Letter of assurances

Att_Telephone Interview VR Agency Staff 08-09.doc

Evaluation of the Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults

Letter of assurances

OMB: 1820-0691

Document [doc]
Download: doc | pdf

Telephone Survey for VR Agency Staff 06/05/09

TELEPHONE INTERVIEW WITH VR AGENCY STAFF




VR Agency________________________________________

Respondent Name and Title__________________________

Number of Years at Agency__________________________

Phone:____________________________________________

Email:____________________________________________

Date Completed:____________________________________


Part A: Clarify Responses in E-mail Survey


  1. Review conflicting responses.


  1. Review “internal” outlier response (items compared to other items in survey).


  1. Review “external” outlier responses (items compared to aggregate data in all surveys).


PART B: Ask for Examples and Contextual Information to Illustrate Their Survey Responses


  1. Once items in the e-mail survey have been clarified, identify responses for which contextual information or examples would be especially useful.


  1. Survey Item #3: Whether the VR agency serves all, most, some, or few deaf-blind individuals, and why.


  1. Survey Item #4: Number of consumers referred to HKNC regional office and why. Focus on increases and decreases over time, and the reason for those changes.


  1. Survey Item #5: Number of consumers referred to HKNC New York and why. Focus on increases and decreases over time, and the reason for those changes.


  1. Survey Item #6: The number of successful results following HKNC referral.

    1. Probe for examples of both successful and less successful results.

    2. Determine if the number of successful results has changed over time.


  1. Survey Items #7 and 8: The number of referrals from HKNC.

    1. Probe for changes over time.

    2. Probe for examples of successful and less than successful referrals.

    3. Probe for reasons that an agency may not be receptive to a referral from HKNC.


  1. Survey Item #9: In-state service alternatives to types of training offered by HKNC

    1. Probe for changes over time and why.

    2. Probe for information on cost effectiveness (success of the outcomes relative to the overall cost).

  2. Survey Item #10: HKNC services to VR agency.

    1. Probe for changes over time, and why.

    2. Probe for examples of useful and less useful training and services.


  1. Survey Item #12: How to improve HKNC services. If response is vague or general, probe for specific services or management issues that need improvement.


  1. Survey Item #14: How to improve VR services. If response is vague or general, probe for specific services or management issues that need improvement.


  1. Survey Item #16: Criteria for coding or classification. Probe for why the agency does what it does? Ask how coding of deaf-blind individuals can be made more consistent.


PART C: Additional Probes


  1. Regarding staffing: Who provides the VR services to consumers with deaf-blindness in their state? In their agency?

  1. Specialists in deaf-blindness?

  2. How many counselors work with consumers who are deaf-blind?

  3. Any specialized training needed?

  4. Are deaf-blind specialists centralized or are they available in some/all field offices?

  5. How many staff work with deaf-blind individuals.

2

File Typeapplication/msword
File TitleEMAIL SURVEY FOR VR AGENCIES
AuthorLori Houck
Last Modified ByAuthorised User
File Modified2009-12-23
File Created2009-12-23

© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy