National Assistive Technology Act Data System
Annual Progress Report - Full Report
Missouri 2021
General Information
Statewide AT Program (Information to be listed in national State AT Program Directory)
Lead Agency
Implementing Entity
Program Director and Other Contacts
Person Responsible for completing this form if other than Program Director
Certifying Representative
State Financing
| Did your approved state plan for this reporting period include any State Financing? | Yes |
|---|---|
| Did your approved state plan for this reporting period include conducting a Financial Loan Program? | Yes |
| Area of Residence | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
Metro RUCC 1-3 |
Non-Metro RUCC 4-9 |
||
| Approved Loan made | 17 | 07 | 24 |
| Approved Not made | 00 | 00 | 00 |
| Rejected | 03 | 00 | 03 |
| Total | 20 | 07 | 27 |
2. Income of Applicants to Whom Loans Were Made
| Lowest Income: | $9,396 | Highest Income: | $127,536 |
|---|
| Sum of Incomes | Loans Made | Average Annual Income |
|---|---|---|
| $1,367,943 | 24 | $56,998 |
| Income Ranges | Total | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $15,000 or Less |
$15,001- $30,000 |
$30,001- $45,000 |
$45,001- $60,000 |
$60,001- $75,000 |
$75,001 or More |
||
| Number of Loans | 03 | 04 | 04 | 05 | 03 | 05 | 24 |
| Percentage of Loans | 12.5% | 16.67% | 16.67% | 20.83% | 12.5% | 20.83% | 100% |
3. Loan Type
| Type of Loan | Number of Loans | Percentage of loans |
|---|---|---|
| Revolving Loans | 24 | 100% |
| Partnership Loans | ||
| Without interest buy-down or loan guarantee | 00 | 0% |
| With interest buy-down only | 00 | 0% |
| With loan guarantee only | 00 | 0% |
| With both interest buy-down and loan guarantee | 00 | 0% |
| Total | 24 | 100% |
| Type of Loan | Number of Loans | Dollar Value of Loans |
|---|---|---|
| Revolving Loans | 24 | $450,991 |
| Partnership Loans | 00 | $0 |
| Total | 24 | $450,991 |
4. Interest Rates
| Lowest | 1% |
|---|---|
| Highest | 4% |
| Sum of Interest Rates | Number of Loans Made | Average Interest Rate |
|---|---|---|
| 82 | 24 | 3.41666666666667% |
| Interest Rate | Number of loans |
|---|---|
| 0.0% to 2.0% | 06 |
| 2.1% to 4.0% | 18 |
| 4.1% to 6.0% | 00 |
| 6.1% to 8.0% | 00 |
| 8.1% - 10.0% | 00 |
| 10.1%-12.0% | 00 |
| 12.1%-14.0% | 00 |
| 14.1% + | 00 |
| Total | 24 |
5. Types and Dollar Amounts of AT Financed
| Type of AT | Number of Devices Financed | Dollar Value of Loans |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | 00 | $0 |
| Hearing | 03 | $14,790 |
| Speech communication | 00 | $0 |
| Learning, cognition, and developmental | 00 | $0 |
| Mobility, seating and positioning | 01 | $4,200 |
| Daily living | 00 | $0 |
| Environmental adaptations | 03 | $27,250 |
| Vehicle modification and transportation | 13 | $386,758 |
| Computers and related | 00 | $0 |
| Recreation, sports, and leisure | 04 | $17,993 |
| Total | 24 | $450,991 |
6. Defaults
| Number Loans in default | 03 |
|---|---|
| Net loss for loans in default | $38,794 |
B. State Financing Activities that provide consumers with resources and services that result in the acquisition of AT devices and services
1. Overview of Activities Performed
| How many other state financing activities that provide consumers with access to funds for the purchase of AT devices and services were included in your approved state plan? | 7 |
|---|
Activity 1
| How would you describe this state financing activity? | Telecommunications equipment distribution |
|---|
2. Geographic Distribution, Number of Individuals Who Acquired AT Devices and Services and Number for whom Performance Measure Data are Collected
| County of Residence | Individuals Served |
|---|---|
| A. Metro (RUCC 1-3) | 173 |
| B. Non-Metro (RUCC 4-9) | 74 |
| C. Total Served | 247 |
| Performance Measure | |
|---|---|
| D. Excluded from Performance Measure | 0 |
| E. Number of Individuals Included in Performance Measures | 247 |
If a number is reported in D you must provide a description of the reason the individuals are excluded from the performance measure:
3. Types and Dollar Amounts of AT Funded
| Type of AT Device / Service | Number of Devices Funded | Value of AT Provided |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | 249 | 153580.00 |
| Hearing | 0 | 0.00 |
| Speech communication | 0 | 0.00 |
| Learning, cognition, and developmental | 18 | 10122.00 |
| Mobility, seating and positioning | 18 | 7329.00 |
| Daily living | 0 | 0.00 |
| Environmental adaptations | 31 | 6246.00 |
| Vehicle modification and transportation | 0 | 0.00 |
| Computers and related | 232 | 57868.00 |
