CAP is a federally funded advocacy program for applicants/consumers of Vocational Rehabilitation, Independent Living Service and other programs of the Rehabilitation Act. CAP provides information/referral, consultation/advice and/or representation to eligible individuals.
We believe that the consumer is the best advocate. In many situations, we provide information and support so she/he can advocate on their own behalf. When we need to become directly involved in a case, we assume that the counselor and consumer have made good faith efforts to resolve problems. Whenever possible, we attempt to address issues informally. We understand that our involvement is usually short term. The counselor and consumer will continue to work together after we leave the situation. Therefore, we try to preserve or possibly strengthen that relationship through our involvement. While we do represent individuals in due process (Mediation, Fair Hearing), this is only a small percentage of our actual work. The following is a sample of what we do. Actual names are not used in the examples.
1) Problem: Sandy felt unprepared for a meeting with her Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) counselor. Her primary concern was not knowing what services VR could provide. Sandy did not want CAP to be directly involved.
Intervention: CAP sent a copy of the VR State Policy manual and some of the federal regulations on VR services to Sandy.
Outcome: Sandy stated that the meeting went very well with her VR counselor, that she felt prepared and was able to negotiate because of the information provided.
2) Problem: Bill was attending college in Maine. He had been promised certain VR services by former VR counselors. The current VR counselor did not agree with the provision of those services. Bill requested CAP assistance to help resolve the disagreement.
Intervention: CAP reviewed the file and recommended that Bill obtain information on disability-related expenses such as transportation and medication. CAP then convened a meeting with Bill and his VR counselor.
Outcome: Through negotiation and the gathering of new information, the issue was resolved fairly and amicably. VR counselor agreed to pay for previous and new disability-related expenses.
3) Problem: Debbie, a former VR client who had been successfully employed in a nursing home, was fired. CAP was asked to look into situation, since Debbie felt there was no just cause for the termination.
Intervention: CAP investigated and discovered that Debbie was fired when her supervisor acted on allegations made by co-workers stating that Debbie's work was not satisfactory. Performance evaluations did not support these claims. CAP met with the administrator of the Nursing Home, the client and her VR counselor prior to filing a complaint under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Maine Human Rights.
Outcome: Debbie was given her job back and assigned to a new supervisor.
4) Problem: Bob was in school, with VR's assistance, pursuing a degree in the field of his choice. After a few years, Bob's VR counselor began questioning his vocational goal due to a decline in job openings in this field. Bob felt this was unfair and violated his choice of a vocational goal. He requested CAP assistance to resolve this disagreement and to help change to a new VR counselor.
Intervention: CAP obtained labor market information from the Department of Labor and a software program to which VR has access. CAP forwarded this information to Bob and his new VR counselor before they were scheduled to meet.
Outcome: VR counselor told CAP that the information helped her to support Bob’s continuation in the educational program toward his vocational goal.
5) Problem: John was a former VR client who requested that VR help modify his vehicle in order to maintain his employment. John’s VR counselor told him that VR does not provide vehicle modification and multiple services under post-employment. Post-employment is a category for individuals who are successfully employed with VR’s help, but who require additional services to maintain, regain or advance in employment.
Intervention: CAP provided the appropriate regulations and policy information to John and his VR counselor.
Outcome: VR counselor and John developed a plan that included provision of services needed to preserve John’s job. John shared the costs for services with VR and his employer.
6) Problem: Susan was a VR client who wanted to attend an out-of-state program to help her reach her career goal. VR refused to support Susan, on the basis that there were suitable programs in Maine. Susan had information that she felt supported her position. She requested CAP assistance.
Intervention: CAP asked if Susan and VR would be willing to have a mediator involved to help resolve this dispute. Both agreed.
Outcome: Mediation was successful. Susan ended up going to the out of state program, and VR agreed to pay for part of the program costs.
7) Problem: Gerry, a VR client, was going to an out-of-state school and needed various accommodations in order to participate in this program and reach his vocational goal. The school refused to provide any assistance, even though VR was willing to share the expense.
Intervention: CAP located appropriate disability rights organization in this other state where the school was located.
Outcome: Due to the threat of an injunction, the institution agreed to share the accommodation expense with VR. Gerry was able to complete the program.