January 31, 2000
the Honorable Denis O'Brien: chair
Committee on Health and Human Services
Pennsylvania General Assembly
House box 202020
Main Capitol Building
Harrisburg, Pa 17120-2020
Dear chairman O'Brien,
I am writing from the perspective as the previous
Commissioner of the Massachusetts commission for the blind over
the period of 15 years to offer my views in support of House bill
160 and its objective of the establishment of a separate state
agency for blind Pennsylvanians. I am confident that the
following will prove helpful and convincing in establishing the
real need for such an agency and the benefits that can be derived
from its creation.
The notion of a one-stop service agency for persons who are
blind has its roots in the very different needs of blind persons
for services which contain the necessary expertise to guarantee
effectiveness, the best investment return for the taxpayer,
accountability to the very population being serviced, and the
avoidance of lowering priorities and availability of service to
this low incidence population. Let me explain.
In addition to the common issues attendant to any
disability, blindness has the pervasive and serious deficits of
the ability to access information and travel without perilous
challenges. I use the word pervasive since access to information
is not just the inability to pick up a print piece of mail and
read it with eyesight, it is all manner of information from
internet connections on the computer to the phone book and want
ads. Alternative techniques must be utilized to compensate to
the extent that can be done. this requires braille instruction
and for those who can utilize computers; the additional training
in electronic technologies utilizing adaptive hardware and
software for either total blindness or the many and varied
degrees of eyesight left to a person who is legally blind. In
addition to these critical areas of special and unique needs, a
blind person must also learn to cook, clean, keep financial
records and manage a household with either no or low vision.
Moreover in this far too short list of illustrations of a blind
persons unique needs that cannot be viably serviced by a generic
or multi-disability provider, there is the whole issue of
training on the use of the long cane or dog guide as the mobility
tools needed to travel independently. These are serious needs
that failure to address without proper and trained staff, can
hold a person from ever achieving employment or independent
living.
the benefit to the taxpayer is clear. Without a one-stop
agency for the blind, the state is likely to incur substantially
higher welfare costs from blind persons not getting work, needing
more services from state or state supported agencies, poor
decision making by state workers not familiar with blindness
oriented training or technologies, lost productivity by state
staff having to recreate the wheel of research each time they
encounter a blind person, and increased bureaucracy through
distributed human resources duplicating what would have been the
full time responsibility of a blindness agency. the costs of
this are difficult to analyze, but empirical evidence has shown
in more than one study that blindness agencies are twice as
likely to help a person get work than the generic models.
Moreover, services from generic models that at best constitute
educated guessing often either fail to provide the anticipated
product or open themselves to over-charging from vendors who can
exploit the lack of knowledge by the purchasing agency. any
small administrative cost of setting up and operating a separate
agency for the blind is more than compensated by the cost
avoidances and increased revenues to the state.
the issues of insuring accountability to the blind community
and avoiding lowered priorities of service from generic systems
is critical from the perspective that those most impacted by a
service delivery system have the largest stake in its successful
operation. History is replete with generic agencies deciding
whatever they feel is best for the constituencies they serve
without regard to the needs of blind persons. this is mostly due
to the fact that other disability groups are often more easily
served because the limitations of their disabilities are more
quickly addressed through inexpensive means. Blindness presents
both a need for serious expertise and appropriate investment. In
those agencies set up for blind persons; a balanced system of
consumer input and community monitoring has produced highly
effective agencies with very positive results for blind people
and the state.
In closing, let me say that all the above was garnered from
my own experiences as the commissioner of the Massachusetts
Commission for the blind over 15 years. Since that time I have
been the Executive director of the american council of the Blind
where my national perspective has only verified these earlier
findings. I therefore urge the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to
move quickly to adopt the legislation necessary to provide for a
truly effective and powerful service system to benefit blind
persons within the Keystone State.
Sincerely,
charles H. crawford
Executive Director.