| Recreation, sports, and leisure | 0 | 0.00 |
| Total | 548 | 235145.00 |
Activity 2
| How would you describe this state financing activity? | Other: iCanConnect |
|---|
2. Geographic Distribution, Number of Individuals Who Acquired AT Devices and Services and Number for whom Performance Measure Data are Collected
| County of Residence | Individuals Served |
|---|---|
| A. Metro (RUCC 1-3) | 38 |
| B. Non-Metro (RUCC 4-9) | 12 |
| C. Total Served | 50 |
| Performance Measure | |
|---|---|
| D. Excluded from Performance Measure | 0 |
| E. Number of Individuals Included in Performance Measures | 50 |
If a number is reported in D you must provide a description of the reason the individuals are excluded from the performance measure:
3. Types and Dollar Amounts of AT Funded
| Type of AT Device / Service | Number of Devices Funded | Value of AT Provided |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | 84 | 66647.00 |
| Hearing | 32 | 6722.00 |
| Speech communication | 0 | 0.00 |
| Learning, cognition, and developmental | 0 | 0.00 |
| Mobility, seating and positioning | 0 | 0.00 |
| Daily living | 0 | 0.00 |
| Environmental adaptations | 0 | 0.00 |
| Vehicle modification and transportation | 0 | 0.00 |
| Computers and related | 66 | 46299.00 |
| Recreation, sports, and leisure | 0 | 0.00 |
| Total | 182 | 119668.00 |
Activity 3
| How would you describe this state financing activity? | Last resort - Activity |
|---|
2. Geographic Distribution, Number of Individuals Who Acquired AT Devices and Services and Number for whom Performance Measure Data are Collected
| County of Residence | Individuals Served |
|---|---|
| A. Metro (RUCC 1-3) | 16 |
| B. Non-Metro (RUCC 4-9) | 12 |
| C. Total Served | 28 |
| Performance Measure | |
|---|---|
| D. Excluded from Performance Measure | 0 |
| E. Number of Individuals Included in Performance Measures | 28 |
If a number is reported in D you must provide a description of the reason the individuals are excluded from the performance measure:
3. Types and Dollar Amounts of AT Funded
| Type of AT Device / Service | Number of Devices Funded | Value of AT Provided |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | 0 | 0.00 |
| Hearing | 1 | 3788.00 |
| Speech communication | 1 | 1097.00 |
| Learning, cognition, and developmental | 0 | 0.00 |
| Mobility, seating and positioning | 13 | 42771.00 |
| Daily living | 3 | 9881.00 |
| Environmental adaptations | 6 | 22632.00 |
| Vehicle modification and transportation | 4 | 20626.00 |
| Computers and related | 0 | 0.00 |
| Recreation, sports, and leisure | 0 | 0.00 |
| Total | 28 | 100795.00 |
Activity 4
| How would you describe this state financing activity? | Other: MFP AT Service |
|---|
2. Geographic Distribution, Number of Individuals Who Acquired AT Devices and Services and Number for whom Performance Measure Data are Collected
| County of Residence | Individuals Served |
|---|---|
| A. Metro (RUCC 1-3) | 58 |
| B. Non-Metro (RUCC 4-9) | 4 |
| C. Total Served | 62 |
| Performance Measure | |
|---|---|
| D. Excluded from Performance Measure | 0 |
| E. Number of Individuals Included in Performance Measures | 62 |
If a number is reported in D you must provide a description of the reason the individuals are excluded from the performance measure:
3. Types and Dollar Amounts of AT Funded
| Type of AT Device / Service | Number of Devices Funded | Value of AT Provided |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | 3 | 13350.00 |
| Hearing | 0 | 0.00 |
| Speech communication | 0 | 0.00 |
| Learning, cognition, and developmental | 0 | 0.00 |
| Mobility, seating and positioning | 13 | 42448.00 |
| Daily living | 42 | 77990.00 |
| Environmental adaptations | 3 | 15000.00 |
| Vehicle modification and transportation | 0 | 0.00 |
| Computers and related | 1 | 595.00 |
| Recreation, sports, and leisure | 0 | 0.00 |
| Total | 62 | 149383.00 |
Activity 5
| How would you describe this state financing activity? | Other: School Reimbursement Program |
|---|
2. Geographic Distribution, Number of Individuals Who Acquired AT Devices and Services and Number for whom Performance Measure Data are Collected
| County of Residence | Individuals Served |
|---|---|
| A. Metro (RUCC 1-3) | 153 |
| B. Non-Metro (RUCC 4-9) | 104 |
| C. Total Served | 257 |
| Performance Measure | |
|---|---|
| D. Excluded from Performance Measure | 257 |
| E. Number of Individuals Included in Performance Measures | 0 |
If a number is reported in D you must provide a description of the reason the individuals are excluded from the performance measure:
Schools have obligation to provide AT under IDEA.
