By Chuk Hamilton, Director, Minnesota State Services for the Blind (SSB)

(Editor’s Note: This presentation was given at the National Federation of the Blind of Minnesota semiannual convention on April 18, 2009.)

Good morning, Federationists. It’s a beautiful day! Before I talk about training, I have to say something. I should have stood up and got the president’s attention when Bob Duncan was still here. If any of you are wondering if what we’re seeing is what we get with Bob and what he’s done over the last two years, the answer is an emphatic yes! One of the little-known stories happened during his first week or two of employment. My phone rang one day, the voice at the other end identified himself as the new interim principal at the Academy for the Blind, and he wanted to talk and learn how we could be better partners. I must admit I was surprised by it and a little skeptical. But I was certainly very intrigued. That started a relationship that has turned around our relationship with the State Academy for the Blind. As many of you know, but some of you don’t know, State Services for the Blind was actually a part of the admissions and discharge committee at the old Minnesota Braille and Sight Saving School. That ended when the first special education act came into law. It was transferred to the educational arena, instead of Human Services. I’m hopeful and confident that relationship will only be expanded in the future.

To review, the Governor did propose a budget that would cut SSB $139,000 of state general fund dollars each year of the next biennium—two years. It’s about 2% of our general fund. I have made certain decisions of cuts which would impact senior services, a child position we have, and it would impact a grant with United Blind of Minnesota. Currently, the House and the Senate are nearing the committee work of those bills and they have accepted the governor’s position as it relates to State Services for the Blind. In the environment we’re in, frankly, from where I sit, that’s a victory. That victory is not final yet, however. All of us who follow these kinds of events know that these funding bills are likely to come back and they’re going to have to redo them. Hopefully in the end, it will be limited to that amount.

I do want to talk about training. I started working for State Services for the Blind June 23, 1976. At that time in St. Cloud, the training was roughly about two weeks under the blindfold and then I was sent to what was then MSB (Minneapolis Society for the Blind, now Vision Loss Resources) for about 3 days, somewhat under the blindfold. That was somewhat the extent to my introduction and training to adjustment to blindness. It was at that time that it occurred to me that if in fact we are the experts from the public perspective (people pay taxes for our agency and look to us because many times they don’t know about the consumer groups for information about blindness) we need to be prepared to provide that. Unfortunately, it was not until roughly the mid 1990’s, under Dick Davis, that a systematic approach to adjustment to blindness training was envisioned and implemented. It lasted until the year 2000 and for approximately three years, there was no systematic approach to adjustment to blindness training for SSB staff.

When the director’s position came open, I did apply and I was interviewed. It included questions from you all and others and one of the things I made very clear at that time was that we were going to reinvigorate an adjustment to blindness training program for staff. We have done that with the support of the National Federation of the Blind, the State Rehab Council for the blind, other consumer groups, as well as staff. It was a step in the right direction at the right time. However, none of the management at State Services for the Blind felt it was the best it could be. With what was happening in the community and because this subject unfortunately had become such a lightning rod, I did decide to move ahead with what we could at that time (the buck stops with me.) We implemented Phase I training that applies to all, underscore all, State Services for the Blind staff. That is a series of readings, DVDs, and discussions with others regarding basic information on blindness, consumer groups, adjustment to blindness skills, low vision, the different services State Services for the Blind provides, and all those basic backgrounds kinds of things you and the public would expect staff to have.

We also had a Phase II level. Phase II was intended for those individuals who had direct contact with blind people. That Phase II training amounted to two two-week training activities at different facilities. Additionally, Phase II training included some deaf-blind training, and low vision training, but those aren’t the pieces that have gotten the most scrutiny. We’ve had roughly five years of experience with that. We did have to go through a procurement procedure—a request for proposal—that was put out in the state register to ask the public “Here’s what we want, can you provide this, and at what price?” There were two community rehabilitation programs, Blindness: Learning in New Dimensions (BLIND Incorporated) and the Duluth Lighthouse for the Blind, who responded. We did arrange with both and still do currently send staff to both locations.

We did do some surveying along the way as people returned from training. Because those proposals had a five-year lifetime, we need to formally look at what we are doing, how we are doing it, ask for input internally and externally, and then the management of State Services for the Blind is going to have to decide if there are going to be any changes. I suspect there will be.

Regarding the survey we just did, there were 57 staff surveys with a 73.7% response, not too bad for a survey. We did divide them into some groups. We wanted to look at the different groups who went through training at different times. We did want to be able to look separately at those staff who wanted to go, but who don’t have direct contact with customers. There was another group of people who went through the 1990’s training that was six weeks at one of three locations, and one week at each of the other two programs. There were 17 individuals who received the survey for that and 10 responded. The final group were people who did not participate in either of those periods, but probably came to us with some other training or felt they had significant training. About 2% of those responded.

We asked for input from consumer groups and received nine comments. There were three from community rehab programs, one from a consumer organization (I wonder who that was) and five from individuals. I was a little surprised by the number of comments. I thought there might be more.

We have that and I have staff who are trying to compile and organize it. Next week, management will look at this. It doesn’t mean management doesn’t already have some opinions about it. We do want to ask those who have participated and those who are providers, as well as consumers and consumer groups who have strong interest in this. Hopefully, we will have a policy soon. I don’t have an exact date for you. Clearly, it is our goal to have staff who have appropriate training for this.

As Joyce Scanlan has reminded me on more than one occasion, the skills are important, but it’s not just about the skills; it’s about the attitude, the outlook, the motivation, and what we do with those skills that is important. I have committed to the president and board of the NFB to work actively with them. We are very aware of the bill that is at the legislature and the two-year life cycle (Editor’s Note: he is referring to bills HF737 and SF1246 proposed by the NFB of Minnesota establishing training standards for SSB counselors and the two-year term of the legislature). I’m appreciative of the decision to give us an opportunity to put something together to improve that training and I’m optimistic and confident that we’ll be able to do that.

I do have two other things. I was informed this morning, for people who use the Radio Talking Book and are waiting for the digital receivers, it is a strong likelihood that on Monday morning production will begin. We have space for those and we can’t wait for that to happen.

Finally, this is likely to be my last visit with you as director of SSB. It is my intent, it has been no secret, to step down this summer. One of the things I certainly will be doing internally is to impress on the leadership to involve the community in the appointment process. I do intend not to retire. I do intend to work. I do intend to do things that are productive, hopefully with the blind community. We’ll see how that works out. There are a couple of possibilities. I am very appreciative of the support I have received from the NFB, as well as the guidance I have received. I’m sure succeeding directors will come to you for the same.