Pennsylvania’s Assistive Technology Lending Library
Report on Progress: July 1, 2014– June 30, 2015
Overview and Challenges
The Institute on Disabilities, Pennsylvania’s University Center of Excellence in
Developmental Disabilities at Temple University, has completed another
successful year of operating Pennsylvania’s Assistive Technology Lending
Library (ATLL), under the auspices of the Department of Labor and Industry,
Office of Vocational Rehabilitation (OVR). In this capacity, the Institute on
Disabilities has built on the infrastructure and accomplishments of Pennsylvania’s
Initiative on Assistive Technology (PIAT), a federally-funded program of the
Institute and the Commonwealth’s program authorized by the Assistive
Technology Act of 1998 as amended (the “AT Act”). As state funds shrink,
assistive technology (AT) device lending activities are increasingly supplemented
with federal funds through PIAT.
Pennsylvania’s Assistive Technology Lending Library is designed to provide
Pennsylvanians with disabilities, older Pennsylvanians, and those who support
them with the opportunity to learn about and try assistive technology devices
“before you buy” – so they can make an informed decision. The success of this
program can be measured by the number of requests to borrow, the number of
devices circulated, the number of borrowers who are served (including the
number of new and the number of unique borrowers), consumers’ satisfaction
with the program, and the outcome of device loans (e.g. decisions to purchase –
or not purchase – specific assistive technology devices). Consumers also
borrow devices while they wait for funding or while their device is “in the shop”;
devices may also be borrowed as a temporary accommodation. Devices may be
borrowed by other stakeholders to promote awareness of the range, scope, and
potential of assistive technology or to train providers about the variety, benefit,
and applications of AT.
The Institute on Disabilities implements its Interagency Agreement with the
Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry, Office of Vocational
Rehabilitation guided by the principles of consumer-responsiveness (e.g. through
exemplary customer service) and consumer direction (e.g. increasing the
informed involvement of persons with disabilities in the process of selecting their
own assistive technology).
State funds for Pennsylvania's Assistive Technology Lending Library support a
centralized program designed to assure equal access to all Pennsylvanians with
disabilities by providing points of entry and information throughout the
Commonwealth, overcoming the barrier of transportation by using a “drop-ship”
model of delivering and returning the equipment at no cost to the borrower, and
maintaining an inventory of devices which are useful to individuals with physical,
1|P age
sensory, and/or intellectual disabilities. In addition, items in the inventory are
useful to infants and toddlers, young children, students (including post-secondary
students), adults, and/or older Pennsylvanians, and may be used in a variety of
settings (home, community, school, or work). The needs of the constituents of
the original five supporting Departments—Aging, Education, Labor and Industry,
Health, and Public Welfare—are considered and balanced against available
resources as decisions are made in the implementation of the program.
Considering the decrease in appropriations over the last several years and the
administrative fee levied by OVR, the Lending Library operates on a budget more
than 60% lower than that in 07-08. The cumulative impact of reduced funding is
increasingly manifested in lower program usage. This does not reflect the need
of Pennsylvanians with disabilities to borrow devices for decision-making and
other purposes, but unfortunately reflects the program’s growing (negative)
reputation for long waiting lists and outdated equipment. We are hoping that the
influx of funds received in the last month of the prior two fiscal years and used to
revitalize the inventory, particularly in the area of devices for communication, will
reverse the essentially flat demand for the program. We anticipate these items
(and those contributed through other sources) will begin circulating in the first
quarter 2015-16. State funds for the Lending Library buy fewer and fewer staff
hours, for subcontractors as well as the Institute on Disabilities; outreach is most
affected by this.
The impact of the Lending Library goes beyond mere numbers: Assistive
technology has the ability to make a substantial difference to individuals with
disabilities in working, learning, and living.
2|P age
Note: Data from the 13-14 program year appear throughout this report for the
purpose of comparison, indicated in brackets.
Goal I: Maintain an inventory of assistive technology devices that meets
the needs of Pennsylvanians with disabilities and that addresses
individuals of all ages, all disabilities, and the activities in which they seek
to improve participation, independence, comfort and safety.
