state of nevada adsdadsd.nv.gov/uploadedfiles/6.10.2020 spil wg draft min… · web view2020. 6....

Draft Minutes

Name of Organization: Nevada Statewide Independent Living Council (SILC) State Plan for Independent Living (SPIL) Workgroup

Date and Time of Meeting: June 10, 2020 1:00 p.m.

This meeting will be held via video-conference only:

In accordance with Governor Sisolak’sDeclaration of Emergency Directive006; Subsection 1; The requirementcontained in NRS 241.023 (1) (b) thatthere be a physical location designatedfor meetings of public bodies wheremembers of the public are permitted toattend and participate is suspended.

The public may observe this meeting and provide public comment on Zoom. To Join the Zoom Meeting:https://us02web.zoom.us/j/9299041434?pwd=dWFXWjQ0bXpDNWFFbERMZ2VRTENSdz09

Meeting ID: 929 904 1434Password: 1Zyk8GOne tap mobile+12532158782,,9299041434#,,1#,566530# US (Tacoma) +13017158592,,9299041434#,,1#,566530# US (Germantown)

Dial by your location +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) +1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown) +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) +1 646 558 8656 US (New York) +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)Meeting ID: 929 904 1434Password: 566530Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kdGvZ9R9O5

Nevada Department of Health and Human ServicesHelping People -- It's Who We Are And What We Do

https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kdGvZ9R9O5

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/9299041434?pwd=dWFXWjQ0bXpDNWFFbERMZ2VRTENSdz09

June 10, 2020

Meeting Materials Available at: http://adsd.nv.gov/Boards/SILC/Agendas/

1. Welcome, Roll Call and IntroductionsKacy Curry, Vice Chair

Participants: Mary Evilsizer, Patricia Unruh, Kacy Curry, Lisa Bonie, Mark Tadder, John Rosenlund, Janet Serial, Lynda TourloukisCART Provider: Becky Van AukenStaff: Dawn Lyons & Wendy Thornley

2. Public Comment (Members of the public will be invited to speak, however, no action may be taken on a matter during public comment until the matter itself has been included on an agenda as an item for possible action. Please clearly state and spell your name. Public comment may be limited to 3 minutes, per person at the discretion of the chair).

Mary: Thanked everyone who worked on the SPIL. She was excited to see how many participants were at the town hall meeting. The SPIL was a different version of input than they had before, and she appreciated all the public comment that came in. She feels their input is important and they are trying to support the SILC. She offered to present a public training on Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) and the Rehab Act to help the community better understand what the SILC is trying to do.

3. Approval of Meeting Minutes from January 9 and May 8, 2020 (For Possible Action). Kacy Curry, Vice Chair

Dawn Lyons: The January 9th minutes belonged to a SILC meeting and was inadvertently put on this agenda for approval. Patricia Unruh motioned to accept the May 8th draft minutes. Mary Evilsizer seconded. The motion carried.

4. Discussion and Make Recommendations Regarding the Final Draft of the State Plan for Independent Living (SPIL) (For Possible Action).

Kacy Curry, Vice Chair

Dawn Lyons: She had sent the SPIL members, two copies of the SPIL draft. She went over the copy with the red marks that contained questions and remarks made by Scott Youngs as public comment. She explained why she added some of the items into the other copy of the SPIL draft containing blue highlights.

On page 2, Scott Youngs said it would be helpful if the Executive Summary had footnotes about where information is mentioned in the Objectives.

Dawn Lyons: The Executive Summary is also something that the group received a comment or a question on. During the town hall they had questions about the various items that were listed in the Executive Summary. This is how the SPIL template is laid out by ACL. Dawn

9/14/20235Draft Minutes for 6/10/2020 SPIL Workgroup

http://adsd.nv.gov/Boards/SILC/Agendas/

June 10, 2020

added in parentheses either the Objective or the section for people to find more information about a particular item. In the Executive Summary, Dawn added the sentence, “As partners, the SILC, CILs and DSE including their AT for IL program, collaborate to achieve the mission of the IL network in Nevada.” Scott had asked how goals were deemed important. In the third paragraph, Dawn added, “These are important goals that have been identified as appropriate for our state based on collective data review.” This clarifies that the information from data was reviewed.

