Section 14(c) National Online Dialogue

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP) is hosting an online dialogue to engage stakeholders in a policy-making process through ePolicyWorks.  If you would like to join in you can access the discussion from this link.  You can register and than write your opinion, like or comment on another idea someone else submitted.  It has been great to see this participation.

There are 3 sections of topics – “Use of the Section 14(c) certificates and observed trends”,   “Experiences transitioning from the use of Section 14(c) certificates” and “vision for the future of work and workplaces; the landscape over the next five to 10 years”


DOL header

This slideshow requires JavaScript.


There are several themes that pop up over and over again and it is really wonderful to see how much support there is for CHOICE to be honored.  But even though CHOICE is supported there are many who disagree and do not respect that choice.

There are SO many issues that are involved which are all very complex and inter-twined.  One cannot change something without understanding how all these issues intersect.  This is even more difficult when people misunderstand the rules of Section 14(c) and how it is intended to be used.

This issue is not just a simple matter of paying the disabled person minimum wage and then they will be independent and off public assistance.

This past legislative session in Washington State there was a bill that was sponsored by Rep. Noel Frame that passed into law after at least a couple of strikers, a few amendments, and much work by constituents and legislators.  Engrossed House Bill 1706 as passed into law

This law has no information regarding increased training, job skill development, or funding for supports needed by these disabled employees in order to work.  It will need to be evaluated before any more transitions take place.

During the House Floor discussions, there were some telling comments by legislators that both indicated that they understood the situation and that they did not understand the full situation.

Representative Tana Senn (41st Legislative District)

“We just heard on this house floor about people with developmental disabilities being needy, not knowing the difference between 5 dollars and minimum wage and focus on the parents.  But I’d like to bring us back to both the people themselves with disabilities and the businesses that hire them.  My husband works for MOD pizza and their entire business model is to do second chance hiring – whether it’s people who are recently incarcerated and now back out in the community or people with disabilities.  And when I asked him if he pays and if his company pays people with disabilities minimum wage – he kind of looked at me askance and asked “why would we pay anybody less money for a job that needs to be done.  He also emphasized that they talk about people at their company as those with special abilities because they know that their co-workers and the community around values diversity and by having people with special abilities in their restaurants – and they have over 500 across the country –  that they know that they are demonstrating inclusivity and diversity and this actually improves the work environment, improves the services and the food and the environment that they deliver to their clients – and so again Mr. Speaker, this is something that all workers can appreciate , that businesses can thrive off and Mr. Speaker, I see no reason why we would pay anybody less for their special abilities to do a job that needs to be done”

  • Questions To Representative Senn –
    • Do the people her husband employs at MOD pizza have 1:1 supports ?
    • If no, what type of support does the disabled person have in order to do their job? .
    • Does she understand that those supports are not paid for by the employer?
    • Would MOD pizza still employ these people if they had to pay another person to be their support or the manager had to devote extra time and energy in management to support this employee?
    • If MOD pizza needed to provide the support for the employee, would that employee’s hours be cut due to cost?
    • Are these employees at MOD pizza considered “high acuity” or “high support” employees by DDA?


Representative Mary Dye (9th Legislative District)

“Many of those in our community with high acuity, meaning they are more needy in their wrap around services in their employment,  they go into independent employment in a private industry, but they have job coaches and people surrounding them to help them be successful and have that time.  Every time we impact that program it means those high acuity people, those people with severe disabilities have less opportunity, less time in the workplace.  That is the piece that hurts the most when we pass bills that we think are right but in actuality, are absolutely devastating to those people who would otherwise be out in the community working”

Representative Michelle Caldier (26th Legislative District)

“I had many of these employment providers coming to my office saying “hey, look at what we are doing, we’re giving these folks a job, we’re job coaches, and it wasn’t until I had parents come and talk to me that I really saw the complexities with employment for people with disabilities.