A. Circulate the devices in the inventory to Pennsylvanians with
disabilities, family members, providers, and others who need to use or
learn about assistive technology devices. Receive and process at least
850 requests for items from the centralized inventory at Hiram G.
Andrews Center (HGAC) annually, reflecting more than 400 different
borrowers. Reach at least 250 “new” customers, e.g. those who are
“first time ever” borrowers from PA’s AT Lending Library. Report on
utilization of the program.
Note: Data in this section refers to activity related to borrowers that requested
devices that circulate from the “centralized inventory” located at Hiram G.
Andrews Center. Information about borrowers and equipment loaned from the
“onsite” lending programs of the Assistive Technology Resource Centers
(ATRCs) is noted in Goal I, Objective B.
As of June 30, 2015, there are 3641 [3575] items (including 1902 [1909] different
kinds of items) in the AT Lending Library housed at the Hiram G. Andrews Center
(HGAC), the subcontractor for the maintenance and circulation of the centralized
inventory. There were 1068 [1038] separate requests for device loans received
by regional Assistive Technology Resource Centers (ATRC), reviewed, and
forwarded to HGAC for processing, exceeding this year’s modest target, and
representing a slight increase from last year (just under 3%). More requests
(1018 [894]) were fulfilled, and more devices (1338 [1272]) were sent out to
borrowers; the remaining borrowers are waiting for the requested product or
group of products.
There were 542 unique borrowers (unduplicated count), exceeding the target for
this year (400) and a notable increase from last year [472]. Four hundred fortyfive [350] were first-time borrowers, substantially exceeding the target (250), and
considerably more than the prior year. While the total number of requests was
not significantly more than during the 13-14 program year, the number of unique
borrowers and especially, the number of first-time borrowers, indicates some
return on the small amount of additional monies provided to ATRCs this year for
outreach.
Borrowers came from 55 [58] of the Commonwealth’s 67 counties (all except
Adams, Bedford, Cameron, Forest, Fulton, McKean, Mifflin, Sullivan, Tioga,
Warren and Wayne). Of the 12 counties with no borrowers this year, all but one
3|P age
(Adams) are “non-metro” (according to www.ers.usda.gov Rural Urban
Continuum Codes).
Who is making the request?
Data on the borrowers of Pennsylvania’s Assistive Technology Lending Library is
obtained each time a separate request form to borrow item(s) is submitted
(although more than one device may be requested on each form).
For each loan application submitted, borrowers identify their role. Requests for
devices come from individuals with disabilities (or family members on their
behalf) and service providers (for use with an individual with a disability).
During the 2014-15 program year, 71 [113] requests came from borrowers who
identified themselves as “education” (including representatives from higher
education), 2 [15] as “family members”, 124 [138] as “service providers”, 2 [7] as
“employer”, and 56 [51] as “other”. The vast majority of loan requests (812 [714])
or about 76% [70%]) were made by people with disabilities.
What are the ages of borrowers?
Customers of Pennsylvania’s Assistive Technology Lending Library included
persons of all ages. Data on age is available for about two-thirds of the
borrowers, reflected in the following chart.
Age of Recipients
Age
Number
Category
birth to 2
93 [97]
3 to 5
62 [36]
6 to 21
182 [98]
22 to 64
250 [284]
65 and older
175 [180]
Unknown
306 [343]
TOTAL
1068 [1038]
There is continuing demand for a program that serves Pennsylvanians of all
ages. Of those for whom age data was known, approximately 44% [33%] of
borrowers were 21 or younger, 33% [41%] were adults 22 to 64, and 23% [26%]
were older adults (65+).
What is the purpose of the AT? Why borrow a device?
