President’s 2012 Budget Proposal Follow-up

April 6, 2011

NCIL would like to thank everyone who attended our webinar last week on the President’s 2012 budget proposal and its implications for IL. As a follow-up to questions presented during the webinar briefing, we would like for you to review the summary of NCIL talking points, in addition to an example letter from Dawn Francis, Executive Director of the Iowa Statewide Independent Living Council providing detailed reasons for why this budget proposal is so harmful. These materials can be used to highlight important points in your contacts with Congress, and especially the White House. Contact information is included below for key legislative bodies and White House staff.

Talking Points:

• The President’s 2012 budget proposal, released February 14, 2011, suggests drastic and unacceptable changes to the way IL is currently funded.

• The President’s budget proposes eliminating the current funding mechanisms for Part B and C Centers for Independent Living, and replacing them with a new “Grants for Independent Living” program.

• Instead of providing direct funding to CILs, as has been the case since 1992, this plan would put all of the money in the hands of state governments to spend at their discretion.

• Providing direct funding to CILs is currently required by the Rehabilitation Act, and for the President’s budget proposal to be enacted, the Rehabilitation Act would have to be reauthorized and substantively altered.

Example Letter:

Dear President Obama, Kareem, Federal Legislators,

I am contacting you regarding the proposed restructuring of the Independent Living funding that is outlined in President Obama’s 2012 budget.

I would like to provide you with some education about the reality of what this will do to many Centers for Independent Living (CILs). I am opposed to this restructuring because of the damage it will do to many CILs, including the very real possibility that many CILs will have to close their doors as they will not be able to fiscally operate under this new structure.

Combining the federal Part B and the federal Part C Independent Living funding, and making them into a new block grant to states for Independent Living funding, is not acceptable for a number of reasons, and I would like to outline those reasons.

Combining these funds into a block grant and giving them to states will significantly reduce, if not eliminate, consumer control of independent living programs. Prior to the Part C funds being given to RSA to distribute directly to CILs, the funds were given out in grants to states. There were numerous problems with the state administering these grant funds, which is why the funding structure was changed to Part C going directly from RSA to CILs. Here are some examples of what happened in the past, and these problems will also occur under the proposed block grant funding:

• Under the past IL grant process, if the state had a freeze on hiring or travel, they would also make the CILs have a freeze on travel and hiring. This meant the CILs could not hire staff when needed, nor could they travel when needed. So even though the consumer controlled CIL Board directed the CIL Executive Director to hire a new staff, or directed that staff was to travel to attend a national conference, the state would NOT allow the CIL to do these things and would not provide the money to do these things, even though these things were an allowable use of the federal grant funds. The STATE AGENCY controlled the CIL, the Consumer Board did NOT have any control.

• In many states, the Vocational Rehabilitation Services agency has procedures for reimbursing funds to the CILs, and in many states CILs would submit documentation for reimbursement and it would take 3, 4 or 5 months for the VR agency to get the money back to the CIL, which caused a great hardship for CILs to be able to keep their doors open. Here is one true example. One CIL Director re-financed his own house to take out a loan to meet staff payroll until the CIL received the reimbursement funds for their expenses from the state VR agency. Currently, I know this is an issue with the federal Part B funds that the VR agencies give to CILs. It can take up to 4 or 5 months for a CIL to get reimbursed for their Part B funds. Fortunately, those CILs also get federal Part C funds directly from RSA so they have money to cover their expenses until they get the Part B reimbursement check from VR. If the President’s proposal becomes reality, there are many CILs that will most likely have to close as they will not have the working capital to pay their bills and then wait 4-5 months to get reimbursed by the VR agency.

There are additional concerns to consider.

• VR agencies are already under stress from state budget cuts, and it takes VR staff time to be able to do contracts and reimbursements for CILs. If these contracts become bigger, VRs will have to hire additional staff to manage these funds and do the contracts with the CILs. Where will the money come from for the VR agency to do this? Will it be taken out of the combined Part B and Part C funds, which means less funds going to CILs for direct consumer partner services, and less money to SILCs to be able to operate?

• Currently only the Part B funds require a state match. If you combine B and C into one block grant, will state match be required for this total amount? If so, where are states going to get the state funds to match the additional Part C funds? Many states can barely find the match for the Part B funds, so it is possible that states will NOT have funds to match the Part C funds too. That means the state will not get the Part C funds, and Centers will not have enough funding to keep their doors open.

• Providing direct funding to CILs is currently required by the Rehabilitation Act, and for the President’s budget proposal to be enacted, the Rehabilitation Act would have to be reauthorized and substantively altered.

These are very serious concerns regarding the President’s proposed budget. If these changes were actually adopted, the consequences of eliminating consumer control on such a scale would be felt across the country, and many CILs would be forced to shut their doors due to fiscal constraints. This budget is not good for CILs, and directly undermines the purpose of the Independent Living Program in America.

Contact Information:

Fortunately, the President’s budget proposal is just that – a proposal. The next step is for Congress to put together their own budgets in each Chamber, starting with the House of Representatives. The Appropriations Committee in the House and Senate need to know that this change is a bad idea, and that the Independent Living community will not idly stand by while such attacks on consumer control are taking place. Here’s who needs to hear from us:

• Call the White House! This is the President’s budget and the White House needs to hear from the IL community that we are not happy that the President would propose a budget with negative ramifications for the Independent Living Program in America.

Contact Kareem Dale, Associate Director & Special Assistant to the President for Disability Policy at the White House Office of Public Engagement, or call (202) 456-1414.

The House and Senate Appropriations Committees in Congress need to know about the proposal for the Independent Living Program, and that we need Congress to send the President a budget that doesn’t reduce the consumer control of the Independent Living Program and create more bureaucratic hurdles for Centers for Independent Living.

• Contact both Appropriations Committees! If your Senator or Representative is on any of the Committees or Subcommittees listed below, they need to hear from you! If your Representative sits on any of these Subcommittees, your help is especially needed!

• Senate Appropriations Committee or (202) 224-7363

• Senate Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Labor, HHS and Education

• House Appropriations Committee or (202) 225-2771

• House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Labor, HHS, and Education

If you have questions about the President’s budget, the budget process, or IL funding, please call NCIL Policy Analyst Austin Walker at (202) 207-0334 (toll-free: 1-877-525-3400), ext. 1008. Austin can also be reached by e-mail at austin@ncil.org.