I learned how much these employment providers make off of the backs of individuals who are developmentally disabled.  I also learned   that it pretty much eliminated group employment  throughout our state and a lot of those parents told me – they said what my child wants is – they’re very social – they want to be around other folks that they can communicate with – maybe they’re not doing the job at the same speed but you know what – they’re able to have the social interactions that they would not get otherwise .  And now because group employment is pretty much eliminated across our state – now they’re in a job that they don’t necessarily like .  We need to make sure that we have options  for people – that there’s opportunities for folks and what we really need to do is dig deeper and listen to the families and listen to what they say – not the people who are making money off of people with developmental disabilities – and for that reason alone, I’m going to be voting no and it’s because I believe in listening to the parents of the folks that this will impact – thank you”

I would like to thank Representatives Dye and Caldier and the others who stood up and voiced an appreciation and understanding of the choices that we need in order to best serve and support our community members with significant disabilities.

Just paying these individuals more per hour will not erase their needs for supports and services.



HB 1706 – another striker bill


Change Improvement Development Adjust Transform Concept

Change Improvement Development Adjust Transform Concept

Very interesting hearing today in the Senate Labor & Commerce Committee regarding EHB 1706.  A packed house with people from all over the state to testify against the bill as written – self advocates, healthcare professionals, parents, guardians and other advocates.  There were also the usual people/organizations who were there to testify in support of EHB 1706 but their voices have already been heard.  It was refreshing to hear some new perspective on issues that affect us and those we work with, live with and love.

One hour of testimony with 1 minute each, one after the other as fast as could be done.  All people were then asked to leave the room and there was an executive session – The outcome was passing  EHB 1706 striker April 1 2019  with a vote of 5 -1.

Some notes from the Fiscal note which actually does indicate there will be a fiscal impact to this legislation:

Developmental Disabilities Administration (DDA)
It is assumed that only individuals eligible to receive Individualized Technical Assistance services under an existing DSHS Developmental Disabilities Administration (DDA) program will receive Individualized Technical Assistance services due to an expiring Special Certificate. It is estimated that 421 eligible DDA clients will receive the Individualized Technical Assistance specified in this legislation. It is assumed:
•Each client will receive 20 hours of Individualized Technical Assistance
•Individualized Technical Assistance cost is $130 per hour
•The 421 clients will be provided services between July 1, 2019 and June 30, 2021

One FTE (WMS Band 1) will be needed between July 1, 2019 and September 30, 2021 to:
•Coordinate with the Department of Labor and Industries
•Prioritize clients for services
•Determine service options for clients
•Track client progress
•Accumulate and organize the data required to be reported in Section 5 of this legislation
•Prepare the required reports
Total cost for this FTE is estimated at:
Fiscal Year 2020: $126,000 ($72,000 GF-State)
Fiscal Year 2021: $120,000 ($68,000 GF-State)
Fiscal Year 2022: $ 30,000 ($17,000 GF-State)
Total Costs:
Fiscal Year 2020: $674,000 ($401,000 GF-State)
Fiscal Year 2021: $668,000 ($397,000 GF-State)
Fiscal Year 2022: $ 30,000 ($17,000 GF-State)

Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR)
The DSHS Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR) may see an increase in the number of DDA clients referred for services. However, it is assumed that the increased referrals will not be significant and the related costs can be absorbed within existing resources.

All in all a step in the right direction and some indication that the voices of those actually affected is beginning to be heard – a victory so far in that there have been some crucial corrections made – still some issues to work out.

April 1 testimony opposing HB 1706

“Facts” from The Arc of King County

The Arc of King County published Some facts about the subminimum wage bill on their advocacy blog today  – we say – check their “facts”

The Developmental Disabilities Case load and Cost report has data that is very different than what the Arc of King County reports – take for instance the number of people in supported integrated employment who work and make minimum wage.

DDA reports  8102 people are in the supported integrated employment services program, 3678 (45%) make at least minimum wage, 2294 (28%) make less than minimum wage and 2130 (27%) do not make a wage.