Seven hundred fifty-five [821] borrowers indicated the equipment would help
them “at home or in the community”; 229 [89] requests were for loans for
4|P age
equipment that would help them “at school”, 52 [57] borrowers reported the
device would be for “work”, and 31 [71] borrowers reported the device would
assist with using the phone or the computer. Nine hundred thirty-nine [921] loans
were for consumer device trial, 82 [48] loans to professionals (e.g. faculty,
service providers) for professional development, 27 [16] uses as an
accommodation (e.g. for employment or public access), 29 [31] uses as “loaners”
(e.g. while the individual’s device was being repaired), and 11[18] “other” uses.
Note more than one reason for borrowing could be identified; clearly, the ability to
“try before you buy” is the overarching function filled by this program.
What is the racial/ethnic demographic of borrowers?
Although it is often uncomfortable to ask for and obtain information on a device
recipient’s race, efforts continue to be made to collect this information in order to
determine the extent to which the Lending Library reaches all Pennsylvanians
with disabilities. More than 80% [70%] of the records included information on
the race/ethnicity of borrowers. Based on the number of records of borrowers for
whom race/ethnicity of the borrower was known and specified, 19% [31%] of
borrowers identified their race/ethnicity as other than Caucasian.
Race/Ethnicity of
Borrowers
Category
Number
Caucasian
705 [545]
Hispanic/
Latino
AfricanAmerican
Asian
31 [20]
other
1[19]
unknown
207 [263]
TOTAL
1068 [1038]
85 [88]
39 [18]
What “systems” serve the borrowers?
Many borrowers are served by publicly-funded service “systems”. To the extent
that the “system” is identified, we can infer that benefits accrue to that system
(e.g. assistive technology that has been tried is less likely to be subsequently
“abandoned”, therefore public monies are more wisely utilized; consumers of that
system are better served). As the Lending Library is a primarily a state-funded
program, it is of particular interest to see where state-funded systems are
affected. Conversely, where borrowers are not “connected” to a service system,
it may be more difficult for them to find funding to acquire their own devices and
5|P age
other supports for assistive technology. Borrowers are asked on the loan request
form to select all systems from which they receive services (e.g. they may select
more than one). Borrowers reported being served by the following systems:
“Systems” Serving
Borrowers
Category
Number
Early
Intervention
Public School
139 [122]
Private
School
Mental Health
28 [13]
Office of
Developmental
Programs
Office of
Vocational
Rehabilitation
BVS
Area
Agencies on
Aging/Senior
Centers
None
Other
TOTAL#
responses
100 [73]
17 [17]
38 [38]
47 [59]
55 [42]
44 [38]
519 [554]
93 [90]
1081 [1046]
The number of borrowers served by the Office of Developmental Programs
continues to be lower than expected (and unchanged from 13-14). We do
understand that, in at least some cases, a barrier may be the reluctance on the
part of residential support providers to assume responsibility for devices
borrowed by people with intellectual developmental disabilities who live in
community living arrangements or larger congregate settings. Conversely, it is
gratifying to see the increase of borrowing by or on behalf of BBVS consumers.
Despite referral to PaTTAN’s short-term equipment loan program, we continue to
serve students with disabilities (either because PaTTAN has a waiting list for the
desired item, does not have the desired item, OR because other requirements
were not met for that program [e.g. request was not made by “authorized”
personnel). The number of borrowers who report being served by none of the
listed service systems continues to surprise.
B. Circulate devices from regional ATRCs, including arrangements for
delivery and pick up. Track and report on usage of ATRC on-site loans.
6|P age
Although on-site lending is NOT supported with state ATLL funds, this activity
compliments the role of the ATRC as a key resource for device loans. Some
ATRCs, including the Institute on Disabilities, have augmented their collection of
devices for onsite lending through other funding sources, where available. For
items represented in both the centralized inventory and an ATRC’s onsite loan
program, the ATRC adheres to its established policies and procedures for
determining the source of the loan. ATRCs are permitted to use their state or
federal funds (if needed) to support lending, e.g. mileage or postage to
deliver/pick up loaned equipment.
Counting all sources of devices, a total of 331 [405] on-site loans were made
from July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015, as follows: PIAT – 220 [260]; Three
Rivers Center for Independent Living – 12 [28]; Roads to Freedom – 66[ 48]; TriCounty Patriots for Independent Living – 8 [23]; United Cerebral Palsy of
Northeastern PA – 16 [39]; United Cerebral Palsy of Central PA – 1 [5],;
Community Resources for Independence – 7 [1], Good Shepherd Rehabilitation
Hospital – 1 [1].
