Comments on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Subject and Citation 7(5)(B) of the Act, as amended by WIOA,- competitive integrated employment High Level Summary Summarize and describe the main points of the subject you are reviewing Description of how definition of “competitive integrated employment” is similar/different from current definitions Changes to Current Practice Describe any changes to current practices that the new rule would require “Specifically, individuals with disabilities hired by community rehabilitation programs to perform work under service contracts, either alone or in groups(e.g., landscaping or janitorial crews), whose interaction with persons without disabilities (other than their supervisors and service providers) is with persons working in or visiting the work locations (and not with employees of the community rehabilitation programs without disabilities in similar positions) would not be performing work in an integrated setting.” This would change our ability to take some closures that we currently get and will reduce the number of employment options for consumers. Implications of Changes Describe any implications – to policy, fiscal impact, staffing, etc. – that would result from the changes I think that the paragraph above is saying that if the person is working for a competitive employer but under contract with a CRP, they would never be considered as working in an integrated setting, even if the job fit the definition in every other way. Conclusion Is the rule change good or bad? Should we support it? Oppose it? Suggest changes? My initial take is that it is bad. To me, when it is an individual placement, where the person’s interaction with non-disabled people is the same as it is for other staff working in the same capacity, then it should be considered integrated, the same as if the person were working for a staffing agency.