MINUTES
February
7, 2011
12:00
p.m. – 2:00 p.m.
Members
Present: Wheeler
Clemons; Liz Graves; Margarita Grome; Anna Liebenow, NAC
Co-Chair; Don Phelps; Jack Ringland; Mary Wambach, NAC Co-Chair.
Guests: Sue
Eleoff (OSCIL), Lorna Ricci (OSCIL).
Staff
Present: Camille
Pansa, Administrator.
Interpreter: Dona
Lombardi
1.
Welcome
and
Introductions: Mary
Wambach welcomed all. Self-introductions
were made.
2.
Review of
minutes of November 22, December 12 and January 10: previously
sent. A motion was made by Anna
Liebenow and seconded by Mary Wambach to accept the November, December,
and
January minutes as written. Vote passed unanimously.
3.
NAC
purpose and function: Mary
Wambach read the draft description of
the NAC. Comments were positive and included praise for having a strong
focus. No
changes were suggested.
4.
Update on
survey sub-committee development: Mary
Wambach stated that the sub-committee has had several meetings and have
been working on the structure of the survey and developing questions.
Lorna Ricci
presented a 2003 SILC survey done by Acadia marketing firm. The survey
was
passed around and will be reviewed by the sub-committee who will take
it under
advisement. The challenge of receiving a sufficient number of responses
to get
an accurate representation was also mentioned. It was noted that the
survey
will be on-going and not offered for just a limited period of time.
5.
Accessibility
of the Survey: The
importance of making the survey accessible
was discussed. No specific suggestions were made.
6.
Dissemination/Collection
of the Surveys: Several
venues to disseminate the survey
were suggested, such as, IL conferences, senior centers, and other
disability
groups’ conferences. As there are a limited number of cross disability
groups,
it will be important to connect with and collect information from all
types of
disabilities and groups. Other suggestions were to develop a schedule
of when
and where to place surveys; code hard copy surveys in order to
determine where
they originated; give presentations at conferences so people have a
better
understanding of the purpose of the survey; give people a ‘carrot’ for
completing
the survey, such as, a completion certificate, “Your Voice Being
Heard”.
7.
How to
elicit information about ‘unmet needs’: The
importance of using specific language as
to not evaluate current services was discussed. A suggestion was made
to
include a category “Do not need services, already living
independently”, and
then ask why they do not feel they need services. The sub-committee
will also
review the Acadia survey for specific questions in this area.
8.
Obtaining
input about broader advocacy issues in the
Survey: Some
suggestions were “Do you feel the laws protecting you are being
enforced?” and “Which
issues/laws need the most improvement?” It was noted that people may
not know the
laws and may need to be educated which may be discovered as an unmet
need. It
was also suggested that specific categories, such as, transportation,
public
access, and accessible housing, be used concerning which RI laws are
working/not working. It was suggested that the GCD might be helpful
with
appropriate wording.
Anna
Liebenow, Co-Chair
Mary
Wambach, Co-Chair