A Review of the Department of Rehabilitation Services
Executive Summary
Introduction
In response to a legislative request, the PEER Committee reviewed the Mississippi Department of Rehabilitation Services.
In conducting the review, PEER’s primary goal was to evaluate whether MDRS addresses its stakeholders’ needs by determining whether MDRS:
PEER also sought to answer specific legislative questions regarding MDRS managers’ administration of the agency. The questions and corresponding answers are given on pages x through xiv of this summary.
PEER did not review the program of the MDRS Office of Disability Determination Services, which determines individuals’ eligibility for Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income. That office is funded entirely by the U. S. Social Security Administration. However, PEER did include the costs of the Office of Disability Determination Services in a comparison of staffing costs and compensation increases.
Background
The Legislature created the Department of Rehabilitation Services in 1991 in the Vocational Rehabilitation Law of Mississippi (codified as MISS. CODE ANN. § 37-33-1 et seq.). MDRS was created “in order to provide for rehabilitation, habilitation and other services to eligible individuals with disabilities, their families and the community.”
The State Board of Rehabilitation Services, consisting of five state officials and two members appointed by the Governor, governs MDRS. MISS. CODE ANN. § 37-33-153 (1972) organizes MDRS into the following offices, corresponding to its programs:
The Office of Support Services provides administrative support for the department.
As of June 30, 2005, MDRS had a total of 873 staff, including those at the headquarters office and at service sites in thirty-four cities. MDRS receives 70% of its funds from federal grants, 7% from the state’s general fund, and 23% from other state and federal sources.
Adequacy of Avenues for Consumer Input and Level of Consumer Satisfaction
Channels for Consumer Input
While MDRS provides all of the avenues for consumer input required by federal law, the department could enhance its efforts for soliciting input and using that information to improve services.
MDRS complies with requirements that state agencies receiving federal vocational rehabilitation funding must meet regarding specified methods for involving consumers in planning, service provision, and evaluation. MDRS establishes for each consumer an individualized plan for services, which the counselor and consumer, or the consumer’s representative, develop jointly. The department also has procedures whereby decisions regarding consumers’ services may be reviewed, both formally and informally. The Client Assistance Program is available to MDRS consumers through the Mississippi Society for Disabilities and the agency has established several advisory groups for its major functional areas.
MDRS’s Consumer Relations staff follows up on inquiries and complaints about services. The department contracts for an annual satisfaction survey of MDRS consumers regarding services. For federal fiscal years 2002 through 2004, MDRS consumers overall rated MDRS’s services on average between 4.56-4.63 on a 5 point scale (with 5 being “very good”).
Consumers and advocacy groups reported to PEER in interviews that they were concerned with poor communication between counselors and consumers and had general concerns regarding resources and employment. Advocacy groups were also concerned with the role of advisory councils in shaping MDRS policy.
Areas Needing Improvement: Solicitation of and Response to Consumer Input
While all federally required avenues for consumer input at MDRS are present and MDRS surveys show that, on average, vocational rehabilitation consumers are satisfied with MDRS services, the agency could make improvements to address concerns noted through PEER interviews. These areas include consolidating consumer complaint information, increasing efforts to involve consumers in advisory councils, and defining the role of MDRS staff in advisory council meetings.
MDRS does not have agency-wide consolidated information regarding complaints or informal and formal reviews. The department also does not have policies and procedures instructing field office staff and regional managers to log or report complaints and reviews.
Regarding MDRS’s relationship with advisory councils, the State Rehabilitation Council and the Statewide Independent Living Council provide notice regarding their meetings that exceeds the amount of notice required by law. However, MDRS does not require vocational rehabilitation and independent living counselors to inform consumers about advisory council meetings. Also, the advisory councils’ by-laws do not specify the role of MDRS staff serving as ex-officio members on the councils.
Since 2002, the Governor has not appointed members to either the State Rehabilitation Council or the Statewide Independent Living Council, even though these groups have sent recommendations for appointment.
Assurance of Quality Service for Consumers
Quality Assurance Standards and Methods
MDRS and the federal agencies that provide the department’s funding monitor the quality of MDRS’s programs through methods such as case reviews, data reporting, and analysis.
MDRS and its federal funding sources have implemented methods of monitoring performance on standards from the individual case level to district and regional officers to the state level. The U. S. Rehabilitation Services Administration monitors MDRS’s performance through annual on-site reviews and through the department’s self-reporting. MDRS also conducts internal monitoring through use of its management information systems, managers’ review of monthly caseload reports and case reviews, internal program evaluations, and surveys.
Areas Needing Improvement in Quality Assurance
While the Department of Rehabilitation Services monitors caseloads and the delivery of services by case workers, the agency lacks an agency-wide, comprehensive, strategic quality assurance plan that details standards, activities, and roles of staff involved in quality assurance, risking duplication of monitoring efforts and aspects of programs operating without monitoring efforts.
While MDRS monitors performance both internally and externally, all monitoring is program-specific. PEER did not find evidence of cross-program monitoring through a set of comprehensive quality assurance procedures. Cross-program monitoring would allow MDRS’s agency administrators to identify more easily the areas that need improvement and would promote good monitoring practices for other programs.
As previously noted, MDRS does not have agency-wide consolidated information regarding complaints or formal, written policies and procedures instructing field office staff and regional managers to log or report complaints. Also, the department has not developed comprehensive written policies and procedures to govern the work of the Program Evaluation Unit.
The Program Evaluation Unit notifies counselors and managers in advance of case reviews rather than conducting them unannounced. Advance notification of case reviews may prohibit MDRS from identifying problems in case management.
Questions and Answers Regarding Specific Administrative Issues
The legislative request that initiated this project included several specific questions to PEER regarding administrative issues at MDRS. The questions posed related to staffing, the headquarters building and grounds, lobbying and advocacy, dues paid to professional associations, consumers’ access to facilities, and vehicle management.
Following are PEER’s conclusions regarding these areas of MDRS’s administration, as well as the specific questions and corresponding answers.
Staffing
MDRS’s administrative salary costs represented 16% of the agency’s total salary costs in FY 2005; salary costs for direct service employees represented 84% of total salary costs. Compensation increases in FY 2005 were similarly distributed and, of eighteen new positions at MDRS, all are direct service positions. Given the nature of the rehabilitation services environment, PEER does not take exception to the proportion of administrative staff to direct service staff at MDRS.
Following are the specific questions regarding staffing that were posed to PEER, followed by PEER’s answers.
What is the cost of MDRS’s administrative personnel in relation to its cost of direct service personnel?
In FY 2005, approximately 16% of MDRS’s total salary expenditures were for administrative employees and approximately 84% were for direct service employees.
How has MDRS distributed increases in compensation between administrative and direct service personnel?
Direct service employees, comprising approximately 85% of MDRS’s total number of employees, received approximately 78% of the dollar value of compensation increases in FY 2005. Within the administrative employees category, 50% of agency-level and 100% of office-level supervisors received compensation increases in FY 2005. Twenty-four percent of the support services staff received increases in compensation. Within the direct service employees category, 43% of direct service supervisors received compensation increases in FY 2005. Twenty-one percent of direct service staff received increases in compensation.
From FY 2002 through FY 2005, the number of direct service employees receiving increases in compensation increased by 71 and the total dollar amount of increases for direct service employees rose by $217,534. During the same period, the number of administrative employees receiving increases declined by 17 and the total dollar amount of increases for administrative employees increased by $836.
How has MDRS distributed new staff positions between administrative and direct service personnel?
From FY 2002 through FY 2005, the Legislature authorized thirty-one additional positions for MDRS. Of those new positions that are filled, all are direct service employees.
Headquarters Building and Grounds Expenditures
From FY 2001 through FY 2005, MDRS spent $50,962 on improving accessibility to its headquarters. For this same period, the department’s expenditures for grounds maintenance equipment and supplies totaled $26,599 (some of which represents expenditures for equipment with an extended life, such as lawn mowers, and some of which represents recurring expenditures). Although the headquarters building has unnecessary amenities such as indoor fountains and tennis courts, those amenities were present on the property when it was bought by the state and have cost the state little to maintain.
Following is the specific question regarding headquarters building and grounds expenditures that was posed to PEER, followed by PEER’s answer.