In the fourth paragraph, Scott Youngs stated that there should be no apparent or perceived conflict over SILC Director by the DSE, that the Executive Director salary is not reflected in the current position. It seems that it is low compared to comparable positions in the field. Full autonomy for the SILC, means private, non-profit with a clear distinction from the DSE.

Dawn Lyons: She would address that question by saying the budget in the SPIL is Part B money. The remainder of the staff salary, including the portion of the Executive Director that is missing, is provided in the state match.

In the fifth paragraph, Scott Youngs stated that the SILC should increase its education of legislators and agencies about Independent Living issues in Nevada. Also, to present as a SILC instead of a single entity or person for funding opportunities.

In the sixth paragraph about the long-term objective of eliminating the need for the staff support, Scott Youngs asked why that would be mentioned if it is not part of the current plan in some way.

Dawn Lyons: It needs to be mentioned because it is a long-term goal, just not one that will be accomplished within the next three-year period. That there is a lot of work the SILC must do and strengthen before they are able to become a 501(3) (e). To attain autonomy from the DSE, removing this position is necessary.

Mark Tadder: Feels that there should be some intermediate steps put in place, to removing the position.

Dawn Lyons: When her position as Executive Director becomes full time, she will have time to create that plan.

Patricia Unruh: Appreciated Scott and Mark’s comments. She agreed with Dawn that the SILC is not there yet. She felt that the SILC had made good progress with Dawn’s work. She felt that being fully autonomous, would not be accomplished in the next three years.

Dawn Lyons: Felt that the SILC has come a long way in the last three years. The biggest barrier in having these plans laid out properly, is the SILC’s membership which is in the Governor’s hands. The SILC will be able to accomplish more, once there are more appointments made so that more people will be involved.

Scott’s next comment is regarding emergency preparedness work. He said each Independent Living plan should contain an emergency plan for crises as well as a “Plan B” for other IL issues like personal care attendants, remaining in one’s own home, et cetera.” There needs


June 10, 2020

to be more Independent Living planning with consumers rather than just providing quick services that are emergent.

Mary Evilsizer: The Independent Living Plan (ILP), is built into the Rehab Act. Both CILs create ILPs if a consumer chooses. The CILs then report that data annually and are in compliance with both the Rehab Act and with WIOA. They were one of the first to conduct wellness checks during the Covid-19 crisis.

Dawn Lyons: Has gotten feedback from individuals stating that they had not been offered the opportunity to create an ILP when they have gone to the Southern Nevada Center for Independent Living SNCIL.

Mary Evilsizer: Individuals who contact SNCIL have a choice of requesting an ILP or receiving indirect services to gain information and services. They sign a document stating that they have been offered an ILP. She would be happy to talk with anyone who would like to have an ILP. She explained the centers’ policies and the process an individual can use to file a complaint regarding services or lack of services at the state’s two CILs.

Dawn will contact both centers to discuss individuals who have voiced concerns regarding this.

Mary Evilsizer: The CILs are also already implementing their own emergency preparedness plans in the centers and the communities.

Dawn Lyons: Perhaps Scott was simply suggesting something get written into the SPIL as part of the process.

Mary Evilsizer. She clarified that, in the Rehab Act, the SILC’s role is to support the CILs.

Janet Serial: Wanted to know how an individual would know about an ILP to request one.

Mary Evilsizer: It is part of the center’s intake form that is filled out. She offered to present an information PowerPoint to the group regarding the roles of the SILC, the CILs, WIOA and ACL, at the next meeting.

Dawn Lyons: Will put this presentation on the next meeting agenda.

John Rosenlund: Perhaps there needs to be an explanation of what CILs and the AT/IL program does and the processes to accessing those services.If Nevadans don't know what to expect and know the process they should expect, then we should provide that.For example, the AT/IL program has specific services to remove barriers to essential daily living and where assistive technology can be used to remove or lessen the barrier.The AT/IL is not the primary resource for developing IL goals that belong in a CIL and the five core services that the CILs provide.