3. Types and Dollar Amounts of AT Funded
| Type of AT Device / Service | Number of Devices Funded | Value of AT Provided |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | 45 | 125067.00 |
| Hearing | 28 | 60774.00 |
| Speech communication | 79 | 119019.00 |
| Learning, cognition, and developmental | 84 | 135477.00 |
| Mobility, seating and positioning | 0 | 0.00 |
| Daily living | 0 | 0.00 |
| Environmental adaptations | 2 | 2.00 |
| Vehicle modification and transportation | 0 | 0.00 |
| Computers and related | 19 | 26858.00 |
| Recreation, sports, and leisure | 0 | 0.00 |
| Total | 257 | 467197.00 |
Activity 6
| How would you describe this state financing activity? | Other: Robotic Pet Project |
|---|
2. Geographic Distribution, Number of Individuals Who Acquired AT Devices and Services and Number for whom Performance Measure Data are Collected
| County of Residence | Individuals Served |
|---|---|
| A. Metro (RUCC 1-3) | 121 |
| B. Non-Metro (RUCC 4-9) | 111 |
| C. Total Served | 232 |
| Performance Measure | |
|---|---|
| D. Excluded from Performance Measure | 0 |
| E. Number of Individuals Included in Performance Measures | 232 |
If a number is reported in D you must provide a description of the reason the individuals are excluded from the performance measure:
3. Types and Dollar Amounts of AT Funded
| Type of AT Device / Service | Number of Devices Funded | Value of AT Provided |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | 0 | 0.00 |
| Hearing | 0 | 0.00 |
| Speech communication | 0 | 0.00 |
| Learning, cognition, and developmental | 0 | 0.00 |
| Mobility, seating and positioning | 0 | 0.00 |
| Daily living | 0 | 0.00 |
| Environmental adaptations | 0 | 0.00 |
| Vehicle modification and transportation | 0 | 0.00 |
| Computers and related | 0 | 0.00 |
| Recreation, sports, and leisure | 232 | 30900.00 |
| Total | 232 | 30900.00 |
Activity 7
| How would you describe this state financing activity? | Other: DD COVID Scholarship |
|---|
2. Geographic Distribution, Number of Individuals Who Acquired AT Devices and Services and Number for whom Performance Measure Data are Collected
| County of Residence | Individuals Served |
|---|---|
| A. Metro (RUCC 1-3) | 117 |
| B. Non-Metro (RUCC 4-9) | 63 |
| C. Total Served | 180 |
| Performance Measure | |
|---|---|
| D. Excluded from Performance Measure | 0 |
| E. Number of Individuals Included in Performance Measures | 180 |
If a number is reported in D you must provide a description of the reason the individuals are excluded from the performance measure:
3. Types and Dollar Amounts of AT Funded
| Type of AT Device / Service | Number of Devices Funded | Value of AT Provided |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | 4 | 1230.00 |
| Hearing | 0 | 0.00 |
| Speech communication | 5 | 2800.00 |
| Learning, cognition, and developmental | 0 | 0.00 |
| Mobility, seating and positioning | 0 | 0.00 |
| Daily living | 0 | 0.00 |
| Environmental adaptations | 0 | 0.00 |
| Vehicle modification and transportation | 0 | 0.00 |
| Computers and related | 178 | 120170.00 |
| Recreation, sports, and leisure | 30 | 25800.00 |
| Total | 217 | 150000.00 |
C. State Financing Activities that Allow Consumers to Obtain AT at Reduced Cost
1. Overview of Activities Performed
| How many state financing activities that allow consumers to obtain AT at a reduced cost were included in your approved state plan? | 0 |
|---|
D. Anecdote
Clara is a fiercely independent 5-year old who has an Anoxic brain injury and other disabilities that affect her functional mobility. Funding assistance from MoAT's KAT Program allowed Clara's family convert their bathroom from inaccessible to accessible through the addition of a grab-bar (installed at Clara height) and a special tub that features a cut-out and door, providing Clara with independent access. For Clara, her new bath is definitely a happy place.
Mr. Harris spent part of the past year in a nursing home recovering from multiple medical challenges. His true desire, though, was to transition back to the community and into his own home, which was made possible when he connected with the Money Follows the Person Program. Due to mobility challenges and limited upper body strength, Mr. Harris was in need of several pieces of AT to help increase his independence and ensure his safety. Funds provided through the AT Demonstration Program enabled Mr. Harris to secure the needed devices, which included a rollater and lift chair.