C. Implement mechanisms for reutilization or other re-distribution of
outdated or irreparable items, in order to reduce the amount of space
required at HGAC. Track disposition of items, e.g. distributed to
individuals with disabilities or programs serving individuals with disabilities;
or items beyond repair that are discarded.
Removing outdated or irreparable equipment from the centralized inventory
reduces the needed space at the Hiram G. Andrews Center (with the potential of
reducing space-associated costs). Review of items also assures an up-to-date
program that does not have consumers borrowing and making decisions about
equipment that is not currently sold. In collaboration with HGAC staff, items that
have not circulated in the past year or more are reviewed and as appropriate,
identified for reuse or surplus.
During the reporting period July 2014-June 2015, twenty [15] devices in working
condition and meeting the criteria of no longer sold and no longer supported by
the manufacturer were taken out of inventory, listed in the Reused and
Exchanged Equipment Program online classifieds (REEP) and subsequently
matched with consumers who needed the AT and had no other resource for
obtaining the devices. This activity saved consumers $13,223 [$22,472]
(if they had to buy similar devices “new”). Devices were provided at no cost,
except for the cost of shipping, when applicable.
The following story illustrates the “new life” AT Lending Library equipment can
have, even when it is no longer suitable for a “try before you buy” program:
D.R. recently contacted REEP to see if any used Braille note takers were
available. Her current device was breaking down frequently and could not be
repaired. The consumer obtained the discontinued model device from the
7|P age
Lending Library and is now able to function in the workplace with a working
BrailleNote mPower.
D. Identify items (current; in good operating condition) that are housed at
HGAC that can be re-deployed to ATRCs; develop mechanisms for redistributing these items for on-site lending, as per ATRCs’ request and
for which they have capacity to store and circulate.
ATRCs have not made any requests for items from the Lending Library to house
at their location.
Goal II: Provide referral services to borrowers who require additional
supports in order to have a meaningful trial with the loaned device.
For items that require support, ATRCs may identify people with disabilities in
need of help in setting up or using devices as they assist them in completing a
loan application or during the review and processing of the application to borrow
“high tech” devices. ATRCs typically explain the complexity or other
characteristics (e.g. weight) of the identified devices, why, and what kind of
support will be needed during the loan period in order to make an “informed
decision”.
A. Provide an interim contact to borrowers of complex devices to see if
they have the supports they need for a meaningful trial.
Each month, ATRCs call or otherwise contact people with disabilities or family
members who have borrowed devices which require support to make sure the
supports needed for a meaningful loan period have been obtained. This interim
contact may result in the identification of borrowers who had listed a support
person on the application but for whatever reason, that individual has been
unable to provide the necessary supports or services. In some cases, the
borrower will contact the ATRC (or HGAC) when s/he is experiencing problems
in using the device.
B. Provide borrowers who require additional supports with referrals to
qualified providers; provide information on potential funding sources for
those services, including but not limited to the Griswold Scholarship Fund.
During 14-15, there was a dramatic increase in the numbers of individuals who
requested and received support services from ATRCs. Forty [21] individuals
received almost 148 [56] hours of support on 71 [23] devices, arranged or
provided by ATRCs. Some borrowers received support on more than one item.
Items requiring supports (where specified) were those for hearing (24 [8]),
speech communication (18 [3]), mobility, seating and position (12 [2]), computer
access (6 [3]), vision devices (6 [3]), and daily living (3 [4]).
8|P age
Recipients of support services provided (or arranged) by ATRCs are asked to
complete a support satisfaction survey upon conclusion of the service.
Based on a 54% response rate to satisfaction follow-up with borrowers who
received support services, 100%[100%] indicated satisfaction with the service
(61% [61%] highly satisfied, 31% [30%] satisfied, and 4% [9%] somewhat
satisfied).
