cannot be interpreted as indicating that vocational rehabilitation agencies would be the most inefficient option for providing independent living rehabilitation services since the characteris- tics of the clients by project varied and costs have not been compared to outcomes. More detailed cost comparisons will be included in the final report. Looking at patterns of expenditures over all projects would be justi- fied as pooling across projects expands the data base which should average out any "odd" figures. A brief examination of type of expenditures will be presented here. The major cost for all projects was for physical and mental restoration. This cost category alone accounted for 43 percent of all expenditures. Typically, the cost for these services were paid for out of Medicare or Medicaid funds. The project paid only 5 percent of all such costs. Only in 107 New York did the projects pay for most physical/mental restoration services (project funds accounted for 75 percent of these expenditures). Maintenance was often the second largest cost of serving the clients. These costs accounted for 24 percent of all expenditures. The most frequent funding sources were SSI and SSDI. The projects paid only 2 percent of all such costs. Physical/mental restoration and maintenance are two categories of services which would most likely be provided to these persons regardless of whether or not they were in the projects. Most cost in the physical/mental restoration area was for hospital/convalescent care (60%), which includes the cost of institutionalization. Other costs were for medicine and drugs (8%), surgery and treatment (15%) occupational and physical therapy (11%) prosthe- tic devices (6%) and other (0.3%). As most of these costs would occur regardless of whether or not the clients were in the project, they should not be seen as an additional cost for setting up an independent living rehabilitation program. In fact, these costs were probably reduced because many clients were deinstitutionalized. The other major cost category was maintenance. This consisted primarily of SSI and SSDI payments. These clients were entitled to such benefits regardless of whether or not they were in the program, so these too should not be taken as an additional expenditure for an ILR program. Mainte- nance and restoration accounted for 67% of all expenditures. The remaining 34% then would include costs most likely to be additional expenditures for serving those persons in an independent living rehabilitation program. The remaining costs average $2,802 per client per year. Most of the remaining costs were paid for through other programs, and some of those costs would 108 have been expended for the clients regardless of whether or not they were in the program. It is difficult to judge which are additional costs so no such estimate will be given. To get an estimate of additional costs for setting up an independent living rehabilitation program, project expenditures were analyzed. It was found that 32 percent of these funds were spent in the "other" category. Coverage cost of $371/client per year). This category includes home and environmental modifications, coordination of services, other equipment and miscellaneous. Most of these expenditures fell into the other equipment category (almost one-half of the expenditures) while the other subcategories shared an almost equal proportion of the remaining costs. Counseling was another major cost category for project funds. (Coverage of $214/client per year). One fifth of all project funds were expanded for this category, and most of that went toward adjustment counseling. As much of this cost goes toward the processing of referrals, determina- tion of eligibility, development of a rehabilitation plan and assessing client needs and problems, this could be called a fixed cost and while varying somewhat from client to client, should remain one of the more stable costs, especially in first year expenditures. Physical and Mental Restoration services accounted for 14 percent of all project costs (average of $161/client per year). This is substantially lower than the 43% figure of total project costs. It shows that most expen- ditures in this category can be paid for by other funding sources (mostly Medicaid and Medicare), but a substantial amount will be needed for paying other restoration costs. The most frequently cited service paid for by project funds in this category was occupational and physical therapy, which accounted for roughly two-thirds of all restoration costs paid for by project funds. 109 Training costs accounted for 12 percent of all project funds expended (average of $139/client per year). About three-quarters of the cost in this category went toward personal adjustment training. As the clients in the projects are very severely disabled, the high percentage of funds expended for personal adjustment training is not surprising. Such a high degree of disability would require a great deal of such counseling to help the client adjust to his handicap. Nine percent of project funds went toward diagnostic and evaluation costs (average of $104/client per year). For total costs, most funds were expended for medical diagnosis and most were paid for by Medicaid and Medi- care. Most project funds went toward psychological evaluation (58% of project funds in the diagnostic and evaluation category). Transportation costs accounted for about 6 percent of all project expen- ditures (average of $73/client per year). Project funds paid for 30 per cent of all transportation expenses. As was pointed out in the previous chapter, transportation was one of the least resolved problem areas for these clients, largely because projects have little to do with making trans- portation systems accessible. The relatively large expenditure in this area probably went toward arranging special transportation and it appears that this will be a substantial cost in providing rehabilitation services to this population. Maintenance accounted for three percent of project funds (average of $34/client per year). As most maintenance costs were paid for by SSI and SSDI, maintenance was not expected to be a major cost. Limited additional expenditures in this category can be expected for independent living rehabi- litation programs. 110 Three percent of costs went toward services to family members (average of $31/client per year). This accounted for roughly two-thirds of all costs in this category. As few other funding sources are available to rely on, independent living rehabilitation programs will be expected to pick up most costs in this area. Only two percent of project funds went toward aid and attendant services (average of $26/client per year). As seven percent of the total cost fell into this category, it appears that projects were successful in finding other funding sources to cover this cost. General Assistance and Title XX were the two most frequently reported funding sources. Placement activites accounted for only 0.3 percent of all project funds, and very little of total costs fell into the category (0.2% or $6,260 of the total expenditures). The data collected reflect mostly cost in first year of service. A low expenditure in this category therefore was not expected, as the clients had very low employment potential at intake. Later year expendi- tures will probably rise in the area as clients become more prepared to seek employment. As more data becomes available, it will be interesting to note changes in these patterns of expenditures. Maintenance costs may decline as more clients are deinstitutionalized. Training and placement costs may rise as vocational potential increases. It will also be interesting to compare these costs by service delivery approach (i.e., by project) and by client gains in status. Such analyses will be possible as more data become available and the final report will address these analyses. Tables 26 thru 30 present cost data on each project. Table 26 Project: Seattle Total and Average Cost Per Client by Cost Category Project Funds and Total Funds, 1976 and 1977 Project Funds Total Funds Total Per Client/Year Total Per Client/Year Counseling $25,060 $282 $ 33,759 $ 379 Diagnostic and Evaluation 234 3 27,767 312 Physical/Mental Restoration 657 7 464,310 5,217 Training 324 4 13,770 155 Placement 59 1 1,275 14 Maintenance 516 6 240,115 2,698 111 Services to Family Members 86 1 170 2 Transporation 1,701 19 15,179 171 Aid/Attendent Service 46 1 89,200 1,002 Other 38,942 438 89,345 1,004 Total $67,625 $760 $974,890 $10,953 Table 27 Project: Salt Lake City Total and Average Cost Per Client by Cost Category Project Funds and Total Funds, 1976 and 1977 