E. Performance Measures
| Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
| 1. Could only afford the AT through the AT program. | 00 | 00 | 823 | 823 |
| 2. AT was only available through the AT program. | 00 | 00 | 00 | 00 |
| 3. AT was available through other programs, but the system was too complex or the wait time too long. | 00 | 00 | 00 | 00 |
| 4. Subtotal | 00 | 00 | 823 | 823 |
| 5. None of the above | 00 | 00 | 00 | 00 |
| 6. Subtotal | 00 | 00 | 823 | 823 |
| 7. Nonrespondent | 00 | 00 | 00 | 00 |
| 8. Total | 00 | 00 | 823 | 823 |
| 9. Performance on this measure | NaN% | NaN% | 100% | |
F. Customer Satisfaction
| Customer Rating of Services | Number of Customers | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Highly satisfied | 728 | 67.41% |
| Satisfied | 160 | 14.81% |
| Satisfied somewhat | 11 | 1.02% |
| Not at all satisfied | 09 | 0.83% |
| Nonrespondent | 172 | 15.93% |
| Total Surveyed | 1,080 | |
| Response rate % | 84.07% |
G. Notes:
Reutilization
A. Number of Recipients of Reused Devices
| Activity | Number of Individuals Receiving a Device from Activity |
|---|---|
| A. Device Exchange | 09 |
| B. Device Refurbish/Repair - Reassign and/or Open Ended Loan | 2,020 |
| C. Total | 2,029 |
| Performance Measure | |
|---|---|
| D. Device Exchange - Excluded from Performance Measure | 00 |
| E. Reassignment/Refurbishment and Repair and Open Ended Loans - Excluded from Performance Measure because AT is provided to or on behalf of an entity that has an obligation to provide the AT such as schools under IDEA or VR agencies/clients | 00 |
| F. Number of Individuals Included in Performance Measures | 2,029 |
If a number is reported in E you must provide a description of the reason the individuals are excluded from the performance measure:
B. Device Exchange Activities
| Type of AT Device | Number of Devices Exchanged | Total Estimated Current Purchase Price | Total Price for Which Device(s) Were Exchanged | Savings to Consumers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vision | 00 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Hearing | 00 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Speech Communication | 00 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Learning, Cognition and Developmental | 00 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Mobility, Seating and Positioning | 07 | $2,270 | $0 | $2,270 |
| Daily Living | 02 | $112 | $0 | $112 |
| Environmental Adaptations | 00 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Vehicle Modification & Transportation | 00 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Computers and Related | 00 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Recreation, Sports and Leisure | 00 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Total | 09 | $2,382 | $0 | $2,382 |
C. Device Refurbish/Repair - Reassignment and/or Open Ended Loan Activities
| Type of AT Device | Number of Devices Reassigned/Refurbished and Repaired | Total Estimated Current Purchase Price | Total Price for Which Device(s) Were Sold | Savings to Consumers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vision | 33 | $15,125 | $17 | $15,108 |
| Hearing | 18 | $2,474 | $105 | $2,369 |
| Speech Communication | 07 | $8,808 | $0 | $8,808 |
| Learning, Cognition and Developmental | 13 | $1,312 | $0 | $1,312 |
| Mobility, Seating and Positioning | 1,364 | $475,179 | $21,841 | $453,338 |
| Daily Living | 1,239 | $251,935 | $18,251 | $233,684 |
| Environmental Adaptations | 26 | $6,026 | $0 | $6,026 |
| Vehicle Modification & Transportation | 02 | $5,200 | $0 | $5,200 |
| Computers and Related | 08 | $1,391 | $0 | $1,391 |
| Recreation, Sports and Leisure | 19 | $5,220 | $0 | $5,220 |
| Total | 2,729 | $772,670 | $40,214 | $732,456 |
D. Anecdote
Family time should be fun and enjoyable, not strenuous and exhausting. Aaron's manual wheelchair was simply not a good option for traveling distances or on hilly terrains and was leaving his parents too fatigued to enjoy all the activities a local amusement park had to offer. Aaron's parents reached out to Accessibility Medical, a MoAT device reutilization partner in the Kansas City area, in search of a solution. A tilt-in-space reclining power wheelchair with elevating leg rests and attendant controls was available for a nominal price. Aaron and his family are now able to fully enjoy their next family trip.
E. Performance Measures
| Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
| 1. Could only afford the AT through the AT program. | 06 | 09 | 1,068 | 1,083 |
| 2. AT was only available through the AT program. | 04 | 02 | 759 | 765 |
| 3. AT was available through other programs, but the system was too complex or the wait time too long. | 01 | 01 | 100 | 102 |
| 4. Subtotal | 11 | 12 | 1,927 | 1,950 |
| 5. None of the above | 00 | 01 | 78 | 79 |
| 6. Subtotal | 11 | 13 | 2,005 | 2,029 |
| 7. Nonrespondent | 00 | 00 | 00 | 00 |
| 8. Total | 11 | 13 | 2,005 | 2,029 |
| 9. Performance on this measure | 100% | 92.31% | 96.11% | |
F. Customer Satisfaction
| Customer Rating of Services | Number of Customers | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Highly satisfied | 1,781 | 87.78% |
| Satisfied | 244 | 12.03% |
| Satisfied somewhat | 04 | 0.2% |
| Not at all satisfied | 00 | 0% |
| Nonrespondent | 00 | 0% |
| Total Surveyed | 2,029 | |
| Response rate % | 100% |
G. Notes:
Device Loan
A. Short-Term Device Loans by Type of Purpose
| Primary Purpose of Short-Term Device Loan | Number |
|---|---|
| Assist in decision-making (device trial or evaluation) | 666 |
| Serve as loaner during service repair or while waiting for funding | 21 |
| Provide an accommodation on a short-term basis for a time-limited event/situation | 28 |
| Conduct training, self-education or other professional development activity | 11 |
| Total | 726 |
B. Short-Term Device Loan by Type of Borrower
| Type of Individual or Entity | Number of Device Borrowers | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Desicion-making | All other Purposes | Total | |
| Individuals with Disabilities | 04 | 00 | 04 |
| Family Members, Guardians, and Authorized Representatives | 12 | 00 | 12 |
| Representative of Education | 498 | 00 | 498 |
| Representative of Employment | 07 | 00 | 07 |
| Representatives of Health, Allied Health, and Rehabilitation | 128 | 00 | 128 |
| Representatives of Community Living | 57 | 00 | 57 |
| Representatives of Technology | 20 | 00 | 20 |
| Total | 726 | 00 | 726 |
C. Length of Short-Term Device Loans
| Length of Short-Term Device Loan in Days | 35 |
|---|
D. Types of Devices Loaned
| Type of AT Device | Number of Devices | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Desicion-making | All other Purposes | Total | |
| Vision | 145 | 00 | 145 |
| Hearing | 65 | 00 | 65 |
| Speech Communication | 784 | 00 | 784 |
| Learning, Cognition and Developmental | 282 | 00 | 282 |
| Mobility, Seating and Positioning | 00 | 00 | 00 |
| Daily Living | 53 | 00 | 53 |
| Environmental Adaptations | 255 | 00 | 255 |
| Vehicle Modification and Transportation | 09 | 00 | 09 |
| Computers and Related | 389 | 00 | 389 |
| Recreation, Sports and Leisure | 10 | 00 | 10 |
| Total | 1,992 | 00 | 1,992 |
E. Anecdote
Social isolation brought on by the pandemic led MoAT to expand its demonstration inventory to include input methods for adapted gaming. Brenden was one of several individuals with paralysis who connected with the device loan program to try out various items that allowed them to connect with others on-line through accessible gaming.
F. Access Performance Measures
| Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
| Decided that AT device/service will meet needs | 284 | 02 | 107 | 393 |
| Decided that an AT device/ service will not meet needs | 69 | 00 | 29 | 98 |
| Subtotal | 353 | 02 | 136 | 491 |
| Have not made a decision | 142 | 00 | 33 | 175 |
| Subtotal | 495 | 02 | 169 | 666 |
| Nonrespondent | 00 | 00 | 00 | 00 |
| Total | 495 | 02 | 169 | 666 |
| Performance on this measure | 71.31% | 100% | 80.47% | |
G. Acquisition Performance Measures
| Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
| 1. Could only afford the AT through the AT program. | 12 | 00 | 18 | 30 |
| 2. AT was only available through the AT program. | 11 | 04 | 12 | 27 |
| 3. AT was available through other programs, but the system was too complex or the wait time too long. | 00 | 00 | 00 | 00 |
| 4. Subtotal | 23 | 04 | 30 | 57 |
| 5. None of the above | 00 | 00 | 01 | 01 |
| 6. Subtotal | 23 | 04 | 31 | 58 |
| 7. Nonrespondent | 02 | 00 | 00 | 02 |
| 8. Total | 25 | 04 | 31 | 60 |
| 9. Performance on this measure | 100% | 100% | 96.77% | |
H. Customer Satisfaction
| Customer Rating of Services | Number of Customers | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Highly satisfied | 641 | 88.29% |
| Satisfied | 44 | 6.06% |
| Satisfied somewhat | 04 | 0.55% |
| Not at all satisfied | 00 | 0% |
| Nonrespondent | 37 | 5.1% |
| Total Surveyed | 726 | |
| Response rate % | 94.9% |
I. Notes:
Device Demonstration
A. Number of Device Demonstrations by Device Type
| Type of AT Device / Service | Number of Demonstrations of AT Devices / Services |
|---|---|
| Vision | 249 |
| Hearing | 271 |
| Speech Communication | 39 |
| Learning, Cognition and Developmental | 28 |
| Mobility, Seating and Positioning | 349 |
| Daily Living | 383 |
| Environmental Adaptations | 29 |
| Vehicle Modification and Transportation | 02 |
| Computers and Related | 60 |
| Recreation, Sports and Leisure | 31 |
| Total # of Devices Demonstrated | 1,441 |
B. Types of Participants
| Type of Participant | Number of Participants in Device Demonstrations |
|---|---|
| Individuals with Disabilities | 1,197 |
| Family Members, Guardians, and Authorized Representatives | 427 |
| Representatives of Education | 54 |
| Representatives of Employment | 34 |
| Health, Allied Health, Rehabilitation | 33 |
| Representative of Community Living | 24 |
| Representative of Technology | 02 |
| Total | 1,771 |
C. Number of Referrals
| Type of Entity | Number of Referrals |
|---|---|
| Funding Source (non-AT program) | 35 |
| Service Provider | 174 |
| Vendor | 118 |
| Repair Service | 01 |
| Others | 39 |
| Total | 367 |
D. Anecdote
If you want to know how assistive technology can change your life, just ask Micah. Though not even out of elementary school, Micah fully understands how the assistive technology devices he has been introduced to through MoAT’s demonstration center can help him succeed in school, assist his family, be independent, and pursue his dreams. During a recent visit, Micah learned about the OrCam, a wearable device that reads text, recognizes faces and identifies products. Able to obtain his own OrCam, Micah quickly put it to use to help him identify which feed the family’s farm animals should receive, to ride his bike around the property, for independently doing his school work, and to further his dream of working in the transportation industry.