In the second paragraph of the executive summary is where he sees that that would fit.The AT/IL program is modeled after the same process that an individual would engage a


June 10, 2020

center with.An individual can call and talk to somebody to engage with regarding options and that may lead to information and referral.They are given information, referral and also talking to them about their options.But when the person chooses to develop an Independent Living goal, then that takes it into a consumer model.That consumer then has the option for the AT/IL program, not for the CILs, to be clear -- at that point they tell the consumer, if they are going to be able to work with them on the pathway of developing an Independent Living goal.Then the consumer has the option if they want, to have an expanded Independent Living plan with each step and every part of the process written out, or do they not want to have a plan where a more informal way through the same process it's just not written out to where they are engaged in every step that they are going to take.That is, steps may revise and add to it. The plan may be evolving.Whether the person has the plan or not, the Independent Living goals still exist, the participant still gets the same services when they're going through this program.For example: What to expect when you go to a CIL, what are the five core services and what does that mean, does it mean going to a Center for Independent Living is going to find you housing tomorrow?Maybe not.But systematically walking through the process and engaging with the consumer is what that Independent Living goal is about.To empower them to make those choices that they can make.And to essentially accomplish their own goal by going through the process themselves.The paperwork will not be done for the consumer. It's a more detailed process.And describing where those differences are between the CIL and the AT/IL program.The AT/IL program was created to address specific gaps to that daily living model.If a consumer can't get into their home, then they are obviously not going to be independent in being able to access their community.If they can't take a shower, if it's a physical barrier that can be removed, that's where the AT/IL program comes in. He sees that could be clarified in that second paragraph of making that distinction.The CILs are still the place to go for the five core services.And the AT/IL program is a secondary.

Dawn Lyons asked the group if she should add more detail in the second paragraph about defining how the difference between the state IL programs run versus the CIL’s and that the CILs are still the primary place to create an ILP.

Kacy Curry and Patricia Unruh both said yes.

Dawn Lyons: Reminded the group that the suggestion was also to put it in the SPIL and to create a PowerPoint about the SILC, explaining the role of the SILC.

John Rosenlund: Added another point that the centers are consumer controlled.

Dawn Lyons: Scott Youngs asked, under Objective 1A, for data. She included a sentence saying “using current data” to explain where the information is coming from. He also asked


June 10, 2020

what the process is for decision making regarding funding competitive sub grants. She explained that the full SILC should have final say regarding any grants or contracts for SILC business. She added, “The SILC will fund at least one Part B competitive sub grant for services needed.” In the next bullet, Dawn added, “The SILC will provide ongoing support.” Also, based on the sunsetting of “Money Follows the Person Program”, the SILC will evaluate nursing home transitions statewide.

In his comments, Scott mentioned that Objective 1B is weak on action items, new and ongoing must be consumer driven and data informed. Dawn added, “The SILC will provide Part B supplemental funding. The CILs will provide the SILC with current, quarterly reports.

Patricia Unruh: Agreed with Dawn that if an individual is reading the SPIL, they will understand that it is consumer driven.

John Rosenlund: They need to make sure their network is working together. He also suggested that, in the second paragraph of the Executive Summary, the word, “manages”, be changed to, “distributes”. Dawn will change that.

Dawn Lyons: At the end of Objective 2A, Scott wrote: “This training must be developed and delivered by people with disabilities. If we cannot make this happen, then we really don’t have an eye on the Movement capability in Nevada.” Dawn agreed and added, “The unified Independent Living message to be offered to our network of partners by the SILC.” Under the last bullet point, she wrote, “The SILC will present this as a training at national conference workshops to consumers during the third year.”

She stated that the SILC will present their unified message by the end of the first year, to the network. Then, present it to the partners the second year, and finally, present it to consumers during the third year at workshops.

Dawn Lyons had received a comment from the Town Hall, under Objective 2B, on the first bullet. The comment was to change a sentence to, “limited to competitive integrated employment.” Dawn changed it.

Under Objective 2C, Scott had suggested that the criteria to become a SILC youth member is that it has to be a youth with a significant disability who engages in the IL Model and has potential for advocacy. Dawn changed that.

Under Objective 2D, Scott suggested that consumer input on the SILC website is critical and he wants to see stories from the “front line.”

Dawn Lyons: There will be a news feed that those things can be added to. She encouraged the SILC members to ask people to submit their stories.

In Scott’s next comment, he mentioned that the SILC should pay a person with a disability for updating the website.

Dawn Lyons: This is not in the SILC budget. She had been doing the updating and felt that it does not take very much time and will not in the future. She is willing to work with whoever


June 10, 2020

wants to be part of updating the website so that they will have multiple people working on it. She stated that if it became more cumbersome, the SILC could put something into the budget in the next SPIL.

