At the end of January 2014, the O&M/GDMI Summit Steering Committee (known at that time as the Steering Committee for the O&M PA Working Group) established an O&M/GDMI Strategic Planning Summit to transform the future for the O&M/GDMI profession and professionals. This document highlights the work that the O&M/GDMI Summit and its Steering Committee has accomplished from January, 2014 to May 2014. One hundred seventeen O&M specialists, guide dog mobility specialists, personnel preparation professionals and consumers registered for the O&M/GDMI Summit, approximately 80 of who participated actively via five virtual strategy meetings and/or through participation in surveys supplemented by email communication.
The O&M/GDMI Summit resulted in a vision statement and related goals, along with action plans to promote and serve the O&M/GDMI professions. O&M/GDMI Summit participants also identified structural recommendations that would best move this new strategy forward. This document recaps the work of the O&M/GDMI Summit.
The process
Jeremy Grandstaff (with S & G Endeavors, Ltd.), a strategic planning and organization consultant, was contracted by the O&M/GDMI Summit Steering Committee to facilitate the collaborative change process guiding the Strategy Summit Meeting series. The overall process used a blended approach of proven dialog-based, community-driven, and collaborative planning methodologies, coupled with an all-virtual approach that used a combination of tools such as Maestro Conference Calling, Google Docs, and Google Discussion Groups. Guiding the development of the meeting agendas and activities included a strong purpose and outcomes for the series of five meetings. Each meeting began with a review of this purpose and outcomes captured below:
Summit Purpose
The purpose of the series of virtual strategy meetings is to come together as a community of committed stakeholders to ensure the future success of the O&M/GDMI profession and its efforts to most successfully serve our consumers.
Summit Outcomes
The overall outcomes of the virtual strategy meeting series are to:
Create a common understanding of the opportunities and challenges facing our profession with respect to pay equity, job conditions, licensure and/or state credentialing, concern for the future, and other issues.
Foster a sense of unity among the O&M/GDMI community, creating an environment of cooperation with a common purpose.
Leave with a sense that we have been open to, guided by, and rejuvenated by enthusiasm for what we do.
Leave with the knowledge that we have all been part of the decision-making process.
Leave with a viable strategy for the success of the O&M/GDMI profession, which creates hope for the future and concrete action plans to ensure that we are true to the vision.
Leave with structural recommendations that help us best implement our actionable strategy and a successful future for the O&M/GDMI profession and the people we serve.
The steering committee designed each meeting to build on previous meetings to ensure the participants were able to achieve the outcomes identified above. Participants attended the meetings based on their availability (as depicted below) and some participants became new leaders with the O&M/GDMI Steering Committee.
Summit Attendance
Description
# of Participants
% of Total Registered
Meeting 1
Meeting 2
Meeting 3
Meeting 4
Meeting 5
Total who Attended Meetings
57
33
31
24
15
68
49%
28%
26%
21%
13%
58%
Total O&M/GDMI Summit participants
who registered during online registration in Fall, 2013
117
100%
All participants, whether they were able to attend meetings or not, were also encouraged to participate in a google Discussion Group and in each of the three votes conducted during and after the Summit. Throughout the Summit and in email messages to all participants following, participants were encouraged to voice any opposition to proceeding in the direction determined by the meeting attendees. Discussions outside of the five O&M/GDMI Summit meeting conference calls helped the participants achieve consensus and ensure that the outcomes were supported by the whole. The chart below outlines the approach for each of the five meetings:
Summit Meetings Approach
Date
Time (Eastern/ Pacific)
Major Activities
Tuesday 3/18/14
8:30-10:30PM/
5:30-7:30PM
Welcome, Setting the stage
Participant introductions that help us build a unified community of concerns and desires
Monday 3/31/14
8:30-10:30PM/
5:30-7:30PM
Panel of opportunities and possibilities (includes Q&A)-to build a strong community that is more informed, realizes our own potential, and desires change that helps our profession succeed
Tuesday 4/22/14
8:30-10:30PM/
5:30-7:30PM
Strategy development: Presentation and feedback gathered on draft strategy to promote, serve, and grow the O&M/GDMI profession-For participants to come together and provide feedback on a draft strategic framework ; This includes a vote of prioritized desires to achieve the larger vision for our profession's future success
Monday 4/28/14
8:30-10:30PM/
5:30-7:30PM
Finalizing strategy and planning action:
Achieve consensus on new strategy for the next 3-5 years
Build off our consensus to create action plans to move us toward implementation of each strategic goal
Saturday 5/10/14
12:30-3:00PM/
9:30-Noon
Action prioritization, structure development and wrapping up:
Small group work on goal action plans are presented to the larger group
participants help prioritize action by casting votes
structural recommendations are created
The virtual strategy series is closed with a celebration of our community-driven success.
The Steering Committee met throughout the process, and participants were encouraged to join the leadership if they chose. In addition, activities such as voting to demonstrate group consensus; recapping the work done at meetings; and sharing the panel discussion via YouTube helped participants between virtual meetings. The Google Discussion Group was also set up for the Summit participants to engage in between-meeting discussions, though it was not used extensively by participants.. A midpoint evaluation and final evaluation were both conducted, creating opportunities to adjust approaches throughout the process and offering insight into perceptions of the effectiveness of the Summit process. The section below recaps the outputs from each of the meetings, and from the O&M/GDMI Summit as a whole.
Telling Our Stories (Meeting 1)
At the first meeting, we broke into small groups of 4-8 people and introduced ourselves to our colleagues in our smaller group. The facilitator afforded each person four minutes to answer the following questions:
Introduction Questions at Meeting 1
1. Who am I? What do I do and for how long have I been doing it? And, the reason I choose to stay engaged and involved in the O&M and GDMI professional community is…
2. Over the past year, a positive highlight from my experience with O&M or Guide Dog Mobility Instructors, or other members of this community, was … I am proud of this community because…
3. As I look over the past year, these are the things that concern me about the future of the O&M or Guide Dog Mobility Instructor profession(s), or our community, as a whole…
4. If I had a magic wand and could change anything about our community to help strengthen the O&M and Guide Dog Mobility Instructor profession(s), these are the things I would change…
5. The things we need to accomplish together as the O&M/GDMI professional Community over the next five years to make it worth my time to have participated in this dialog are…
After we each had an opportunity to introduce ourselves, as a way to move individual thoughts out to the smaller group and then to the whole group, the facilitator asked us to discuss what we heard when listening to the stories told by the people in our small groups. Each group identified:
a. What was common among our stories;
b. What was unique to one or two of us in our group; and,
c. What we need to accomplish over the next five years together, to make it feel like it was worth our time to participate in these meetings.
Appendix 1, at the end of this document, captures the combined raw data outputs from our small group work at the first meeting of the Summit. These outputs help to show the breadth of our discussions and desires of our community from our conversations.
Bringing participants more wisdom-the panel (Meeting 2)
At meeting two, we heard from a panel designed to represent different stakeholders of our community who were able to share knowledge from their vantage point in order to help participants become better educated as they considered the future direction. Specifically, we heard from:
Gene Bourquin, Helen Keller National Center
Ed Bell, Professional Development and Research Institute on Blindness Louisiana Tech University
Lukas Frank, The Seeing Eye
Corey Grandstaff, Washington State School for the Blind
Wendy Eichler, Leader Dog
Elga Joffee, Hunter College, NYVRA, Invision Services, Inc.
After we heard from the panel, participants broke into small groups to discuss what they heard, their reactions, and what questions of understanding they had for the panelists. When we came back together as a whole group, each of the smaller break-out groups asked a question, allowing panelists to share even more wisdom with the participants. The panel and the Q&A is available via YouTube (use this link or the YouTube box to the right).
Creating our strategy and prioritizing action (Meetings 3 & 4)
The purpose of Meetings #3 and #4 connected them, beginning with a presentation of a draft strategic framework (vision and goals) by the Steering Committee. Participants then broke into small groups and suggested changes to ensure the strategy would most effectively move the O&M/GDMI community forward. After Meeting #3, the participants voted on recommendations, and the Steering Committee then met to consider those recommendations to revise the vision and goals. The revised document, known as the Strategic Framework, was presented to the participants at Meeting #4, where we gained consensus that the final Strategic Framework would guide our work for further planning. The vision and goals are presented below.
PARTICIPANTS DEVELOPED A VISION AND FIVE-YEAR GOALS
Our Community-driven vision
We envision a community-driven support system for O&M/GDMI professionals that delivers a brighter future where:
We have enough time, resources, and educational opportunities to provide the quality services that our consumers need, deserve, and expect;
We are widely recognized by name and respected for our profession;
We have third-party funding within the health care system, sufficient funding within the vocational/rehabilitation/educational systems, and abundant additional sources of funding for our work;
The number of qualified O&M and GDMI professionals has increased;
University education programs are promoted, supported and funded; and,
All O&M/GDMI professionals feel unified, confident, excited, and engaged, and seek to create new opportunities for our profession.
Goals - over the next five years, we will have:
1. Increased licensing or credentialing by government or other accrediting entities: O&M/GDMI professionals have secured support or submitted legislation to obtain licensure/credentialing in at least 3 states.
2. Increased and expanded funding streams for our work: We have secured support or submitted legislation to incorporate O&M & GDMI services in Medicare, Medicaid, vocational/rehabilitation, educational, and private healthcare billing.
3. Increased Recognition: O&M/GDMI Professionals are valued by related professions, are promoted by providers, have strong university programs, and have a solid body of evidenced-based research that together, elevates validation and increases opportunities to serve.
ACTION PLANS
At Meeting Four, participants took their consensus a step further by breaking into small groups to create action plans needed to achieve each goal.
The action plans were further developed by participants, including a measurement of success as well as a "preferred future statement" for each action, describing what success would look like in the first year, as we moved toward achieving the overall five year goal.
These action plans were then presented back to the full participant group for them to vote to prioritize which items would most effectively help the community achieve the vision and goals.
The 3 action plans that got the highest votes to prioritize are below (listed in desending order with a link to the full set of accompanying action plans):
The final outputs from this work are presented below in full, with the key action plans for each goal presented in descending order of priority votes --
the votes are listed in parenthesis as described below:
The first number is the number of votes marking the action as a priority action, one that will most significantly move the overall strategy forward.
The second number is the number of votes suggesting the action should be done with a normal priority.
The third number is the number of votes suggesting that the action should never be done.
Five-year Goal #1: Increased licensing or credentialing by government or other accrediting entities First-year Preferred Future Statement -
Three States have been selected to pioneer licensure/credentialing in Orientation and Mobility and the O&M Professional Community is on Board.
Proposed Key Actions & Sub-steps
Create a model Bill for licensure, certification, or adopting ACVREP credentialing by reference.(votes: 21, 9, 0)
Who needs to lead the actions? A prominent person in the State with leadership skills.
Who needs to be involved? Prominent person; O&M providers who have been involved in credentialing process; ACVREP/AER representatives who want to move licensure forward; the leadership of systems where we would present our credentials; legislative attorneys
Identify a core group to educate the O&M Community nationwide about Credentialing(votes: 15, 15, 0)
Who needs to lead the actions? A prominent person in the State with leadership skills.
Who needs to be involved? Prominent person; O&M providers who have been involved in credentialing process; ACVREP/AER representatives who want to move licensure forward; the leadership of systems where we would present our credentials
Create a group in each of the 3 states to work with the legislatures to involve them in the process of moving our legislation forward.(votes: 10, 19, 1)
Who needs to lead the actions? A prominent person in the State with leadership skills.
Who needs to be involved? Prominent person; O&M providers who have been involved in credentialing process; ACVREP/AER representatives who want to move licensure forward; the leadership of systems where we would present our credentials; lobbyist or attorneys with expertise in moving legislation. We have a group that is prepared to find a sponsor to introduce and move our licensure bills in states.
Five-Year Goal #2: Increased and expanded funding streams for our work
First-year Preferred Future Statement -
A group of dedicated, energetic, diverse stakeholders have developed a position paper on Medicare/Medicaid (third party) reimbursement that includes a sound rationale for Medicare/Medicaid support for O&M services, and an outline of a plan to move the field toward the goal of attaining access to third party reimbursement billing privileges.
Proposed Key Actions & Sub-steps
Conduct research on strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to third party reimbursement for O&M services(votes: 17, 12, 1)
Who needs to lead the actions? A passionate leader who can marshal and motivate people to complete the research needed to develop a sound draft plan for third party reimbursement
Who needs to be involved? The to-be-formed research and writing committee, supported by state VR leaders, consumer leaders, and private agency leaders
How do you want to measure the success of this action? Are the research and writing committees functioning, and does their effort yield a planning document with rationale and recommendations that is grounded as much as possible on evidence obtained from research?
Identify constituents to participate in planning process for third party reimbursement(votes: 15, 15, 0)
Who needs to lead the actions?
Steering Committee with oversight of the plan development process
Who needs to be involved? Ask current stakeholders who needs to be involved. Ensure representation of consumers, public and private administrators and practitioners
How do you want to measure the success of this action? Appropriate diverse, passionate constituent members are identified and motivated to move forward with plan development
Draft position paper and plan for advancing third party reimbursement(votes: 12, 17, 0)
Who needs to lead the actions? Steering Committee
Who needs to be involved? Research and writing committees
How do you want to measure the success of this action? Plan published in JVIB and presented at conferences and distributed electronically (webinar?) to a wide range of practitioners of O&M. Support for plan implementation is requested and a critical mass of O&M practitioners sign on to advance the plan implementation.
Obtain feedback from various constituencies about the comprehensiveness and practicality of the plan and its rationale(votes: 5, 20, 2)
Who needs to lead the actions? Steering Committee, O&M AER Division Board
Who needs to be involved? Steering Committee, O&M AER Division Board
How do you want to measure the success of this action? Plan is thoroughly vetted and revised based on feedback from constituents before "marketing' to Medicare/Medicaid begins. A critical mass of constituents have "bought into" the plan and are willing to support it in their various states and with their Congressional leaders and others.
Five-Year Goal #3 - Increased recognition
Note: several teams wrote Preferred Future Statements for this goal (Increased Recognition), with proposed key action plans to achieve their statement in the first year. These Future Statements with their key actions are listed here in descending order of the number of participants who voted for them:
First-year Preferred Future Statement #1 -
The O&M/GDMI profession has approached related professions to develop mutual understanding and collaboration.
Proposed Key Actions & Sub-steps
Develop a consensus about the scope of practice for the O&M/GDMI profession(votes: 21, 9, 0)
Who needs to lead the actions?
A committee of O&M/GDMI professionals with a wide variety of backgrounds
Who needs to be involved?
O&M/GDMI instructors, university personnel, consumers and administrators
How do you want to measure the success of this action?
Finalized scope of practice is published and made available to O&M/GDMI practitioners, university personnel, professional organizations and consumers.
Prioritize which related professionals would be most beneficial to approach to develop mutual understanding and collaboration, such as health and rehabilitation professionals, occupational and rehabilitation therapists, teachers, social workers and counselors, transportation professionals, etc.(votes: 10, 18, 2)
Who needs to lead the actions?
A steering committee of O&M/GDMI professionals with a wide variety of backgrounds.
Who needs to be involved?
O&M-GDMI practitioners/ university personnel, consumers and administrators
How do you want to measure the success of this action?
A list has been developed of prioritized professions to approach for understanding and collaboration
Develop an understanding and mutual goals with related professionals concerning scope of practice and areas of needed collaboration and referrals.
(votes: 9, 21, 0) Who needs to lead the actions?
Subcommittees for each related profession, consisting of O&M-GDMI professionals and representatives of related profession
Who needs to be involved?
Professionals, consumers and administrators of the O&M/GDMI profession and representatives of the related profession
How do you want to measure the success of this action?
At least two related professions have been approached and their representatives are working with ours to develop memorandums of understanding and areas of needed collaboration and referrals.
First-year Preferred Future Statement #2 -
Our profession maintains a clear vision of what research is needed to validate our services, has resources to carry out the research, and effectively disseminates the information.
Proposed Key Actions & Sub-steps
Identify research needs. Establish an ongoing system to identify and prioritize research needs in O&M/GDMI. (votes: 14, 13, 1)
Who needs to lead the actions?
A research committee
Who needs to be involved?
Practitioners; consumers; university personnel; administrators
How do you want to measure the success of this action? A committee has been established which has developed an ongoing procedure to collect research ideas and have them prioritized by the profession.
Garner resources to conduct research: Establish a contracted position to write grants, request funding and find willing partners to do research that has been identified as essential to our profession (could be paid for in part by procured funding).(votes: 9, 19, 2)
Who needs to lead the actions?
A professional organization, research center, university, and/or governmental agency
Who needs to be involved?
professional organizations, universities, research centers
How do you want to measure the success of this action?
A position has been created and filled to write grants, request funding and find partners to conduct research essential to our profession
Garner resources to conduct research: Establish a clearing house of (1) practitioners / consumers / administrators willing to help plan research, conduct trials, and collect data and (2) researchers and university personnel who can provide IRBs and analyze data(votes: 9, 20, 1)
Who needs to lead the actions?
A professional organization, research center, university, or governmental agency
Who needs to be involved?
Practitioners; consumers; university personnel; administrators
How do you want to measure the success of this action?
A clearing-house has been established which can be used by those who want help to do needed research.
Disseminate information from research: Establish systems to routinely report results of research.(votes: 4, 25, 1)
Who needs to lead the actions?
A professional organization, research center, university, or governmental agency
Who needs to be involved?
publishers, conference planners, universities, practitioners, consumers, administrators
How do you want to measure the success of this action?
At least 3 systems have been established (such as a website, publication, a regular feature of conferences) that provide periodic updates on research in our profession
First-year Preferred Future Statement #3:
[The Future Statement for these Key Actions was not articulated]
Proposed Key Actions & Sub-steps
Initiate more research within our field that can be considered for peer review and appropriate for other fields VA(votes: 16, 12, 2)
How do you want to measure the success of this action? Going to the director of research; Percentage increase of articles/presentations published in other journals
Instill within University programs "Learning about, from and with other professionals" (OT, PT, Optometry / Ophthalmology, Low Vision) (votes: 7, 18, 3)
How do you want to measure the success of this action? Evaluation Plans/Survey; Hosting professional lunches with case studies / reports; Knowledge; Attitude; Perception; Use created tools
STRUCTURAL RECOMMENDATIONS - IMPLEMENTING OUR STRATEGY (Meeting 5 and beyond)
The participants designed Meeting Five with the purpose of bringing "stakeholders of the O&M/GDMI community together to finish defining what we are doing, why we are doing it, and how we will make it successful."
Specifically, the outcomes for just this meeting were:
A clear, actionable, measurable, plan with strategic alternatives;
A wise public engagement and dissemination plan that effectively positions our efforts for greatest success;
Internal Accountability-ways to check in, hold ourselves accountable, to continue momentum after the Summit.
The meeting began with a quick review of the action plan voting by the design team, allowing participants to consider the priorities identified by the community as a whole. Our facilitator outlined a variety of options that could be considered to help move the community-driven strategy forward. Below are the options, described with the same wording as described to the participants:
Options for Structure Needed to Implement the Strategy
1. Ask that the strategy and action plans be executed by AER's O&M Division. If they accept, they will need approval from AER's board to budget and implement our plan.
2. Ask AER's Board and O&M Division to create an O&M/GDMI Professional Association affiliate within AER -- an affiliate that would have the authority to make its own decisions regarding its budget and initiatives (the same as AER's chapters do now);
3. Create a strong, independent, new organization to serve as a professional association for O&M/GDMI and execute our strategy and action plans;
4. Use a working group model, driven by volunteer leads. This option does not have established funding streams.
Each group discussed the options presented in order to recommend an option and further suggest ways that we would measure whether the option chosen was successful. We reconvened to share the recommendations and highlights from group discussions. All of the participants at the meeting unanimously voted for a primary choice of option 2. It should additionally be noted that the majority of the attendees voted to pursue a backup choice of option 3, if option 2 is not successful.
Building on this consensus, we then had the small groups define the stakeholders that the Steering Committee would need to engage to make that option a success. We further defined specific and actionable recommendations for discussing the outcomes of the Summit, our strategy, our community-driven effort, and other aspects of this process in a way that would achieve the greatest success. After sharing highlights from our second discussion, participants helped wrap up the Summit by sharing reflections on the work done together as well as one thing that they would do to help make the strategy successful. The leadership team then closed the Summit with an appeal for new Steering Committee members, a thank you for the great collaborations taking place, and a commitment to move work forward based on the feedback and outputs created through our work.
Following the Summit, we presented a draft copy of the report to all 117 participants, specifically asking any participants to let the Steering Committee know if they had any objections to moving forward with the recommendations of meeting five participants. No objections were expressed. In addition, participants also were asked to cast a final vote to prioritize the four options outlined above, to help the Steering Committee ensure that the recommendation was supported by the majority of participants. The majority of respondents (70% or 28 respondents) indicated that they would support Option #2 as a primary option, as depicted in the graph below.
Vote of support for primary & secondary options
The preferred plan if Option #2 fails is not as clear. Although Option #3 was a runner-up to Option #2 for the primary option by respondents, Option #1 received the most votes as a secondary option. This apparent inconsistency is probably because all of those who chose Option #1 or Option #3 as their primary option could not choose it again as their back-up plan if Option #2 failed. If we add those who had voted for Option #1 or Option #3 as their primary choice to those who voted for it as a back-up plan, we'd find that they are approximately equal (19 for Option #1; 20 for Option #3).
Given the ambiguity as to what is the preferred back-up plan, if Option #2 fails we would need to come back to the participants to reconsider which of the other plans would be preferable. It should also be noted that though 44 respondents voted for a primary choice, only 40 cast a vote for a secondary option.
As part of this additional survey, we also asked respondents to indicate whether they were AER members, with 68% or 30 respondents reporting that they were members of AER, as depicted in the chart below:
AER Members Who Cast a final vote
The raw data outputs from the final activities are also included in Appendix 2 at the end of this report, providing specific direction to the Steering Committee as they move this work forward.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS -- WHAT IS NEXT?
In order to ensure the experience both was positive for participants and accomplished the goals of the Steering Committee, the steering committee conducted midpoint and final evaluations. In addition to these evaluation tools, continuous check-in evaluations were conducted with Steering Committee membership and various participants to make adjustments to the approach. Though the Steering Committee drove the design of the whole Summit, a design team was used to engage the community in the design of the last Summit meeting specifically (time issues prevented full engagement of such a team for the entire Summit).
An initial review of evaluation data revealed that:
Participants were engaged and excited by progress made as a community at the Summit. We had a range of 15 to 57 participants on each call, and even if participants were not able to participate in a meeting, they did engage through voting mechanisms (Survey Monkey). The technology, timing, and activity design used proved to be successful, and one participant even reflected we have "a written plan to move the profession forward based on collaboration."
Even though some participants weren't able to join any of the meetings, some participants chose to keep up on the discussions; review the outputs from the meeting; and vote. One participant even remarked, "I would personally like to thank everyone for their involvement in this historic journey. While I have [been] unable to personally attend the conference calls…I have followed each and every communication you have shared. You have been professional, courteous and above reproach. Thank you for your efforts on behalf of all O&M professionals…It is refreshing to see a movement that cares about the profession and one that is proactive in its approach".
The Summit served to create a meaningful opportunity for the stakeholders of the O&M/GDMI community to come together to put "a plan in place to make improvements," as another evaluation reflected. Eighty-one percent of the respondents in the final evaluation indicated that the virtual approach allowed them to make connections with other participants at the Summit.
The Summit also helped participants make more connections in the field and even look at ways that they could engage in making a difference in their own life and in the community. When reflecting on what he or she was taking from the Summit, one respondent wrote in the final evaluation, 1) "convinced me to look for another job where I can practice OM…and to stay involved in ways like the Summit in the meanwhile. 2) "Convinced me to try to get other OMers in my state to become involved in helping to get the action plans implemented".
When asked to score their level of confidence that the group would carry out their action plans, participants averaged a 6.74 out of 10; comments indicated that higher confidence in success was partly related to the optimism that AER would embrace the collaborative spirit of the Summit and its participants.
Evaluations provided robust data for the Steering Committee to help to continue to engage participants and to help inform future work needed to implement the strategy. The complete data set was shared with the Steering Committee.
As the Steering Committee proceeds to guide the implementation process, which will facilitate collaboration with a solid structure to implement the community-created strategy, it is important for the Steering Committee to remember some of the common themes heard during the Summit:
1. Ensure that steps taken represent the desires of, and are supported by, the community of Summit participants
2. Ensure that AER is approached and engaged as a truly collaborative partner to increase the success with implementation of the strategy created; and,
3. Continue to engage the community, as a whole, through reasoned and timely internal and external communication.
With a successful collaboration of AER leadership, O&M/GDMI Summit leadership, and the Summit participants, the whole community is poised to implement the solid and measurable strategy developed at the Summit, as well as strengthen, promote, and better serve O&M/GDMI professionals.
Respectfully Submitted,
The O&M/GDMI Strategy Summit Steering Committee
Appendix 1 Combined Raw Data Output from Small Groups at Meeting 1
Editor's note: The statements below capture the actual wording by participants. The editor combined the statements from each breakout group discussion together as one list. This accounts for the differences in parallel structure and repeated concepts.
What was common among our stories?
establish a way forward that won't be detrimental to AER, but will advance the O&M profession in a way we haven't been able to within AER
too many rifts within the O&M Community; we need to be seen as unified professionals; we are stronger when we're working together
we need to improve our reputation within and outside our field
we need to establish a uniformly accepted credentialing system
Quality and quantity of service to individuals served.
Watering down of skills.
Not enough service.
Level of skills taught is not high enough
Not being taught full extent of independent travel.
The need for more collaboration, including people being more open minded and better listeners.
Everyone saw the value in networking
Licensure
access to medical insurance billing
OT's "doing our job" with less training and expertise
our group has 10+ years of experience each
Many in our profession are retiring; fewer are entering the O&M profession.
Decreasing Funding
Lack of funding
Educating professionals, families, agencies, communities about what it is we do
Recognition of O&M as a profession
Collaboration within the field and with other disciplines
Would like to get together more often to discuss issues
Desire to come together to provide a better service
Action taken in the next 5 years
Wants recruiting and retention efforts.
Want people to know what O&M is, why it is important, know about the colleges offering the degree. "growing the profession"
Want "community" and to ways to stay engaged when out in the field by yourself besides conferences
Pay not equal to what we do compared to other disciplines
PT and OT in some states crossing over into our services and school staff allowing it because they do not know better. Need education for both.
Need for a stronger organization so a more of a powerful "force" to make changes.
What was unique among our stories?
some states are dealing with personnel shortages, some are not
some are dealing with people in need of O&M not getting referred for service
some states are on a path to licensure, some are not
some are employed with salary & benefits, others are not due to the problems with the current service delivery network
some are able to 'get around' the problem by getting certified as a TVI and getting hired full-time, but actually working as a full-time O&M
Lack of state credentialing in O&M in NYS interferes with and limits the provision of early intervention and preschool O&M services.
This forum and its purpose/projected success Will it help and how will it help?
Environmental access/barriers
Need for more service providers. What about paraprofessionals? Started as a state trained paraprofessional, 2 years later received MS in O&M but sees the need for paraprofessionals (associates degree?)
COMS in training
Need for uniform curriculum across universities.
Need training to work across age spectrum NOT just adults
Weakening of professional skills. (level of skills of individuals graduating)
??? Have the distance programs led to instructors with weaker professional skills.
Some individuals felt that the people they worked amongst are locked into philosophies and do not want to deviate or learn from others
In the breakout session the participants appreciated the diversity of the group (2 consumers of O&M services, new O&M teachers, senior O&M teachers, and a GDMI)
One of the O&M instructors stated it would be good to see blind consumers have an opportunity to become GDMI'S
For Guide Dog and uncertified LV Specialist
Interest in a tri-skill degree: O&M, LV, & VRT.
One member is a TVI/O&M
Two members work in high crime metropolitan areas that limit their ability to instruct
One researcher in the group
One guide dog user
Bigger cities have a better idea of O&M and
Kids getting around other visually impaired kid with adults
GDMI experiencing growth - no certification - loves coming together
Service birth-26 in Michigan
One suggested to vendor at other disciplines like OT or PT's conferences to educate them
One was an O&M college level instructor
One member was center based.
One was instrumental in Montana now having 3rd party Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement.
What needs to be accomplished over the next five years to make it worth our time to have participated in these virtual strategy meetings?
find ways to get to know & understand each other better
improve our reputation
identify what has impeded our progress and honestly address our shortcomings
We must move forward as a group - remain unified as a profession.
As a profession are we O&M- or - are we O&M, GDMI, VRT, LVT, TVI?
Need 3rd party reimbursement.
Need more EBP research.
Need to be recognized at same level as other service providers (OTs and PTs)
Strengthening of the terminology of IDEA
ensuring that service providers utilize certified O&M instructors
Licensure
Access to medical insurance
Clear national best practice and standards.
Licensure and scope of practice for the profession
Empirical testing of basic instructional methods, techniques and strategies
Reaching out to VI community for their input and participation in research etc.
Funding to meet all of these goals
Unified voice of O&M community
Recognition of O&M as a field
Recognition of WHY it is a field
Clarification of role of P.T. /O.T. vs. O&M and educating all players about the limits of each field to best serve population of blind or visually impaired
Educate the community about guide dog use being a choice; not based on greater or lesser skill in any area of independent travel.
Licensure
Make steps toward solving funding problems
Greater consistency from state to state about educational requirements for instructors to teach in educational settings.
More guide dog instructors encouraged to become O&M instructors in U.S.
Standardization of evaluation tools and measurement tools
Develop a structure of communication
Bring together the consumer, instructors both seasoned and new to the profession
O&M and GDMI professional(s) to be most successful.
Education and Awareness of our Profession
"Grow" more O&M's and the profession
Lobby for more funding for O&M education programs at colleges
Getting Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement for all states.
Separate and stronger O&M association to focus on our needs and way to "connect" more often than at conferences such as web-based meetings.
Appendix 2 Raw Outputs from Final activities, Meeting 5
Group Activity 1: Discussing Strategic Alternatives and options to implement our strategy (outputs)
Editor's note: The outputs capture the actual wording by participants. The editor combined the outputs from each breakout group discussion together as one list. This accounts for the differences in parallel structure and repeated concepts.
Before the discussion began, options for Structure Needed to Implement the Strategy were listed:
Ask that the strategy and action plans be executed by AER's O&M Division. If they accept, they will need approval from AER's board to budget and implement our plan;
Ask AER's Board and O&M Division to create an O&M/GDMI Professional Association affiliate within AER -- an affiliate that would have the authority to make its own decisions regarding its budget and initiatives (the same as AER's chapters do now);
Create a strong, independent, new organization to serve as a professional association for O&M/GDMI and execute our strategy and action plans;
Use a working group model, driven by volunteer leads. This option does not have established funding streams.
What are our initial reactions to the options outlined?
