We would like the plan to specify what core CIL services are performed without cost to the residents of the State of Michigan.
Response: This question was addressed by the writing team and further definition was added to Section 2.1C. This is an area which will continue to receive discussion during the next three years.
Why not have SILC and the DSU produce an annual report regarding the valuation and progress of SPIL initiatives focused on increasing services, advocacy and leadership development or under represented communities and people with disabilities.
Response: An annual SPIL report will be created to address the implementation of the SPIL and will be presented to the “committee of the whole” as outlined in Section 7.
I am concerned this document does not state it is the operation base for Michigan’s IL program. It should say somewhere that MRS acts as a fiduciary for Michigan in carrying out the SPIL. It reads more like an appendix to the SPIL.
Response: The language of the plan does spell out each agency responsibilities and provides for an operational base for Michigan’s IL Program.
I am concerned there is not more teeth in monitoring the IL program.
Response: Both Section 2 Objectives and Section 7 was composed and strengthened to provide statewide monitoring on SPIL implementation.
I urge the Michigan SPIL to consider and to commence advocacy to protect persons with disabilities from these discriminatory, assaultive and unconditional policies and practices attached as the complete document received for this comment.
Response: While the specific request has not been added as a SPIL Objective, the SPIL does contain the framework for advocacy efforts to ensure that people with disabilities can be free of discrimination and unconstitutional policies and practices. Advocacy efforts need to be undertaken by individual CILs as the Council is unable to undertake direct advocacy initiatives per the Act.
Public Comment from Luke Zelly:
Response: The writing team has met and considered this comment and the impact on the SPIL. **
Public Comment from Mike Zelly:
Response: The writing team has met and considered this comment and the impact on the SPIL. **
** The writing team, in consultation with the Silc council, are concerned how implementing the removal of all targets in the SPIL will allow the Council to perform it’s statuary requirements regarding Statewide monitoring of the plan. At this time, no options have been presented.