Scott mentioned that all the disability partners should provide content to keep it current so that the website does not become dormant.

Dawn Lyons: She is working with KPS3 to include a partner forum section where they can enter their data, access other partners’ data, and communicate with one another. They can post their information to each other so that efforts are not duplicated.

Mark Tadder: Asked if the administrative side of the website will also be accessible for people using screen readers and other assistive technology.

Dawn Lyons: Stated that she believes it is. It is a WordPress site and KPS3 has assured her that all aspects of the website will be accessible. She will discuss the administrative side of the website with KPS3, the next time she is talking with them.

Under Objective 3A, Scott suggested that members must understand Independent Living (IL), being disabled is not enough. Also, that they must inform the SILC and broader community about taking local steps to improve services and the IL Model.

Dawn Lyons: Agrees with Scott. The point of attending the trainings is to learn all that information and they are sharing that information with the rest of the group, which is something that is in the SILC’s policies. Dawn will add language into the sentence such as, “the SILC will develop a resource development plan according to the mandate.”

Under Objective 3C, Scott stated that he liked the idea of the support staff, the Executive Director becoming 100%, SILC focused. Dawn will work on a plan geared towards that.

In the last paragraph of section 1.4, Evaluation, Scott asked where he would find the data that the CILS have given the SILC. Dawn forwarded the data to him and stated that they were public records.

Mary Evilsizer: ACL posts those reports in several different locations, so they are always accessible.

Dawn Lyons: Has not been able to locate the reports online. Mary will send the link to the reports to everyone.

Regarding the table that outlines the process and timelines SILC will use to evaluate goals,Scott says this evaluation method is obscure, it's not measurable, nor does it tie back specifically to the bullets within each goal. If this is the guide, there is no specific action items or timeline that one can follow. This speaks loudly of a weak SPIL up front.

Dawn Lyons: She agrees that the table is not helpful. She does not think it leads them to all the different steps that they are going to measure and see how successful they are with their


June 10, 2020

SPIL. It does not cover all their action steps, because it is not laid out that way. It does follow the example sent out for the SPIL creation.

Scott wanted to know what the action plan is for the following three areas:1-Purchase and distribute goods and services for people with disabilities 2- Provide technology and training to support consumers, and staff, 3- Address emergency housing needs.

Scott is concerned that without hiring new staff with disabilities at the Centers, this money will not get spent appropriately.

Dawn Lyons: Dawn asked about this at the last SILCSpeak call she attended. The guidance from ACL only required a limited amount of information from the CILs, leaving them room to create the plans in the future since it is too soon to have a plan. It would be premature to be writing down all the things that they are going to be using their emergency money for other than the categories that ACL tells them they could use it for.

Mary Evilsizer: ACL is developing policy around these funds as things go along. SNCIL has found that they cannot afford to even pay for auditing of these funds unless they can expend the administrative costs, it is a complicated system. ACL could change things and do so sometimes at the last minute. CILs have always been known for their flexibility.

Dawn Lyons: Under Section 2; Scope Extent and Arrangements of Services, Scott is unsure of the matrix with the check boxes.

Dawn Lyons: This is ACL’s template that is being followed.

Under Section 2.2, Outreach, Scott stated that this section is weak.

Dawn Lyons: She referenced comments from the Town Hall. People wanted to know how the Centers were collaborating with the rest of the networks in this regard. Dawn asked the centers if they would like to elaborate on this question. She clarified that she explained at the Town Hall that ACL was very clear that this is not a section for the CILs’ outreach plan, this is a section for the networks’ outreach because the CILs have their own outreach plan.

Mary Evilsizer: The CILs received guidance from Paula McElwee, the training liaison, stating that this is the SILC’s plan and not the CILs, the two are totally separate plans.

Dawn Lyons: Primarily, this is the SILC’s outreach plan, but it should be for the entire network. The SILC should be working and partnering with the network. Figuring out how that looks as they work together in their outreach, the collaboration is what she thinks is missing. She asked if the CILS wanted to add more.

Mary Evilsizer: No, the CILs will not be adding to this section.

