CSAVR EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
April 18, 2005
Introductions and sign-in sheet were the first order of business.
Committee Chairperson Steve Wooderson - Overview of agenda as follows:
1. Agenda overview
2. Review goals of committee
3. Re-cap strategic planning from committee
4. Re-cap network activities from the Nashville meeting
5. Facilitated dialogue regarding the future movement of the network
6. June 1st "Growing the VR-Business National Network" Conference
7. Ongoing leadership
8. RSA Update
9. CARF Presentation
Wooderson Updates:
- November ‘03 set 2 goals for committee: development of national VR-Employer Network; development planning to ensure success for the network. These were accepted by CSAVR.
- Spring '04 conducted a S.W.O.T. with committee in relation to national network.
- Strengths: Experience in serving people with disabilities and employers; national infrastructure to deliver services to both customers; able to build on our expertise; history of success with business.
- Weaknesses: System is "immature" at the national level…in terms of timeliness of response, etc.; relationship with One-Stops and with single points of contact; not consistent with packaging the network nationally.
- Opportunities: Support of RSA; WIA and partnering with them in a leadership role to show what we can do.
- Threats: Danger of not being able to deliver what we promise; tenuous relationship with WIA; consistency of delivery in the network.
- Employment Conference - big success in networking.
Presentation by Paul Andrew, CARF:
Working on standards of service. Proposing some through CARF. Would like permission to email all committee members for input on drafted standards. Standards will involve business. Broad overview: some traditional stuff…..assessment, evaluation, AT, accommodations, skills training, employment…and personnel services to employers for people who are job seekers. Also focused on rural economic development issues. This category will also be included.
Returned to discussion on national network:
- Reviewed some slides from Nashville CSAVR meeting: Why VR/Why Now? And state, regional and national action steps suggested.
- Clarified the meaning of "point of contact".
- Reviewed basic network focus on developing a VR person-to-person network that would create a dialogue network of trust among those on the VR side of the network. This would then support networking with business.
Facilitated discussion by Sally Siewert, GSU RCEP generated the following issues that focused on building a more formal approach to the infrastructure for growing the VR-Business National Network. Sally asked, “What do you want to see on June 2 as an outcome of the June 1st conference in Atlanta?”
1. Define the process: names, phone numbers, etc. for each VR point of contact and define who the employer would make contact with….and the protocol as to how to organize specific contact information to connect employer with VR.
2. Consistent message across the board regarding the network. What is that message?
3. In-state consistency when there is a general and blind agency.
4. Control over the message regardless of who controls the carrying of the message…..especially with thousands of messengers. Craft that message.
5. Analyze what each agency has to offer. Fold this into the marketing message. What are the deliverables? The commonalities?
6. Any homework prior to participants' arrival at the June 1st meeting? Maybe bring contents of the CSAVR survey sent out a year ago regarding the network to the "Points of Contact" in each VR agency.
7. What about a database and a way to exchange information?
8. What financial commitments are states willing to make toward this effort? First need to know the commitment.
9. Make sure the points of contact in VR know the commitment of their directors. Discuss this at the June 1st meeting as related to the needs of the "infrastructure".
10. Examine Region 4 model so we don't have to re-invent the wheel. Send out info prior to the June 1 meeting. What's their baseline?
11. Nature, purpose, structure, models to study, etc. all need to be a part of the dialogue at the first meeting.
12. Get a common vision.
13. Be basic in the first meeting with common elements so that all states can fit into the network if they want to.
14. Try to enhance what's happening in each state and take it to a national level.
15. Plan for something after the June 1st meeting and reconvene to go the next level with the network.
16. What skills and knowledge are needed by staff?
17. The work product of the June 1st meeting should be a written statement. Gives us something concrete.
18. Do a bullet presentation of the strategic imperatives: What are your quality control issues…..success in meeting the needs of the customer; easy retrieval of success indicators; ground rules/procedures/nuts and bolts…but simple, please, just a few.
19. After first session on June 1, what are the challenges to making this network work? Draw from SWOT.
20. On feedback loop….use to market successes in the network.
21. Need some ACTION to come out of the meeting, not just more talk. Be very active in next steps.
22. Some $ to bring in a leader for the initiative.
On June 2nd, what ideas would you expect to see as action steps?
· A model.
· VR celebration.
· Contractors for a data system and cost. What about the Region 4 website?
· Building trust between individuals in the network.
· Know what we all do "in common" for national system.
· Plan for small wins.
RSA Update from Roseann Ashby:
Reported on the RSA website which features best practices in employment. The site will also include a point of contact in VR for all 80 agencies.
CSAVR Employment Committee "Steering Committee" Possibility:
Steve Wooderson suggested this concept to help maintain the forward movement and action on the national network. This would offer the committee a continuity plan. Use steering committee to have more frequent contact and preliminary planning in between Employment Committee meetings (all members on a conference call is not effective). The Chair of this committee would select steering committee with input from the group….maybe 8 - 10 people. Suggests geographic or regional representation. Also consider including an RSA rep in the field and possibly RCEP. There was no opposition to this suggestion, just a question about time commitment.
