Headline

Vocational Rehabilitation Privatization:
Higher costs, less service and $1 million no bid contract

In 1999, the clients, the workers and even some providers cried out against the privatization of vocational rehabilitation, arguing that it would increase costs and hurt services.

Now, the disabled community is saying a sad "we told you so."
A legislative watchdog agency found that administrative costs have skyrocketed by 179 percent and the number of clients has declined.
Furthermore, the privatization agency is paying $343,000 in rent for a building it doesn't use and paid $830,000 last year for services it could not show were ``reasonable or necessary.''

Then there is the $1 million no bid contract given to the employer of former Sen. George Kirkpatrick, who sponsored the bill to privatize vocational rehabilitation and sits on the privatization commission's board of directors. This was too much even for Education Commissioner Charlie Crist who killed the contract.

In response, the director of the privatization commission has been transferred. And the the privatization commission itself could be disbanded under bills being worked on by several legislators and the Department of Education.

The functions of the Occupational Access and Opportunity Commission, a two-year-old board with a troubled history, would be turned over to the Department of Education, under bills being written by Rep. Sandra Murman, R-Tampa, Sen. Richard Mitchell, D-Jasper and Sen. Jim Sebesta, R-St. Petersburg.

The board was created by the 1999 Legislature to privatize job training for the state's estimated 100,000 disabled residents.

But legislative investigators found that costs increased as much as 179 percent in the three pilot projects that were privatized April 1. In all, the cost of providing services doubled from $1.5 million in 1999-2000 to an estimated $3.1 million in the fiscal year that will end June 30, 2002.

Meanwhile, statewide administrative costs nearly doubled from $249,667 in 1998-99 to $496,090 in 2000-01, after peaking at $658,238 in 1999-2000. Also, the board did not have a long-term plan, did not conduct feasibility studies and paid providers large startup costs with little analysis of the validity of those costs, legislative investigators said.

Services have deteriorated on five key measures over the past year and have not met the standards for 2000-01, the investigators said. Investigators looked at how many clients were reviewed for eligibility, the percent of eligibility determinations that were made within 60 days as required by federal law, the number of significantly disabled and all other clients gainfully employed and the type of employment they obtained.

"Privatization doesn't work either for those receiving the services or for the public paying for them," said Council 79 President Jeanette D, Wynn. "For the sake of the disabled community, we're glad that legislators are seeing the error of their ways."