John Rosenlund: Wanted to add one piece that goes back to an earlier discussion about what the consumer should know and expect from Independent Living (IL) in Nevada. If individuals contact and say things are not clarified and they do not understand how things work together,


June 10, 2020

that is what the SILC needs to focus on. The SILC could do that under Goal number 2: Establishing a unified IL message. Consumers should know the CILs are there and what the core services are. He feels that promotion of Independent Living and the IL network is crucial in the next three years. This would enable the consumers to know IL and what they can expect from their centers or the AT/IL program or anyone in their network.

Dawn Lyons: They do need to plan a unified message and provide that training to all parties, consumers and partners.

Mary Evilsizer: Disability Awareness Day (DAD), in Las Vegas, shows all the different disability service partners in the network. SNCIL makes referrals and educates consumers as part of their outreach.

Dawn Lyons: Had another question from the Town Hall asking if there was anything up North that was like Disability Awareness Day.

Mark Tadder: NNCIL takes part in many events that include marches, veterans and state teacher’s associations, to focus on outreach.

Lisa Bonie: NNCIL used to take part in events by the Disability Awareness Coalition.

Mark Tadder: Discussed how much more accessible Zoom meetings are for people to attend and get the word out about individual programs or updates to things. They could share surveys in those forums.

Dawn Lyons: Given the limitations of paratransit and the on gatherings due to Covid-19, the two CILS might want to consider partnering and have a statewide event on Zoom.

Mary Evilsizer: Each center needs to see what the needs of their community are and respond to that information.

Under Section 2.2: Coordination, Scott asked about being able to measure.Dawn Lyons: Measure can be assessed by having the coordination between the SILC and individuals working with local tribes, enlisting or having a member of the NAACP and having a brochure done in Spanish.

Janet Serial: You can measure in terms of if there is increased utilization over a period of time.

Dawn Lyons: The SILC has explained this and so she will leave the wording as is.

John Rosenlund: Measurable outcome is looking at the consumers served to see if you are reaching the diversity of the communities. Historically, this was measured by comparing the diversity of the consumers served in comparison to the census data that you can compare by county. This kind of language was utilized in past SPILs.

Dawn Lyons: The SILC’s data hub will track how many and what categories of minorities versus whites, what race, what ages etc. She will add some of this language.


June 10, 2020

Mark Tadder: Asked if the SILC is going to have information to show what populations exist and what kind of representation they have for identifying and meeting unmet needs. He is particularly concerned about people with disabilities who are homebound or cannot attend Zoom meetings voicing their needs and getting them met.

Dawn Lyons: In the current SPIL, partners is defined as, “anyone who serves the disability population of any kind and who is willing to learn about the Independent Living philosophy and become part of the network.” This will be included in the data hub.

John Rosenlund: He had been referring to census information.

Dawn Lyons: Will be reaching out to Census personnel to see if they can include their data in the SILC’s data hub.

Scott’s next comment under “Coordination”, is for the SILC to lead in service coordination. He also stated that the DSE should not be involved in rural outreach by the SILC, it should be separate.

Dawn Lyons: There is coordination between the DSE and The SILC, and the DSE does not direct the SILC. The DSE coordinates services between the partners.

Under Section 3.1, Scott asks how the SILC can serve all counties except Clark, with no satellite offices.

Lisa Bonie: There used to be two offices in Elko and one in Fallon. Now, NNCIL partners with different family resource centers, senior centers and now has a much larger presence. They also have a rigorous referral system.

Scott had also stated that the plan for fund distribution should a center close, is not well thought out.

Dawn Lyons: There is an unserved CIL in Carson City that needs SILC support. Dawn is going to reach out to this center.

Under section 4.2, Grant Process and Distribution of Funds, Scott states that the SILC should have a process to name partners.

Dawn Lyons: The SILC voted in the past, what the definition is.

On page 25, under 5.3, Maintenance of SILC, Scott asked why the DSE is involved in the onboarding process.

Dawn Lyons: The DSE is involved in the onboarding for state-specific purposes only. The state has rules and guidelines that the SILC must follow. Things relating to trainings and reporting.