E. Performance Measures
| Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
| Decided that AT device/service will meet needs | 62 | 25 | 1,265 | 1,352 |
| Decided that an AT device/ service will not meet needs | 01 | 03 | 44 | 48 |
| Subtotal | 63 | 28 | 1,309 | 1,400 |
| Have not made a decision | 00 | 02 | 39 | 41 |
| Subtotal | 63 | 30 | 1,348 | 1,441 |
| Nonrespondent | 00 | 00 | 00 | 00 |
| Total | 63 | 30 | 1,348 | 1,441 |
| Performance on this measure | 100% | 93.33% | 97.11% | |
F. Customer Satisfaction
| Customer Rating of Services | Number of Customers | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Highly satisfied | 1,270 | 71.71% |
| Satisfied | 187 | 10.56% |
| Satisfied somewhat | 10 | 0.56% |
| Not at all satisfied | 02 | 0.11% |
| Nonrespondent | 302 | 17.05% |
| Total | 1,771 | |
| Response rate % | 82.95% |
G. Notes:
Overall Performance Measures
Overall Acquisition Performance Measure
| Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
| 1. Could only afford the AT through the AT program. | 18 | 09 | 1,909 | 1,936 |
| 2. AT was only available through the AT program. | 15 | 06 | 771 | 792 |
| 3. AT was available through other programs, but the system was too complex or the wait time too long. | 01 | 01 | 100 | 102 |
| 4. Subtotal | 34 | 16 | 2,780 | 2,830 |
| 5. None of the above | 00 | 01 | 79 | 80 |
| 6. Subtotal | 34 | 17 | 2,859 | 2,910 |
| 7. Nonrespondent | 02 | 00 | 00 | 02 |
| 8. Total | 36 | 17 | 2,859 | 2,912 |
| 9. Performance on this measure | 97.06% | 88.24% | 93.74% | 93.75% |
| ACL Performance Measure | 85% | |||
| Met/Not Met | Met | |||
Overall Access Performance Measure
| Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
| Decided that AT device/service will meet needs | 346 | 27 | 1,372 | 1,745 |
| Decided that an AT device/ service will not meet needs | 70 | 03 | 73 | 146 |
| Subtotal | 416 | 30 | 1,445 | 1,891 |
| Have not made a decision | 142 | 02 | 72 | 216 |
| Subtotal | 558 | 32 | 1,517 | 2,107 |
| Nonrespondent | 00 | 00 | 00 | 00 |
| Total | 558 | 32 | 1,517 | 2,107 |
| Performance on this measure | 74.55% | 93.75% | 95.25% | 89.75% |
| ACL Performance Measure | 90% | |||
| Met/Not Met | Not Met | |||
Overall Satisfaction Rating
| Customer Rating of Services | Percent | ACL Target | Met/Not Met |
|---|---|---|---|
| Highly satisfied and satisfied | 99.21% | 95% | Met |
| Response Rate | 90.88% | 90% | Met |
Training
A. Training Participants: Number and Types of Participants; Geographical Distribution
| Type of Participant | Number |
|---|---|
| Individuals with Disabilities | 484 |
| Family Members, Guardians and Authorized Representatives | 72 |
| Representatives of Education | 483 |
| Representatives of Employment | 226 |
| Rep Health, Allied Health, and Rehabilitation | 27 |
| Representatives of Community Living | 768 |
| Representatives of Technology | 230 |
| Unable to Categorize | 18 |
| TOTAL | 2,308 |
| Metro | Non Metro | Unknown | TOTAL |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1,564 | 744 | 00 | 2,308 |
B. Training Topics
| Primary Topic of Training | Participants |
|---|---|
| AT Products/Services | 1,682 |
| AT Funding/Policy/ Practice | 47 |
| Combination of any/all of the above | 459 |
| Information Technology/Telecommunication Access | 120 |
| Transition | 00 |
| Total | 2,308 |
C. Description of Training Activities
Describe innovative one high-impact assistance training activity conducted during the reporting period:
Helping Missouri's State Schools for the Severally Disabled become assistive technology rich environments to enhance learning opportunities has been an area of focus for MoAT over the past two years. As part of this project, each district was provided a kit of basic cause and effect devices. As each school received their kit, MoAT staff provided direct training to a minimum of 3 people in each of the 34 state schools. The trainings focused on an overview of each device in the kit and ideas for implementation of the devices with students. Schools will be followed up with to monitor progress and to identify students who might be candidates for additional exploration of devices, especially those students who may be in need of communication devices.