There was one referral to the Griswold Scholarship Fund for financial support for
needed services; however, because that fund is meant to be “last resort”, the
applicant was rejected.
The following story provided by an ATRC (Three Rivers Center for Independent
Living) illustrates the value of support services as a critical component for
consumers who are borrowing a device to make a decision about what AT might
work:
Jane, a woman with visual impairment, borrowed a computer with JAWS, a Victor
Stream Reader and the Humanware Braillenote mPower. She was having
difficulty trying the devices. Although she knew people who used JAWS, none of
them knew how to use a laptop computer. She scheduled an appointment with
me for ATLL borrower support. When I arrived and started working with her it
became apparent that she was primarily interested in just having a note taker.
She thought that she needed to have one connected to a computer and reader in
order for it to work. When she discovered that was not the case, she stated that
she was not really interested in using the computer or the Victor and we
concentrated on the mPower. The device did not come with instructions. I called
a friend of mine who uses note takers to get some basic ideas on how to use
one. With that information Jane was able to decide that a note taker would work
for her and do all the things that she needed it to do. I put her in contact with the
vendor for additional support and product information; the vendor emailed me the
next day to let me know that Jane had placed an order for a Humanware note
taker.
The opportunity to borrow – and the support from the ATRC – helped Jane
understand her AT needs and decide what would – and wouldn’t - work for her.
Goal III: Evaluate customer satisfaction and outcomes associated with
equipment loans and supports through Pennsylvania’s Assistive
Technology Lending Library. Utilize findings to continuously improve the
program (ongoing and as funds allow).
A. Measure overall satisfaction with the program, maintaining at least a
90% satisfaction rate.
More than 97% (N=558) of the Lending Library’s customers responding to the
follow up survey conducted by ATRCs are satisfied with the service. Of these,
9|P age
74% [72%] % are highly satisfied, almost 24%-26%] are satisfied, and less than
2% are somewhat satisfied. This benchmark was exceeded.
B. Report on the ability of the borrower to make a decision as a result
the program, with at least 90% of program users who borrow in order to make a
decision reporting they were able to determine AT would (or would not) work for
them.
One of the best measures of efficacy of the program is an examination of
program outcomes. As per the following chart, 94% [96%] of respondents were
able to make a decision that the AT whose hands-on experience dissuaded them
from pursuing the AT they tried – a potential cost savings if they had purchased
said device. This benchmark was exceeded.
As a result of
Primary Purpose of Which AT is Need – as identified on
borrowing
Device Loan Request Form
the device, I Education Employment Community IT/Telecommunication
Living
Decided that
107 [54]
16 [33]
345 [236]
21 [100]
an AT
device/service
will meet
needs
Decided that
1 [8]
1 [2]
12 [42]
0 [8]
an AT
device/service
will not meet
needs
Have not
8 [1]
4 [0]
20 [0]
2 [0]
made a
decision
Total
489
[423]
14
[60]
34
[1]
Nonrespondent
5 [1]
2 [0]
3 [2]
1 [3]
11
[6]
Total
121 [64]
23 35]
380 [280]
24 [111]
548
[490]
Goal IV: Review, revise, and/or develop policies for the operation of a
statewide program that is efficient, consumer-responsive, cross-age (with
some exceptions), and cross-disability.
A. Continue to develop and implement new policies that create additional
10 | P a g e
cost efficiencies while attempting to maintain a program that meets the
needs of consumers who wish to borrow and trial assistive devices,
including but not limited to new procedures to reduce shipping costs,
generate fees and increase loans of devices from de-centralized points
(ATRCs), and policies that restrict usage of the program by school-aged
students who have alternative resources (PaTTAN).
Delays in returning equipment, for any reason, negatively impact customer
service by creating waiting lists. The more time that elapses past the due date
for equipment return, the less likely it is that equipment (and all related
components including instruction manuals, cables, etc.) will be returned intact—
or at all. In addition, each call tag issued is an added expense to the program.
Accordingly, all aspects of the shipping/return process are closely monitored.
On average, late returns necessitate only a second call tag. For example, in the
fourth quarter of the 2014-2015 program year, of 278 [376] devices that were
returned that quarter, there were only 12 [19] devices requiring a second call
tag; only two [1] loans required three call tags and none required more than
three call tags before they were successfully returned via UPS. This may reflect
ATRCs’ initiative in dealing with such borrowers, e.g. developing alternate
strategies for picking up late returns and otherwise recovering devices, as
illustrated by the following accounts from our ATRCs:
The borrower was a client of BBVS and was confused about why he needed to
return the loaner scanner to HGAC. After unsuccessful attempts to contact him, I
contacted his social worker and she was able to tell me that he had been in the
hospital. He had just received his SARA Scanning Reading device from BBVS,
and thought the device from the AT Lending Library was the one he was
supposed to keep. The social worker was able to help the borrower realize that
the device in the shipping case needed to be returned, and the one in the actual
equipment box from BBVS was the one he could actually keep. The device was
ultimately returned to HGAC and put back in circulation.
The borrower went to the hospital during the loan period and the device then
went with her to rehab. The device was supposed to be picked up at her home.
I was finally able to contact the daughter who told me that it was at the rehab
facility. By the time I contacted the speech therapist at the rehab facility the
borrower had moved – with the device – to a nursing facility. I talked to the
therapy department, who did not know how to return it. Call tags were sent to
have it shipped back to centralized inventory at HGAC. However, for some
reason it was sent to the Center for Assistive Technology (CAT) in Pittsburgh. A
speech-language pathologist let me know it was there and I contacted HGAC.
Call tags were sent to the CAT and it was successfully shipped back to HGAC. If
we had not had the daughter’s contact information, I would not have been able to
track it down.
11 | P a g e
When the borrowed phone came due, UPS came and went with no results.
When I called to ask what happened, the borrower apologized and assured me
that the phone would be packed up the next time UPS came. The second time
UPS came, they picked up the shipping case but without the phone, the base, or
the power cord. When I called to ask about this, the borrower asserted he had
packed everything up. When I made follow-up calls, he just hung up on me. So I
wrote a letter of intent to collect, and that was received by the consumer and his
building manager, who explained to him the loaner phone he was still using was
not his property. They arranged a delivery back to HGAC at their expense, and
everything was resolved successfully.
B. Maintain acceptable levels of loss, at or below the number of
items/cost of items not returned in 2013-14. Review and revise (if
necessary) policies that prevent/minimize loss.
Some borrowers find the equipment so helpful they don’t want to return it!
Procedures regarding late and missing items continue to be implemented,
resulting in many items recovered by the ATRCs and successfully returned to the
circulating inventory.
During this period, a total of 37 [70] items, less than 3% [5%] of the total number
of devices shipped out, were not returned when due. Of these, 18 [21] devices
or device components) were ultimately recovered or paid for by the borrower,
worth a total of $29,806 [$22,136].00. Despite efforts to retrieve devices or
components not returned by borrowers, we could not recover or be compensated
damage to 4 [7] items, worth approximately $430.00 [$6,119]. We remain hopeful
that the remaining items will be located and returned, or paid for and consider
them to be “in process” of being returned. The level of loss (number of items
lost, value of items lost) was substantially lower than the previous year’s.
The following policies that prevent/minimize loss were reviewed or revised:
Managing Missing/Damaged/Overdue Equipment - $50 or less
Managing Missing/Damaged/Overdue Equipment - $51 or more
Suspending Agencies
Goal V: Maintain the infrastructure of Pennsylvania’s Assistive Technology
Lending Library.
A. Coordinate, monitor, and evaluate Lending Library-related activities
of Assistive Technology Resource Centers (7 ATRC subcontractors,
staff at Institute on Disabilities) and the Inventory Subcontractor.
Institute on Disabilities at Temple University
The Institute on Disabilities maintains overall coordination and provides direction
for the implementation of Pennsylvania’s Assistive Technology Lending Library.
In addition to positions funded directly through the Interagency Agreement with
12 | P a g e
the Department of Labor and Industry, the Institute on Disabilities contributes
other resources towards this program. The Institute strives to maximize available
resources from multiple funding sources (e.g. Pennsylvania’s Telecommunication
Device Distribution Program, as well as federal support through Pennsylvania’s
Initiative on Assistive Technology, and iCanConnectPA) to develop a seamless
system of assistive technology services in Pennsylvania, while at the same time
assuring that funding from any given source is supplemented, but not
supplanted.
The Institute serves as the Assistive Technology Resource Center for
southeastern Pennsylvania, coordinates the network of ATRCs, oversees the
work of the centralized inventory subcontractor Hiram G. Andrews Center
(HGAC), facilitates communication between the ATRCs and HGAC, establishes
and implements policies and procedures for the operation of the program, and
provides overall coordination and direction to the statewide infrastructure for
assistive technology.
Objective 1: Process subcontracts as per acceptable responses to
noncompetitive “RFPs”; monitor subcontracted activities; facilitate
payment of invoices (ongoing).
The noncompetitive Requests for Proposals (RFP) for 14-15 were reviewed,
amended as necessary, and incorporated as the statement of work for the 14-15
subcontracts for our Assistive Technology Resource Centers (ATRCs) as well as
Hiram G. Andrews Center. Institute on Disabilities staff (McNally) monitored
contract compliance and performance and provided technical assistance
throughout the year. In 2014-15, an ongoing vacancy in the Information
Technology Technician position at HGAC has negatively impacted the ability to
move returned items (especially “high-tech” devices) back into circulation in a
timely way, resulting in waiting lists. We hope this barrier can be resolved in 1516.
The noncompetitive RFP for the 15-16 contract year was released to seven
incumbent ATRC subcontractors on June 12, 2015 (due June 30, 2015). The 1516 award will be level funded, pending the final appropriation for the program in
the state budget.
Assistive Technology Resource Centers (ATRC)
The ATRCs provide the link between borrowers and the “circulating department”
of the Lending Library at the Hiram G. Andrews Center (HGAC). The ATRCs
facilitate the borrowing process by providing assistance to consumers as follows:
 identify the equipment to be borrowed (which may involve referral for
evaluation);
 identify and refer to service providers when the device requires support for
use during the loan period;
13 | P a g e




assure completeness of the application (including original signature);
track the loan request;
communicate with the borrower regarding (a) the status of the request; (b)
anticipated shipment date; (c) for those on waiting list, information about
alternative sources for trying, borrowing, renting the desired device OR
possible substitutions; (d) whether or not there is a need for additional
supports in order to have a meaningful trial period, and arranging for or
providing up to two hours of such support if needed; (e) reminder of the
impending end of the loan period; and (e) follow up on items that are late
being returned or which are returned damaged or with missing pieces; and
assist borrowers in “next steps” regarding the purchase/funding of
equipment that has been found to be useful and appropriate.
The relationship between the ATRC and the borrower figures significantly in the
success of the program. On-going communication improves the consumerresponsiveness of the program, keeping borrowers informed and providing
opportunities for the ATRC to intervene when there are problems. The contact
between ATRC and borrower increases the likelihood that the loan period will
meet its goal (rule in or rule out a particular device, for example) while minimizing
losses that might be expected with the circulation of thousands of pieces of
equipment.
ATRCs receive status reports from the “circulation department” of the Lending
Library at Hiram G. Andrews Center (HGAC) enumerating incomplete and
overdue loans. The ATRCs implement procedures for following up with late
(beyond 30 days past due date), missing, and/or damaged items in accordance
with Lending Library policy. Close communication between HGAC and the
ATRCs helps to contain the extent and cost of losses incurred by the program as
a result of incomplete returns, lost devices and damaged items.
As the AT Lending Library centralized inventory “ages”, ATRCs play an
increasingly important role in identifying other resources through which
individuals may borrow more current technologies, including but not limited to the
ATRC’s on-site loan program.
Hiram G. Andrews Center (HGAC)
The Lending Library staff at the Hiram G. Andrews Center is responsible for
moving the equipment to and from borrowers, in a timely way, and with all
components in working order. The routine activities of the “circulating
department” at Hiram G. Andrews Center (HGAC) include:


intake and processing of requests to borrow equipment, including
communication with Assistive Technology Resource Centers
(confirmations to ATRCs with estimated shipment dates; notice of waiting
list status if applicable);
packing and shipping of devices, components, and peripherals;
14 | P a g e





coordinating with UPS, including resolving problems with shipping;
checking in devices returned (inventorying all items returned, checking
condition e.g. need for batteries to be charged or replaced);
maintaining the inventory so that all devices are in good condition and in
working order;
responding to inquiries and
maintaining and reporting data regarding inventory and loan activity.
In addition, HGAC staff promote the Lending Library within their facility (including
the Center for Assistive and Rehabilitation Technology), throughout the Office of
Vocational Rehabilitation system, and when other opportunities arise. HGAC
Lending Library staff also assists borrowers who are in residence at HGAC, and
provide follow-up activities (e.g. retrieving components to devices borrowed but
not returned by HGAC clients).
Objective 2: Maintain communication among ATRC subcontractors, the
Institute on Disabilities, and the Centralized Inventory Subcontractor via
telecommunications or other cost-effective methods.
Oversight and technical assistance to ATRCs are provided by Institute on
Disabilities’ staff, and include ongoing monitoring of monthly progress reports
and database entries, an ATRC listserv and other forms of communication (e.g.
periodic teleconferences; and an in-person meeting supported through federal
funds).
Goal VI: Maintain electronic resources.
A. Provide and maintain an accessible website including current inventory
information, borrowing procedures, application forms, and electronic
versions of other relevant print materials.
Materials are available to assist Pennsylvanians in learning about the Lending
Library inventory and its operation. The website reflects new additions to the
inventory and is updated as items are removed from circulation. Alternate
formats (electronic, audiotape, Braille) and Spanish language information are
available upon request.
After a decrease in page views of the on-line catalog in 13-14, this year page
views increased almost to the 12-13 level (65, 983 [62,007]. The number of
views of pages with supporting information (FAQ, application, ATRC detail) also
increased (33,968 [32,320]).
New additions to the inventory are also announced via social media (Facebook
page of Pennsylvania’s Initiative on Assistive Technology).
Goal VII: Seek sources of private support from vendors, manufacturers,
foundations, individuals and other sources to enhance the program.
15 | P a g e
A. Identify and respond to public and private funding opportunities that may
support additions to the equipment inventory.
The Institute on Disabilities provides support to the AT Lending Library by
allocating a portion of its federal funds received through Pennsylvania’s Initiative
on Assistive Technology (PIAT), the Commonwealth’s program under the
Assistive Technology Act. This year, more than $100,000 in federal funds
through PIAT supplemented the state funding, included partial support for a
student worker and a graduate assistant, partial funding for other designated
Institute staff, design and printing of public awareness materials, additional
equipment purchases exceeding $35,000) and travel on Lending Library-related
business.
Over $50,000 in supplemental funding provided by OVR in June, 2015 enabled
the addition of equipment to refresh and update the inventory; it is anticipated
these devices will begin to circulate in the first quarter of the 15-16 program year.
Priority was given to purchasing those items for which there is documented
demand (as per waiting lists) and/or which are not represented in the inventory of
current technologies. Equipment additions were also provided through more
than $1200 of funding from the Pennsylvania Telecommunication Device
Distribution Program (TDDP) and devices valued at more than $15,000 from the
federally-funded iCanConnectPA program.
When purchasing equipment, vendors/manufacturers are asked to provide
discounts, wherever possible. Where we have been successfully in leveraging
contributions, they are generally modest (5%-15% off the Manufacturers
Suggested Retail Price, free shipping, extended warrantees, etc.).
Temple University provides in-kind support by accepting the state’s limitation of
15% on “indirect” charged by the University for similar activities (usually at 26%).
16 | P a g e