June 10, 2020

Dawn stated that there was an anonymous public comment. Under Section 5.3, paragraph 5, that IL network includes the DSE and the Centers for Independent Living, CILs. Two major concerns arise with the CILs having the confidential profile information on any candidate for an Executive Director position with the SILC. Initially, the information provided for or by the candidate or candidates would entirely compromise the insured confidentiality mandated through the employment application process. Secondly, there is a question of ethics referring to the release of private information of candidates to the SILC board, it poses a potential conflict of interest by means of undue influence by the CILs regarding the candidate selection process. Consequently, an interview panel composition should not include a CIL member or DSE for the same reason. The phrase, “IL network”, should be changed to “interview panel”.

Dawn checked with the state’s HR department and they sent her a section of the manual for their process. In the manual, Section 5.3, regarding distributing the list of applicants to the IL network, the state of Nevada recruitment manual published by the Division of Human Resource Management application process, states the following: “Confidentiality of applicant information, the names of applicants shall not be made public.”

Inspection of applicants is limited to staff members of the Division of Human Resource Management, designated HR representatives and appointing authorities and their designees, many times an applicant supervisor will call to discuss an applicant.

The application cannot be discussed with them and should only be discussed with the applicant.

We would not even disclose if the applicant applied. So therefore, she concluded that it needs to state “interview panel” instead of IL network as the anonymous comment stated under paragraph 5.

And the new group or the interview panel may want to further define that a CIL director should not in fact, be a member of the interview panel due to potential conflict of interest or undue influence as described in that comment as well.

So Dawn did change the language in there to state, “The DSE will assist in posting the position, providing the chosen panel with a list of candidates who have applied and onboarding for state specific position training and benefit purposes. Neither the center staff nor the DSE shall be members of the interview panel to avoid any conflict of interest or undue influence on the SILC.Neither the DSE nor the CILs will supervise, direct, or otherwise exercise any authority over the Executive Director regarding any SILC business once hired.”

This ensures SILC autonomy from the state agency and Part C centers.That's what Dawn added in there because that is what was brought to her attention and was also spelled out by the process at the state as long as it's a state position.They need to follow the state process.

Patricia Unruh: Agreed with Dawn on following the state’s process.

Mary Evilsizer: Respects the policy and disagrees with it.9/14/20235

Draft Minutes for 6/10/2020 SPIL Workgroup

June 10, 2020

Mark Tadder: Right now, the Executive Director position is housed with the state government. With a goal of a nonprofit status, autonomy and independence, he does not see why the SILC would need to abide by the state rules down the road.

Dawn Lyons: She thinks it is wise to stick to a known process that works, that is within legal parameters. That it is definitely up to the SILC to take a look at other examples and other models when that time comes.

Patricia Unruh: Agrees and feels that the SILC is not there yet. That the SILC still needs to work towards autonomy. The SILC needs to be concerned with conflict of interest. She agrees with what Dawn wrote and stands firm on that.

In the Town Hall public comments, Robin Kincaid had concerns about services, and specific plans for services in the state of Nevada not being in the SPIL. Dawn had explained to her that the centers’ plan would be the place for that because the SILC cannot provide services. She also told Robin that the SILC does put out subawards to the community with the little bit of Part B money that they have to do so with.

Mary Evilsizer: She is reaching out to Robin Kincaid. She will cover the other questions that Robin had at the Town Hall.

Dawn Lyons: Also, in the Town Hall comments, Nathan Say asked about a youth presence in the IL network. He asked for more specific information about it because it was scattered throughout the SPIL. Dawn has put references to the Objectives and the sections where that information could be found. Nathan is interested in the youth presence in the IL network.

Mark Tadder: Had asked where to submit comments in writing.

Dawn Lyons: Comments can be emailed to nvsilc.adsd.nv.gov or an individual can call Dawn.

Irma Prettenhoff had asked about stipulations for dementia.

Dawn Lyons: The SILC covers all disabilities and does not try to single anyone out or leave anyone out. If naming a specific disability, the SILC would want to name all disabilities.

Dawn also changed the term from, “integrative employment”, to “competitive employment”.

Under Objective 3c, Scott Youngs said there were no indicators.

Dawn Lyons: Without going into too many specifics, she added an action step of staff acting in the role of Executive Director for the SILC, will telecommute from outside the DSE office the first year and seek part time shared space with at least one community partner by the end of the first year. That is one of the action steps under that objective.