Briefly describe one training activity related to transition conducted during the reporting period:
Briefly describe one training activity related to Information and Communication Technology accessibility:
This year saw the continuation of our efforts to enhance accessibility issues among state agencies and related organizations via regular on-line trainings. In all, 7 sessions were conducted on topics ranging from how to create accessible documents in MS Word and MS PowerPoint to how to create accessible posts in social media and video captioning. Reaching content creators or individuals overseeing content development within state government has been our target group.
D. IT/Telecommunications Training Performance Measure
| Outcome/Result From IT/Telecommunications Training Received | Number |
|---|---|
| IT and Telecommunications Procurement or Dev Policies | 49 |
| Training or Technical Assistance will be developed or implemented | 64 |
| No known outcome at this time | 07 |
| Nonrespondent | 00 |
| Total | 120 |
| Performance Measure Percentage | 94.2% |
| ACL Target Percentage | 70% |
| Met/Not Met | Met |
E. Notes:
Technical Assistance
A. Frequency and Nature of Technical Assistance
| Education | 53% |
|---|---|
| Employment | 11% |
| Health, Allied Health, Rehabilitation | % |
| Community Living | 36% |
| Technology (IT, Telecom, AT) | % |
| Total | 100% |
B. Description of Technical Assistance
Describe Innovative one high-impact assistance activity that is not related to transition:
Missouri Assistive Technology has been working closely with the state’s department of education this past year on the implementation of a 4-year accessible educational materials technical assistance grant the state received. With a goal of developing a coordinated statewide system for providing accessible educational materials, MoAT’s role has been to help with assessment of needs, collection of data, and development of both a curriculum for school districts and related materials. https://dese.mo.gov/special-education/effective-practices/accessible-educational-materials-aem
Breifly describe one technical assistance activity related to transition conducted during the reporting period:
Staff from MoAT and the state’s UCEDD, The Institute for Human Development, have been actively working on incorporating assistive technology into the LifeCourse Framework, a well-known tool for fostering self-determination for persons with I/DD. MoAT contributions have included development of materials for inclusion on the curriculum and hosting of a series of webinars on AT related to various components of the LifeCourse tool.
C. Notes:
Public Awareness
Public Awareness Activities
Public Awareness Narratives
Describe in detail at least one and no more than two innovative or high-impact public awareness activities conducted during this reporting period. Highlight the content/focus of the awareness information shared, the mechanism used to disseminate or communicate the awareness information, the numbers and/or types of individuals reached, and positive outcomes resulting from the activity. If quantative numbers are available regarding the reach of the activity, please provide those: however, quantative data is not required.
1. Based on its success last year, MoAT continued to push out public awareness of AT devices and services via its newsletter "Know AT with the Help of MoAT". The newsletter is primarily targeted at K-12 educators and aims to succinctly provide them with information on devices, link them to additional resources and help them connect with MoAT programs that can help them obtain devices for students. The newsletter has become a "must read" by many recipients and has become a valuable tool for information, as well as a catalyst for launching new initiatives and training. Our analytics indicate the open rate for the newsletter is 23% that translates to approximately 14,000 full or partial readings of the newsletter.
2.
Information And Assistance
| Types of Recipients | AT Device/ Service |
AT Funding | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Individuals with Disabilities | 2,035 | 554 | 2,589 |
| Family Members, Guardians and Authorized Representatives | 688 | 241 | 929 |
| Representative of Education | 3,117 | 24 | 3,141 |
| Representative of Employment | 39 | 05 | 44 |
| Representative of Health, Allied Health, and Rehabilitation | 665 | 06 | 671 |
| Representative of Community Living | 2,245 | 06 | 2,251 |
| Representative of Technology | 162 | 01 | 163 |
| Unable to Categorize | 00 | 00 | 00 |
| Total | 8,951 | 837 | 9,788 |
Notes:
Coordination/Collaboration and State Improvement Outcomes
Overview of Coordination/Collaboration Activities
| Coordination/Collaboration activities are not required. You may report up to two MAJOR coordination/collaboration activities for this reporting period. How many will you be reporting? | 2 |
|---|
A. Coordination/Collaboration
1. As concisely as possible, describe the partnership initiative. What activities/services were provided? Who are the major collaborating organizations and what is their role? Who is served/benefited? What funding was used to implement the initiative?