The Arc of King County reports – “Most people served by individual supported employment (the other 92 percent getting DDA employment services) already make minimum wage or better.”

DDA reports that 45% of those in supported integrated employment make minimum wage or better.

The Arc of King County reports “Most people served by individual supported employment (the other 92 percent getting DDA employment services) already make minimum wage or better.”

A national trend?  We don’t think so.  Of great importance is that there has not been evaluations done for quality of life, meaningful life or job satisfaction/employment rates since some of these states have made changes.  As policy makers, one would think that evaluations are important before making decisions.

The Arc of King County reports Vermont closed its sheltered workshops in the 1990s and abolished subminimum wage certificates for people with disabilities. New Hampshire, Maryland and Alaska all passed legislation to abolish subminimum wages for people with disabilities

Review Magical Thinking for some research and insights from New Hampshire and Maine on the issues of eliminating subminimum wage.

From Alaska :  While the Employment First movement has picked up in recent years, it does pose new challenges in how providers should tailor job-training services for each person.

One approach has been to give workers a job coach, who goes to work with them during their first month on the job and helps them learn the ropes.
(from 2018 – no evaluation of the outcome of their legislation yet )

These are just a few of the facts that have been checked – there are more.

Please ask The Arc of King County, Representative Noel Frame, Activist Shaun Bickley or any of those organizations on the list of organizations which support this bill,  about these discrepancies.

Ask them about the numbers of hours that employees work a week, ask them who pays for the job coaches and supports that will be ongoing for many of the employees to keep their jobs.  There are too many unanswered questions or concerns that have not been addressed for this bill to advance without causing more harm than good.

Eliminating subminimum wage – HB 1706

EHB 1706 passed the House yesterday in a vote of 81-17.  We have many concerns regarding this bill and now after one of our contributors received a response from Representative Noel Frame regarding the number of people who had special certificates, we are more concerned about the lack of information she and other legislators may have regarding the Special Certificates, sub-minimum wage, supported integrated employment and people with disabilities in general.


Representative Noel Frame

Below is the conversation from Noel Frame’s Facebook site. Clearly Representative Frame does not understand that there are over 4000 people in the DDA integrated supported employment program that are employed and make less than minimum wage.

It appears that Representative Noel Frame thought the only people earning less than minimum wage were those in sheltered workshops (which are no longer in Washington State anyhow) and totally missed that there are many in our integrated community sites that do not earn minimum wage or maybe do not earn any wage.

Felak and Frame Facebook posts from Noel Frame site


DDA caseload and cost report

Cheryl Felak also wrote:

While I understand that you, Noel Frame, were introduced to this issue by your constituent, Shaun Bickley, who is a very hard worker and activist, Bickley is misinformed on some of the information – partly because he blocks people who have a difference of opinion or ask questions for clarification – He blocked me over a year ago so any comments he may post, I will not be able to see.

It appears to not only me but many other advocates that Bickley has a vendetta against parents and allies who do not 100% agree with his position. Given that the MAJORITY of people in DDA continue to live with their families and depend on their families for housing, transportation and other activities of daily living, it is critical that we also listen to families, caregivers and other natural supports in this discussion. Without these people involved who do their best to ensure their family member with IID is integrated in the community people who want to make policies and laws regarding support are missing a huge part by ignoring these very critical partners.  They are a huge part of the discussion. Ridiculing them and stating they are speaking out of fear is a bias that is uncalled for.

As an aside to this – the issue of many, many people with IID being dumped in hospitals for months, chemically and physically restrained because their group homes have refused to care for them any longer is reality for many families now. Families tried to speak up about this in the past but were ridiculed. Families know the reality and they need to be listened to and be a real part of the conversation too.

It will be interesting to see what type of response we receive.  It would would have been best to have been part of the discussion from the beginning rather than mopping up a mess.