What has MDRS spent recently for headquarters building and grounds improvements and maintenance?
From FY 2001 through FY 2005, MDRS spent $50,962 on accessibility improvements and $26,599 on grounds maintenance equipment and supplies for its headquarters building.
Lobbying and Advocacy
Some MDRS staff members travel to the Capitol three to four days per week during legislative sessions. While state agencies should have access to the legislative process to support the constituents that they serve, they should also ensure that resources are used efficiently.
Following are the specific questions regarding lobbying and advocacy that were posed to PEER, followed by PEER’s answers.
Are any MDRS staff registered lobbyists?
No. According to the Secretary of State’s Office, MDRS does not have any registered lobbying groups or individuals.
How often do MDRS staff travel to the Capitol and for what purposes?
MDRS’s Executive Director reports that he and the Deputy Director travel to the Capitol an average of three to four days per week during the legislative session.
During the 2005 regular legislative session, MDRS staff members were reimbursed for 103 round trips to the Capitol from MDRS headquarters in Madison in private vehicles. This does not include any trips made in MDRS vehicles.
Dues to Professional Associations
In FY 2005, MDRS paid $21,181 in professional dues to associations, $13,604 of which was spent for membership in the Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation. MDRS also spent $16,162 in travel to meetings of this association. Membership in the council provides MDRS with training, opportunities for federal advocacy, and facilitates interaction with similar agencies in other states.
Following are the specific questions regarding dues to professional associations that were posed to PEER, followed by PEER’s answers.
What associational dues does MDRS pay and for what purpose?
In FY 2005, MDRS paid $21,181 in professional dues to associations.
How much did MDRS spend in FY 2005 in travel costs related to associations?
In FY 2005, MDRS spent $16,162 on out-of-state travel to meetings of the Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation.
Consumer’s Access to Facilities
MDRS chose the locations of its service facilities based on factors intended to maximize consumers’ access to services. MDRS staff members state that they will travel to or provide transportation assistance for consumers who do not live near a service facility. MDRS chose to locate its headquarters in Madison after the state received bids on six buildings and the bid for the present site was the lowest received. Although the headquarters building is located outside of Jackson, no services are provided there that would require consumers to travel to that location.
Following are the specific questions regarding consumers’ access to facilities that were posed to PEER, followed by PEER’s answers.
Are MDRS’s service locations easily accessible to consumers?
MDRS chose its office locations based on factors intended to maximize consumers’ access to services. If an MDRS service location is not convenient to a consumer, MDRS will either provide transportation for the consumer or an MDRS counselor will travel to the consumer.
Why did MDRS locate its headquarters in Madison?
The state bought the MDRS headquarters building in Madison after reviewing six bids from the Jackson metro area. The state chose the Madison building because it had the lowest bid.
Vehicle Management
MDRS manages ten state-owned vehicles but does not manage them in a way that ensures their most efficient and effective use.
Following are the questions regarding vehicle management that were posed to PEER, followed by PEER’s answers.
What state-owned vehicles does MDRS manage?
MDRS manages ten state-owned vehicles.
What are the components of a good vehicle management program?
An agency’s vehicle management program should include elements such as documented cost-benefit analysis regarding decisions about purchase and replacement and formal policies and procedures addressing vehicle use and documentation.
Does MDRS manage its state-owned vehicles in a way that ensures their most efficient and effective use?
No, the department does not manage its vehicles in a way that ensures their most efficient and effective use.
MDRS’s policies and procedures do not require the staff to conduct an annual cost benefit analysis to determine when to provide an employee with an assigned state-owned vehicle, when to establish an agency pool of vehicles, and when to reimburse employees for mileage driven in private vehicles. MDRS reimburses some personnel for travel in private vehicles when MDRS vehicles are available for use at less cost. MDRS’s policies and procedures do not require the staff to conduct formal annual needs analysis upon which to base decisions regarding purchase or replacement of vehicles. Although MDRS has formal, written policies and procedures for maintaining travel logs, MDRS staff do not keep consistent and detailed travel logs for state-owned vehicles.
Recommendations
The procedures should address, but not be limited to, the roles of following in quality assurance:
The MDRS plan should also include production of an annual report of quality assurance activities and results.