Project Funds Total Funds Total Per Client/Year Total Per Client/Year Counseling $ 33,698 $ 379 $ 34,488 $ 388 Diagnostic and Evaluation 8,850 99 11,100 125 Physical/Mental Restoration 21,380 240 316,694 3,558 Training 14,421 162 32,124 361 Placement 1,077 12 2,633 30 Maintenance 6,496 73 239,459 2,691 112 Services to Family Members 1,871 21 3,800 43 Transporation 19,245 216 40,697 457 Aid/Attendent Service 8,926 100 23,096 250 Other 72,082 810 90,916 1,022 Total $188,046 $2,113 $795,007 $8,933 Table 28 Project: Berkeley* Total and Average Cost Per Client by Cost Category Project Funds and Total Funds, 1976 and 1977 Project Funds Total Funds Total Per Client/Year Total Per Client/Year Counseling $4,575 $ 75 $ 7,351 $ 121 Diagnostic and Evaluation 1,647 27 7,500 123 Physical/Mental Restoration - - 211,969 3,475 Training 1,098 18 11,040 181 Placement - -- 585 10 Maintenance - - 107,338 1,760 113 Services to Family Members - - - - Transporation 1,403 23 18,957 310 Aid/Attendent Service - - 69,507 1,134 Other 915 15 4,346 71 Total $9,638 $158 $438,593 $7,190 *Only 1976 data is available for the Berkeley Project. Table 29 Project: New York Total and Average Cost Per Client by Cost Category Project Funds and Total Funds, 1976 and 1977 Project Funds Total Funds Total Per Client/Year Total Per Client/Year Counseling $ 483 $ 7 $ 1,000 $ 14 Diagnostic and Evaluation 20,045 286 102,259 1,461 Physical/Mental Restoration 29,549 422 39,355 562 Training 63 1 54 1 Placement - - - - - Maintenance - - - 114 Services to Family Members 8,423 120 12,800 183 Transporation 693 10 685 10 - Aid/Attendent Service - - - Other 6,389 91 60,904 870 Total $65,645 $938 $217,057 $3,101 Table 30 Project: San Antonio Total and Average Cost Per Client by Cost Category Project Funds and Total Funds, 1976 and 1977 Project Funds Total Funds Total Per Client/Year Total Per Client/Year Counseling $ 9,797 $ 272 $10,064 $ 280 Diagnostic and Evaluation 4,917 137 13,442 373 Physical/Mental Restoration 3,808 106 195,673 5,435 Training 32,051 890 59,454 1,651 Placement - 1 1,767 49 Maintenance 4,625 128 98,962 2,749 115 Services to Family Members 245 7 670 19 Transporation 2,073 58 7,575 210 Aid/Attendent Service - - 7,440 207 Other 9,210 256 14,421 400 Total $66,726 $1,853 409,468 11,374 Appendix A Tables on Client Characteristics 3 Table A-1 Mean Age and Number of Clienta by Project, Sex, Race All Clienta, at Intake Male Female Male and Female White Black Htsp. Am. Ind. Other Total White Black Utsp. Am. Ind. Other Total Total 30.3 36.3 30.3 -- 28 31.8 35.4 38.7 -- -- 51.0 36.8 33.6 Age Barkeley (No.) (29) (1) (46) (19) (6) -- -- (1) (26) (72) (12) (4) : 36.0 43.4 35.0 31.3 -- -- 41.0 37.8 Age 38.2 31.2 21,0 -- -- New York (No.) (32) (5) (3) -- -- (40) (17) (2) (3) -- -- (22) (62) Age 34.5 -- -- 34.6 40.5 -- 23.5 -- 35.0 39.2 36.6 37.0 -- Salt Lake (2) (40) (28) -- (2) -- (1) (31) (71) (No. ) (38) : -- -- Age 14.2 38.9 47.6 41.0 34.8 -- -- 38.0 38.4 22,0 47.5 : -- San Antonio (tto.) (13) (1) (8) : (22) (5) (2) (17) -- -- (24) (46) -- 42.0 29.0 40.8 44.7 -- -- -- 16.0 44.0 42.1 Age 41.2* 45.0 -- Seattle (No.) (49) (1) -- (4) (3) (59) (40) -- -- -- (1) (41) (100) ABC 36,6 35.6 37.5 42,0 28.8 36.5 41,9 38.4 33.3 -- 34.0 40.2 38.0 TOTAL (No.) (161) (21) (17) (4) (4) (207) (109) (10) (22) -- (3) (144) (351) A Had greatest variance. Table 1-2 Primary Disability of Clients, by Project, All Clients, at Intake Total, by Berkaley New York Salt Lake San Anconio Seattle Disability Visual No. 5 - 2 46 - 53 Impairment :- 9.4 - 3.8 86.8 - %1 6.9 - 2.3 100 - 15.1 Hearing No. 1 - 1 - - 2 Impairment :- 50.0 - 50.0 - - .1 1.4 - 1.4 - . 0.6 Three or No. 40 57 54 - 49 200 more Limbs :- 20.0 28.5 27.0 - 24.5 %i 53.6 9.19 76.1 - 48.5 56.3 1 upper No. 7 - - - 23 30 limb and I :- 23.3 - - - 76.7 Lower Limb 21 9.7 - - - 22.8 8.5 . 1 or both No. - 1 1 - 3 5 upper limbs :- - 20.0 20.0 - 60.0 101 - L.6 1.4 - 3.0 1.4 I or both No. 13 I 4 - L2 30 lower Limbs :- 43.3 3.3 13.3 - 40.0 %1 18.1 1.6 5.6 - 11.9 3.5 Trunk, back, No. - 2 3 - 7 12 spine :- - 16.7 25.0 - 58.3 %1 - 3.2 4.2 - 6.9 3.4 Amputation No. 2 - 2 - 2 6 :- 33.3 - 33.3 - 33.3 :1 2.8 - 2.8 - 2.0 1.7 Mental No. - - - - I 1 Recardation :- - - - - 100.0 zi - - - - 1.0 0.3 Endocrine, No. 1 - 2 - 4 7 Epilepsy, :- 14.3 - 23.6 - 57.1 Cardiac :1 1.4 - 2.8 - 4.0 2.0 Respiratory, No. 1 1 2 - - 4 Digestive, :- 25.0 25.0 50.0 - - Ganetour. 