Regarding gathering information about the needs of the state, Dawn explained that the SILC gets information from several Needs Assessments across many different entities, including


June 10, 2020

the Census, the Grants Management Advisory Council (GMAC) and the Department of Education to name a few.

Dora Uchel: Asked about the SILC website and who is going to make it accessible.

Dawn Lyons: The SILC is already working with a company (KPS3), on that.

Dawn Lyons: In public comments from the Town Hall, there were some questions about the outreach efforts of the two CILs. Dawn explained that this is the SILC’s plan, not the CILs’ plan. Also, with the Covid-19, she did not yet know what that outreach would look like, but that it is being worked on. She gave the location of the list of our state’s IL network and who the network is.

Tim Smalley had suggested that the North could create an event like the Disability Awareness Day and work together with the South, on outreach statewide, possibly partnering with Deaf Centers of Nevada, where he works. Dawn will be reaching out to him.

Patricia Unruh motioned to accept the changes made to this SPIL draft document. Mary Evilsizer seconded. The motion carried.

5. Approve Next Meeting Agenda Items and Next Meeting Date (For Possible Action)Kacy Curry, Vice Chair

The SILC will later determine the next SPIL meeting date.

6. Public Comment (Members of the public will be invited to speak, however, no action may be taken on a matter during public comment until the matter itself has been included on an agenda as an item for possible action. Please clearly state and spell your name. Public comment may be limited to 3 minutes, per person at the discretion of the chair).

Dawn Lyons: Thanked everyone who participated, had comments, suggestions and helped in the creation of the SPIL. She is happy to have something to send to the SILC for their next meeting.

Patricia Unruh: Thanked everyone for being part of this. She got a lot of information and appreciated the input.

Kacy Curry: Thanked everyone for their help.

7. Adjournment (Agenda items may be taken out of order, combined or consideration by the public body, and/or pulled or removed from the agenda at any time. Pursuant to NRS 241.020, no action may be taken upon a matter during a period devoted to comments by the general public until the mater itself has been specifically included on an agenda as an item upon which action may be taken.)

Kacy Curry, Vice ChairMeeting was adjourned at 4:06pm.


June 10, 2020

NOTE: We are pleased to make reasonable accommodations for members of the public who have disabilities and wish to attend the meeting. If special arrangements for the meeting are necessary, please notify Wendy Thornley at (775) 687-0551 as soon as possible and at least five days in advance of the meeting. If you wish, you may email her at [email protected] According to NRS 241.020, supporting materials for this meeting is available at: 3416 Goni Road, #D-132, Carson City, NV 89706 or by contacting Wendy Thornley at (775) 687-0551 or by email at [email protected].

Agenda Posted at the Following Locations:Notice of this meeting was posted on the Internet: http://www.adsd.nv.gov and https://notice.nv.gov

In accordance with Nevada Governor Sisolak’s Declaration of Emergency Directive 006 there will not be a physical location for the Governor’s Commission on Behavioral Health Meeting regarding the Annual Governor’s Letter. As per Nevada Governor Sisolak’s Declaration of Emergency Directive 006; Subsection 3: The requirements contained in NRS 241.020 (4) (a) that public notice agendas be posted at physical locations within the State of Nevada are suspended. As per Nevada Governor Sisolak’s Declaration of Emergency Directive 006; Subsection 4: Public bodies must still comply with requirements in NRS 241.020 (4)(b) and NRS 241.020 (4)(c) that public notice agendas be posted to Nevada’s notice website and the public body’s website, if it maintains one along with providing a copy to any person who has requested one via U.S. mail or electronic mail. As per Nevada Governor Sisolak’s Declaration of Emergency Directive 006; Subsection 5: The requirement contained in NRS 241.020 (3)(c) that physical locations be available for the public to receive supporting material for public meetings is suspended. As per Nevada Governor Sisolak’s Declaration of Emergency Directive 006; Subsection 6: If a public body holds a meeting and does not provide a physical location where supporting material is available to the public, the public body must provide on its public notice agenda the name and contact information for the person designated by the public body from whom a member of the public may request supporting material electronically and must post supporting material to the public body’s website, if it maintains one.


https://notice.nv.gov/

http://www.adsd.nv.gov/

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

June 10, 2020


state of nevada adsdadsd.nv.gov/uploadedfiles/6.10.2020 spil wg draft min… · web view2020. 6....

Documents