Small group 1:
On board with least invasive route, but doubtful that AER would give us the go-ahead
Best option is #2 (creating chapter affiliate within AER), but also doubtful about AER giving autonomy
1st option (asking strategy and action plan be executed by O&M division)--actions often take a while to be accomplished, concerned about being unable to deal with budget issues
A disadvantage to sticking with AER--don't want to exclude individuals who are not members
Unsure of logistics of forming a separate professional organization
Option 4 (working group model) would present issues with lack of funding and structure
Need to document that we have attempted to work with AER before we implement option 3 (creating new professional organization)
Option 2 - has been advocating this since New Orleans
Option 2
Small group doesn't see other options than the ones proposed. Looked at affiliations with other large professional organizations such as CEC, Rehab Associations, OT, or PT associations and found no fit.
Small Group 3:
All 5 of us wanted to stay within AER - the O&M profession only has a limited number of engaged members and resources, AER has a small group of engaged people and we were worried about dividing that synergy.
What option does your group recommend?
Option 2 (creating chapter affiliate within AER), then option 3 (creating new professional organization)
First attempt to include AER, but with both a timeline and stipulations
Unsure of time frame to present to AER without knowledge of AER's operation
Option 2 - no dissenters/unanimous recommendation
Two people preferred option #1 (AER's O&M Division) and 3 preferred an autonomous affiliate in AER. We discussed the merits and everyone agreed to go with Option #2 - autonomous affiliate within AER
One sentence statement to define success with the option we recommend would be…
We will have an answer from AER within ___amount of time, and based on their decision, ____amount of time after, we will have begun work to establish a new chapter or a new professional organization.
Our group would define success by AER approving an independent chapter for an O&M/GDMI professional association at the conclusion of two board meetings and consideration of this proposal.
There was not another statement sentence defining success from the third group.
Group Activity 2: Gaining Support and Momentum-sharing our Success (outputs)
Editor's note: The outputs capture the actual wording by participants. The outputs from each break-out group discussion have been combined together as one list. This accounts for the differences in parallel structure or any repeated concepts.
Based on the option we have chosen as a community, who are the people we need to engage to make sure we succeed? Who will help us position ourselves to best move forward?
AER Leadership
O&M division
ACVREP leadership
NOMC leadership
IGDF leadership
Steering Committee
O&M/GDMI community of providers
Engage national and state groups - private b/vi service, public agencies b/vi service, schools for the b/vi
AER Board
All consumer groups
University programs
AER board members including Canadian rep
O&M Division
Universities
Coalitions of directors of private agencies for the blind and of public agencies for the blind (they have sometimes expressed distrust of O&M specialist advocacy so we should strategize as to how supportive they'd likely be before approaching them)
Veterans Administration
Canadians and international O&Mers - Denise can reach many of them
GDMIs - AER consider our request more seriously if we have the potential of attracting a relatively untapped source of new members such as GDMIs
What should we be sharing from the Summit? With whom? And how should we share it?
Information shared should focus on action plan. The important thing to get across is that the Summit is not about forming a professional association, it's about figuring out where we want the field to go. Implementation of action plan is a related but separate issue. By focusing on the action plan and our goals, we hope to get a greater number of people on board.
Share with other professionals in the field, stakeholders, etc.
We can share it through a variety of means, including:
Listserv
O&M associations
Word of mouth (individuals participating in the Summit who also participate in other organizations and groups)
Handouts
JVIB
International Mobility Conference
Dissemination of AER meeting minutes, when our action plan is presented
The scope of the information presented may change depending on the audience; some groups may require more detailed information, while summaries and bullet points may be more appropriate for other groups
Make a statement to the field that we have engaged in a strategic process, have an action plan that we are aware that this is not an AER activity but believe the field as a whole should have the opportunity to read/understand/make up their own minds. Compile our findings.
Approach the AER and Division IX leadership before we go public so they are aware of our work. Suggestion - to be considered for invitations are Lucas Franc, Richard Long, Gene Bourquin, and Sarah Bussey as spokespersons to AER. This step is recommended because the group believes our effort needs to be viewed as a community effort to improve the O&M/GDMI profession, and not associated with personalities or Division IX history.
E-mail compiled findings to the original groups of participants
Post compiled results on the listserv
We need numbers. We need more #s and support for impact with AER. Do another Survey Monkey survey to the listserv that is presented in form of a petition to go to AER requesting action on option 2.
Develop a presentation about our strategic efforts/results and present results at state AER Chapters and O&M Associations throughout the country such as SOMA, rehabilitation associations, etc.
Our mission, goals and action plans
Our desire is to improve our profession (be positive - make it clear we're not trying to oppose anything, emphasize what we're trying to accomplish)
Our decision to ask AER to establish an autonomous affiliate (demonstrate that our purpose is to improve our profession)
Share with the Division membership (perhaps personal letters/messages to Division members, but the cost would be prohibitive)
ACVREP certificates
O&M listservs (which include international O&M specialists)