National Council on Disability
Cultural Diversity Advisory Committee (CDAC)
January 13, 2005 - Public Meeting Record

Participants: NCD's Council Liaison to CDAC--Milton Aponte, JD; CDAC Members--Darrell Simmons, JD; Glenn Fujiura, Ph.D., Wendy Alegra-Jones; L. Elaine Mbionwu, CCHP; Jean Lin; and Lilliam Rangel-Diaz; Public/guests--Errol Ehstain (TN), Angela Branch (Academy for Educational Development, Tricia Quisenberry (Dallas, TC), Lana Smart (Great Neck, NY) and Sharon Glover (Winston Salem, NC); and NCD staff and contractors--Jeff Rosen, Director of Policy/General Counsel, (NCD); Elizabeth Akinola (Independent Contractor) and Designated Federal Official (DFO)--Gerrie Hawkins, Ph.D.

I. Roll Call and Introduction of Guests were lead by the DFO. An official welcome from NCD and other comments were provided by Mr. Milton Aponte, J.D. in his role as Council member and liaison to this committee. After the DFO's review and approval of agenda without revisions the meeting proceeded as follows.

II. Report from Pre-Forum Dialogue Opportunity - Discussion of the Civil Rights Project 2005 began with a review of perspectives on the recent preliminary dialogue. The DFO stated that the dialogue occurred at NCD's November 30 2004 NCD quarterly meeting and that CDAC's played a vital role in the effort to find ways of bridging the communication between disability and broader civil rights entities around public policy priorities. Darrell Simmons, J.D. and Glenn Fujiura, Ph.D. who co-facilitated the November 2004 panels (comprised of civil rights leaders) and dialogue with NCD Council members gave brief summaries of the meeting. Ample suggestions were obtained to select discussion topics for designated workgroups at the upcoming March 2005 civil rights forum. While not every invited organization could attend the November meeting, four coalition task force leaders representing a large consortium of organizations were present. Among the issues discussed were the following highlights:

• Education and advocacy for equal services for people from diverse cultures in general;
• Focus on civil rights of people with disabilities within the diverse communities;
• Outreach and opportunities for people with disabilities for inclusion in broader civil rights organizations (e.g., on boards and as potential staff);
• Leadership development within the civil rights organizations and encouragement of young people with disabilities to engage in training opportunities related to broader civil rights matters;
• Discussion of immigration laws with consideration of different viewpoints;
• The Higher Education Act and the key role of ensuring quality teachers and other professionals;
• Discussion of employment and workforce development that addresses reasonable accommodations, economic security, welfare reform, and issues of SSI/SSDI benefits; and
• Civil rights restoration as an umbrella for dialogue about federal legislation such as the Fairness Act, as well as the ADA.

Other observations about the preliminary dialogue were shared as follows. The eagerness of different groups to work together was clearly expressed by several panelists. There was a sense of openness and evidence of receptiveness to some form of coalition building, and encouragement to identify a common agenda across the different organizations. Part of the lesson was that current public policy agendas are not set or cast in concrete; there appears to be flexibility. The No Child Left Behind legislation appeared to be an important agenda item across several organizations focused on the need for improvements in the education as a common theme, as well as need for and concern about the lack of effective enforcement of a number of existing laws such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

Next Steps - The preliminary dialogue provided an opportunity for creating greater awareness among the different civil rights groups based on their interest in partnering with NCD to "get the evidence-based word out," (e.g., to include NCD reports on websites, making information available to a broader market that may not otherwise be aware of the materials, findings, facts, and recommendations). After the November 2004 meeting, the civil rights forum contractor (AAPD) and NCD staff met and discussed the notion of how to ensure that CDAC stays involved with the projects and work plans that NCD has carved out within its authorized way of working by Congress. This report back to the committee and public was the next step.

III. CDAC's Assistance with Forum Planning - The Need for CDAC members' input in the March 2005 forum planning was identified with respect to suggestions for background information that can be considered for the second communication that will be sent to potential forum participants. The forum will take an overall structure of not just "talking heads" or people giving presentations. While the forum would also include opening, lunch time, and closing remarks by key people, the main focus would be three facilitated workgroups convened to work on identifying common ways to approach the major policy topics of education, employment, and civil rights. Within the three breakout groups, conversations can flow from background information and identified expectations about the forum provided by NCD and AAPD to the invited participants.

IV. Developing Stakeholder Lists - Each CDAC member was requested to stay involved with this process to make the event a success. CDAC members were also asked to consider suggestions for critical organizations, and maybe individuals to be invited. Approximately sixty people will be assigned to three topical groups. It was anticipated that as many civil rights groups as possible should be invited with consideration that the capacity total will be estimated at 60, depending on the facilities available. The DFO gave a timeline of February 4 for receipt of suggestions.

V. Issues for Future Attention - Unmet Needs of Youth with Disabilities: Juvenile Justice Link.  As early as the CDAC September 2004 public meeting discussion touched briefly on reauthorization and other public policy issues that were yet not addressed by Congress.  One issue of interest involves perspectives on youth with disabilities in need of special education and related services and a question of the link between not receiving appropriate services at public schools and youth becoming involved with the juvenile justice system. CDAC members previously expressing their interested in follow up dialogue were led by Ms. Mbionwu and Ms. Alegra-Jones. The initial goal was to identify and share with CDAC members some information and supporting document for future consideration and to begin by looking at evidence-based research as it becomes available. One such document was an NCD's 2003 study on juvenile justice titled Addressing the Needs of Youth with Disabilities in the Juvenile Justice System: The Status of Evidence-Based Research. Among other issues are findings on how youth with disabilities are served, or underserved, in both systems of education and justice.  Ms. Mbionwu and Ms. Alegra-Jones spoke further on this topic. Among the points raised were: (1) Organizations such as NAPAS have faced challenges and resistance in juvenile justice advocacy efforts especially on the issue of funding. (2) Most well rooted advocacy groups are concerned about the amount of funds that would be required to gain access to the criminal justice system, as well as the cost of bringing class action suits. (3) For future CDAC work along this line it could be helpful for CDAC members to work collectively on finding ways of bringing attention to some of the unmet/unaddressed needs also identified by advocates. Contacting Protection and Advocacy groups and at the state level to form a national collaboration, might be a means of shifting focus to examine what are some areas where there has been the most detrimental as well as promising impact. Other CDAC members indicated that this might be a good starting point. The DFO encouraged e-mail feedback on this topic, since the time for today's call was ending. February 10, 2005 was the initial date for further discussions after CDAC members might have had more time to look at a summary paper prepared on this topic. CDAC members were also asked to communicate via e-mail with one another and the DFO in this regard.

VI. CDI Toolkit Update - NCD's contractor completed all work on preparing the toolkit for launch. NCD provided to the Government Printing Office (GPO)--the agency's website contractor and host--all of the necessary materials and technical information for moving the toolkit from the temporary host site to that of NCD's website. Task completion lies with GPO for getting the toolkit online.

VII. Adjournment - After an expression of appreciation by the DFO to all participants for their time and valued input, the meeting was adjourned.