7.1 1.4 1.6 2.8 - 4 1.1 Speech and No. 2 - - - - 2 Other :- 100.0 - - - - :1 2.3 - - - - 0.6 Total, No. 72 62 71 46 101 352 by project i " 1 20.3 17.6 20.2 13.1 28.7 100 - Table d-3 Secondary Disability of Clients, by Project, All Clients, at Incake Total, by Berkelav New York Salt Lake San Anconio Seattle Disability Visual No. 2 I 2 - - 5 Impairment :- 40.0 20.0 40.0 - - =1 8.7 2.1 4.2 - - 2.6 Hearing No. 4. - 1 4 2 11 Impairment :- 36.4 - 9.1 36.4 18.2 %1 17.4 - 2.1 9.1 7.7 5.8 Three or No. - 20 - 1 1 22 more limbs. 7.- - 90.9 - 4.5 4.5 %1 - 41.7 - 2.3 3.3 11.6 1 upper No. 2 - - 2 - + 11mb and 1 7.- 50.0 , - 50.0 - lower Limb zi 8.7 - - 4.5 , 2.1 I or both No. 1 1 I - I 4 upper Limbs %- 25.0 25.0 25.0 - 25.0 % 4.3 2.1 2.1 - 3.8 2.1 I or both No. 1 1 - I 1 3 Lower limbs 7- 33.3 33.3 - 33.3 , Zi 4.3 2.1 - 2.3 - 1.6 Trunk, back, No. 1 4 1 3 1 10 spine :- 10.0 40.0 10.0 30.0 10.0 %1 4.3 8.3 2.1 6.8 3.8 5.3 Amputation No. 2 , 2 I ! 6 :- 33.3 - 33.3 16.7 16.7 21 8.7 1 4.2 2.3 3.3 3.2 Mental Illnes No. 3 - 7 14 2 26 7.- 11.5 - 26.9 53.8 7.7 %1 13.0 - 14.6 31.8 7.7 13.3 Mental No. - - 3 9 3 15 Recardacion 7.- - - 20.0 60.0 20.0 =1 - - 6.3 20.5 11.5 7.9 Endocrine, No. 5 3 1 9 7 25 Epilepsy, :- 20.0 12.0 4.0 36.0 28.0 Cardian %1 21.7 6.3 2.1 20.5 25.9 13.2 Respiratory, No. ' 18 3 - 2 23 Digestive, : , 78.3 13.0 - 8.7 Ganacou. %1 - 37.5 6.3 - 7.7 12.2 Speech and No. 2 - 5 - 5 12 Other 16.7 , 41.7 - 41.7 %1 8.7 ' 10.4 - 19.2 6.3 Don't Know, No. - - 22 - 1 23 Not Available 7.- - - 95.7 - 4.3 %1. , - 45.8 - 3.3 12.2 Tocal, No. 23 43 48 44 25 189 by project :- 12.2 25.4 25.4 23.3 13.3 Table A-4 Percent Distribution by Income Level, 1978* Clients and U.S. Population Income Level Group Under 3,001- 5,001- 6,001- 7,001- 10,001- 12,001- 15,001- 20,000 3,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 10,000 12,000 15,000 20,000 and up U.S. Population % 3.6 5.7 3.5 3.7 10.9 7.2 11.3 17.8 36.3 (cum %) (3.6) (9.3) (12.8) (16.5) (27.4) (34.6) (45.9) (63.7) (100) Client Population % 24.9 17.0 5.9 3.9 20.3 6.6 8.9 6.6 5.9 (cum %) (24.9) (41.9) (47.8) (51.7) (72.0) (78.6) (87.5 (94.1) (100) A 1977 figures used for U.S. population. Actual figures were unavailable, but would be higher, further increasing the difference in income between clients and the general population. Table A-5 Mean Client Income, By Sex and Race, All Clients, at Intake Race Sex White Black Other All Clients Male 4,180 3,008 2,191 3,831 Female 3,316 3,066 1,945 3,053 @ Table A-6 Largest Stugle Source of Client Income, by Race and Sex, All Clients, 41 Intake WHITE BLACK HISPANIC OTHER SEX, TOTAL Subtotal Subtotal Subtotal Subtotal TOTAL Male Female Mile & Fem Male Female Mala & Few Malu Female Hale & Years Male Female Hale & Few Male Female BY SODUCE No. 9 3 12 1 0 1 - - - - 10 3 13 Hundy, wages and unlary % 6.9 3.4 5.5 5.6 0 3.6 - - - - 5.8 2.5 4.5 1 1 - - - - - - 1 - 1 No. - - Income from self employment x1 - 0.6 - 0.5 - - 0.3 8.9 - - - - - No. 56 31 87 6 0 6 5 1 a 8 0 a 75 34 109 SSDI x1 39.9 33.3 0 21.4 33.1 15.0 22.9 100.0 0 88.9 43.6 28.8 37.6 42.7 35.6 No. 33 27 60 10 9 19 10 11 21 - - 53 49 102 SS1 21 25.2 31.0 27.5 55.6 90.0 67.9 66.7 65.0 65.7 - - 30.8 41.5 35.2 6 0 1 1 - - 2 5 7 No. 2 4 - - old age Sur- vivors Insurance x1 1.5 4.6 2.8 0 5.0 2.9 - - 1.2 4.2 2.4 - - Unemployment, Veterans, prl- No. 17 3 20 0 1 1 0 1 1 - - 17 5 22 vate pension, Workman's Com- 21 13.0 3.4 9.2 0 10.0 3.6 0 5.0 2.9 - - 9.9 4.2 7.6 pensation, etc. No. 23 - Other (divi- 13 - 10 13 23 10 - - - - dends, Interest, 21 14.9 10.6 - 5.8 11.0 7.9 rental Income, 7.6 - - - - - etc.) No. 1 5 6 1 0 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 2 B 10 AFDC x1 0.8 5.7 2.8 5.6 0 3.6 0 1.0 5.7 0.0 100.0 11.1 1.2 6.8 \ 1 3 - - - - 2 1 3 Railroad. No. 2 - - Refirement and 1.5 1.1 1.4 - - - - 1.2 0.8 1.0 Disability 21 - - 172 118 290 100.0 A Does not Include 72 clients for which data was not available, who didn't know, or had no Income. Table A-7 Number and Percentage Distribution of Clients Employed, NOT Employed, by Sex and Race, All Clients, at Intake WHITE BLACK HISPANIC OTHER TOTALS Male Vemale Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total No. 121 82 203 18 , 25 13 21 34 6 1 9 153 113 271 Not Employed, Total x1 77.6 82.0 79.3 90.0 70.0 83.3 76.5 95.5 87.2 75.0 100.0 81.8 78.6 83.7 80.7 (-Worked in past) (66) (57) (123) (15) (3) (18) (4) (6) (10) (4) (2) (6) (89) (68) (157) (-Never worked) (55) (25) (80) (3) (4) (7) (9) (15) (24) (2) (1) (3) (69) (45) (114) No. 35 18 53 2 1 5 4 1 5 2 0 2 43 22 65 Employed 21 22.4 18.0 20.7 10.0 30.0 16.7 23.5 4.5 12.8 25.0 0.0 18.2 21.4 16.3 19.3 201 135 336 100 Appendix B. DATA COLLECTION METHODOLOGY The primary goals of the study were to evaluate the independent living rehabilitation demonstrations and to analyze the service needs of and costs incurred by the severely handicapped individuals served by them. To accomplish these goals, data from all projects were collected on standardized forms which assessed independent living capability. The forms were designed to be analyt- ically compatible to those used in the Comprehensive Service Needs Study (CSNS), completed by The Urban Institute in June 1975. Given the diversity of program structures used by the demonstration projects, and the diverse mix of clients in them, assessment of the projects was a challenging task. The procedures followed to obtain the needed data are outlined in this section. A. The Survey Instruments Two survey instruments were developed to collect information on the clients served by the projects. One was called the data protocol, which collected information on client status, needs, and progress. The other was the cost form which collected information on services provided, cost of those services, and sources of funds utilized. 1. The Data Protocol The data protocol was constructed using items in the CSNS survey of the most severely disabled and newly developed items. The major types of variables in the data protocol were: - Demographic Characteristics (I.D. number, race, sex, age, type of housing, household composition, income, insurance, education and employment); - Disability Diagnoses (Primary and Secondary); - Status of Medical Condition - Severity Scales (PULSES, Barthel, Functional Limitations) ; - Social Interaction; - Transportation; - Architectural Barriers; - Equipment (Owned, Used and Needed) ; - Services Received and Needed; - Service Programs Contacted; and - Medical Expenses. A pretest of the questionnaire was conducted by each project on three of their clients. Revisions were made based upon comments from the projects and resulted in a final data protocol. A demonstration manual was written to provide instructions for using the questionnaire, as some of the questions were complex and required care attention. 2. Cost Forms The quarterly cost data form was designed to provide a detailed break- down of the costs of services, as well as the sources of funding, for each client in the program. The cost forms had ten major sections; counseling; diagnostic and evaluation; physical and mental restoration; training; placement; maintenance; services to family members; transpor- tation; aid and attendant services; and other. These service categories were essentially those used in the regular VR reporting system. Several cost categories were added or expanded in an attempt to capture information on the unique characteristics and emphasis of the Section 130 Demonstration programs. Rehabilitation Service Administration, Statistical Reporting Systems, Rehabilitation Services Manual, July 1974. Cost forms were completed quarterly for each client. During the early part of the study, however, costs were collected retro- actively from client intake to December 31, 1976 (data forms became available) and subsequent quarters thereafter. In this manner, the cut-off point of the cost forms would be congruent with that of the protocols. Actual expenditures for each service were collected. Only when actual figures were unavailable were estimates of the costs used. In addition to obtaining information on services provided which utilize project funds, the forms gathered information on services funded through other programs, including the regular VR program. These other funding resources or "similar benefits" were a key part of developing effective rehabilitation programs as costs were high for these clients, and project funding was low. Data on the use of similar benefits has been lacking within the regular VR program to date. To determine what is really needed to successfully rehabilitate a client, valid information on the types of services funded through vocational rehabilitation and other