The COVID Scholarship Program was a joint endeavor between MoAT and the Missouri Developmental Disabilities Council, the state’s Developmental Disabilities Council. The program started as a response to addressing the technological needs of individuals with I/DD during the pandemic, but it has since morphed into a broader discussion on people with disabilities and the digital divide. MODDC provided the initial funds for the program and MoAT contributed additional funds to enhance the program. Through an application process, MODDC identified and selected individuals and families to award assistance to. MoAT then contacted the families to discuss their technology needs, purchased the devices and distributed them to individuals/families. Approximately 180 individuals/families were served through the program (the number of applicants was considerably higher, further underscoring the need).
2. As concisely as possible, describe the measurable results of the initiative and any lessons learned. How did access to AT change as a result of the coordination/collaboration/partnership? How did awareness of AT change as a result of the partnership? How did the reach of the state AT program change as a result of the partnership? What made the partnership successful? What would you change or wish you had done differently? Provided funding/resources are available, will the initiative continue or is this a one-time event? What advice would you give for replication of the initiative? Please include URL for initiative if available.
The program’s outcomes were significant as the vast number of recipients reported being able to take advantage of tele-medicine appointments, maintain contact with family, friends and service providers, participate in education remotely, etc. From the angle of MoAT, the program helped tie participants to our overall program, as well as specific programs for AT that they could utilize to meet additional needs (i.e. our funding program for school districts, our Telecommunications Access Program, etc.). On a wider level, the program helped raise the profile in the disability community of the importance of broadband access, but even more the need for affordable access to broadband and related technologies. Discussion has occurred about a second round of program funding.
3. What focus areas(s) were addressed by the initiative?
Community Participation and Integration; Information and Communication Technology / Remote Connectivity;
4. What AT Act authorized activity(s) were addressed?
State Financing;
A.2 Coordination/Collaboration (Entry 2)
1. As concisely as possible, describe the partnership initiative. What activities/services were provided? Who are the major collaborating organizations and what is their role? Who is served/benefited? What funding was used to implement the initiative?
A fun, low-cost, low-tech solution to lighten the negative impact of the pandemic on individuals with disabilities and older Missourians, while simultaneously opening the door to greater focus on assistive technology within IL Centers and AAA’s was the central idea behind the Robotic Pet Project. Participants in the program “adopted” a pet for a minimum of five weeks and agreed to participate in a survey of social isolation and the impact of the robotic pets to reduce social isolation. MoAT administered and provided the robotic pets, IHD developed the study survey and evaluated the data, and the AAA’s and IL Centers served as conduits to identify applicants and administer the survey questions during the length of the program. The program was made possible by the state’s receipt of COVID relief dollars
2. As concisely as possible, describe the measurable results of the initiative and any lessons learned. How did access to AT change as a result of the coordination/collaboration/partnership? How did awareness of AT change as a result of the partnership? How did the reach of the state AT program change as a result of the partnership? What made the partnership successful? What would you change or wish you had done differently? Provided funding/resources are available, will the initiative continue or is this a one-time event? What advice would you give for replication of the initiative? Please include URL for initiative if available.
As of this writing, the program's data results are not finalized. The initiative addressed the pressing issue of social isolation as it helped to increase interactions between isolated individuals, family members, service providers, plus it has led to discussions between IL Centers and AAA’s on future endeavors around greater understanding and use of AT among their clients. The program has also led to several requests to present at national conferences. Plans are to replicate the program again once additional funding is secured.
3. What focus areas(s) were addressed by the initiative?
Community Participation and Integration; Recreation / Leisure; Aging; Aging and Disability Network / No Wrong Door;
4. What AT Act authorized activity(s) were addressed?
State Financing;
Overview of State Improvement Activities
| State improvement outcomes are not required. You may report up to two MAJOR state improvement outcomes for this reporting period. How many will you be reporting? | 00 |
|---|
Additional And Leveraged Funds
| Did you have Additional and Leveraged Funding to Report? | Yes |
|---|
A. Leveraged Funding for State Plan Activities
| Fund Source | Amount | Use of Funds | Data Reported |
|---|---|---|---|
| Private | $20,916 | Device Loan | True |
| Public/State Agency | $107,500 | State Financing | True |
| Public/State Agency | $100,000 | State Financing | True |
| Public/State Agency | $134,445 | State Financing | True |
| State Appropriations | $734,497 | State Financing | True |
| Federal | $165,606 | State Financing | True |
| Public/State Agency | $500,000 | State Financing | True |
| Amount: $1,762,964 |
For any leveraged funding reported above for which data could not be reported, please describe the extenuating circumstances that precluded data from being reported and efforts to remediate the situation in future reporting periods.
B. Describe any unique issues with your data in this section (e.g., the reason why you were unable to report the number of individuals served with additional or leveraged funds).
Center for Assistive Technology Act Data Assistance . Saved: Mon Mar 07 2022 11:08:50 GMT-0600 (Central Standard Time)