agencies or programs is essential. The additional funding needed to design a program of independent living for the severely disabled is often overstated because the potential for effectively utilizing similar benefits is not taken into account. Collecting information on use of other funding sources is fundamental then in identifying the actual amounts of money needed by VR to implement an independent living program. The data protocols were administered to clients at intake and at equal yearly intervals. Cost forms were administered in the quarter which the client entered the program and each quarter thereafter. Communication from project staff was encouraged especially when dis- crepancies were discovered or if technical assistance was needed. As forms were returned, they were entered in the 1og books to keep track of forms received or missing. Not only did this procedure help to remind projects when certain forms were due but it also updated the records of those clients who had died, had moved or were otherwise "lost to study. " An initial manual edit was then performed on the data and the majority of missing data was discovered. A list of incomplete and/or incorrect cost forms, by I.D. and project, was constructed to determine whether corrections would be obtained by telephone or through written correspondence. The decid- ing factor, though, was usually the number of forms which needed to be corrected. If time permitted, and the number of errors was sub- stantial, the incorrect protocol and cost forms were returned to the respective project for correction. Upon their return and review, these forms were sent to be key- punched. After it was determined that the data was in satisfactory condition, it was entered into computer files and stored for later analysis. An edit program was run on the data to flag logic errors, stray or missing data. Errors appearing on the edit printout were corrected and, finally, the data was prepared for analysis. At this point, the analysis which was written in advance could be placed in effect. Usually a frequency distribution of each variable was made along with several two-way crosstabs. Under the direction of senior staff persons, higher level analyses were performed on the data, after which the results were analyzed for the yearly reports. The incidence of data-related problems encountered during the course of the Section 130 study was partially eliminated as staff of the demonstrations become more familiar with the forms and procedures. B. Problems in Data Collection The most consistently found project errors throughout the three years of the study were the following: 1. Timeliness Protocol and cost forms, expected no later than one week following the due date, were received late. In some instances, forms were received several months late, even after repeated requests for them were made. This created serious delays in producing annual reports on the projects. 2. Missing Forms and Information In addition to missing forms there was a high incidence of missing information, especially concerning percentages of project and other funding sources. Cost forms without these elements were returned to the project for correction. 3. Unknown Information In many sections of the data protocol, a "don't know" code was given for those cases where the information. was unobtainable. There appeared to be excessive use of this code especially in the first year. 4. Skip Patterns Skip patterns (e.g., if answer to No. 6 was yes, skip to question 8) appeared throughout the protocol. This sometimes led to inappropriate questions being answered, or other questions being skipped over. 5. Severity Scores It was discovered, by manual and computer edit, that PULSES and Barthel total scores were added incorrectly. Scores were corrected by The Urban Institute. C. Other Data Collection Activities Major revisions were made in the data protocol during the third year of the study. Questions within each section were reworded to reduce their ambiguity. Revisions to the instruments manual were made to correspond to the changes in in the data protocol. The major problem associated with the revisions was that extreme caution had to be exercised when analyzing the two, differently formatted, data protocols. THE URBAN INSTITUTE 2100 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037