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? | No |
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? | 1 |
---|
How would you describe this state financing activity? | Telecommunications equipment distribution |
---|
County of Residence | Individuals Served |
---|---|
A. Metro (RUCC 1-3) | 5 |
B. Non-Metro (RUCC 4-9) | 0 |
C. Total Served | 5 |
Performance Measure | |
---|---|
D. Excluded from Performance Measure | 0 |
E. Number of Individuals Included in Performance Measures | 5 |
If a number is reported in D you must provide a description of the reason the individuals are excluded from the performance measure:
Type of AT Device / Service | Number of Devices Funded | Value of AT Provided |
---|---|---|
Vision | 0 | $0 |
Hearing | 0 | $0 |
Speech communication | 0 | $0 |
Learning, cognition, and developmental | 0 | $0 |
Mobility, seating and positioning | 0 | $0 |
Daily living | 5 | $3,806 |
Environmental adaptations | 0 | $0 |
Vehicle modification and transportation | 0 | $0 |
Computers and related | 0 | $0 |
Recreation, sports, and leisure | 0 | $0 |
Total | 5 | $3,806 |
How many state financing activities that allow consumers to obtain AT at a reduced cost were included in your approved state plan? | 1 |
---|
How would you describe this state financing activity? | AT Fabrication or AT Maker Program |
---|
County of Residence | Individuals Served |
---|---|
A. Metro (RUCC 1-3) | 26 |
B. Non-Metro (RUCC 4-9) | 0 |
C. Total Served | 26 |
Performance Measure | |
---|---|
D. Excluded from Performance Measure | 0 |
E. Number of Individuals Included in Performance Measures | 26 |
If a number is reported in D you must provide a description of the reason the individuals are excluded from the performance measure:
Type of AT Device / Service | Number Provided | Total Estimated Current Retail Purchase Price | Total Price for Which Devices Were Sold | Savings to Consumers |
---|---|---|---|---|
Vision | 1 | $100 | $0 | $100 |
Hearing | 0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
Speech communication | 3 | $1,496 | $4 | $1,492 |
Learning, cognition, and developmental | 0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
Mobility, seating and positioning | 5 | $4,101 | $98 | $4,003 |
Daily living | 6 | $3,551 | $111 | $3,440 |
Environmental adaptations | 8 | $5,847 | $93 | $5,754 |
Vehicle modification and transportation | 0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
Computers and related | 1 | $289 | $14 | $275 |
Recreation, sports, and leisure | 2 | $5,286 | $76 | $5,210 |
Total | 26 | $20,670 | $396 | $20,274 |
Mateo (not his real name) is a very active 13-year-old with Spina Bifida. As a kid, he used to enjoy a ride-on toy that he could propel with his arms to run and spin around. This toy helped him exercise to develop upper body strength and coordination. However, he outgrew this toy. There was no similar alternative in the market except for hand-powered bikes that were quite expensive, required a different kind of arm movement, and, most importantly, could not do 360 spins. A hand-powered ride-on vehicle was created and tested through PRATP's AT fabrication initiative and a team of mechanical engineering students at the University of Puerto Rico (UPR). Mateo first tried the device at a beach-side park with many open spaces. He shot off, running over asphalt and sidewalks, then went off-road over dirt and grass. He was delighted to be able to play with his childhood toy again, and he ran and spun all over the place. There was a second need addressed in parallel with the ride-on vehicle. Mateo plays the piano, and he takes lessons at school. Even though he can play the piano quite well, having no movement from the waist down means he cannot push the piano pedal to hold the notes while he plays. However, a switch-activated pedal-pushing device for classical pianos is unavailable in the market. Therefore, PRATP and UPR engineering students developed an electromechanical pedal pusher controlled by a side head tilt movement. On the first test, Mateo could consistently push the piano pedal while playing to hold the notes when and for as long as he wanted. Mateo and his family were quite happy with these devices that helped increase his access to exercise, recreation, and music, all through the power of AT.
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 | 10 | 10 |
2. AT was only available through the AT program. | 03 | 01 | 17 | 21 |
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 | 03 | 01 | 27 | 31 |
5. None of the above | 00 | 00 | 00 | 00 |
6. Subtotal | 03 | 01 | 27 | 31 |
7. Nonrespondent | 00 | 00 | 00 | 00 |
8. Total | 03 | 01 | 27 | 31 |
9. Performance on this measure | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Customer Rating of Services | Number of Customers | Percent |
---|---|---|
Highly satisfied | 31 | 100% |
Satisfied | 00 | 0% |
Satisfied somewhat | 00 | 0% |
Not at all satisfied | 00 | 0% |
Nonrespondent | 00 | 0% |
Total Surveyed | 31 | |
Response rate % | 100% |
Activity | Number of Individuals Receiving a Device from Activity |
---|---|
A. Device Exchange | 02 |
B. Device Refurbish/Repair - Reassign and/or Open Ended Loan | 158 |
C. Total | 160 |
Performance Measure | |
---|---|
D. 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 |
E. Number of Individuals Included in Performance Measures | 160 |
If a number is reported in D you must provide a description of the reason the individuals are excluded from the performance
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 | 03 | $3,621 | $0 | $3,621 |
Daily Living | 00 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
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 | 03 | $3,621 | $0 | $3,621 |
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 | 10 | $10,265 | $0 | $10,265 |
Hearing | 02 | $1,030 | $0 | $1,030 |
Speech Communication | 05 | $610 | $0 | $610 |
Learning, Cognition and Developmental | 09 | $2,977 | $0 | $2,977 |
Mobility, Seating and Positioning | 138 | $216,602 | $6 | $216,596 |
Daily Living | 31 | $6,445 | $20 | $6,425 |
Environmental Adaptations | 03 | $627 | $0 | $627 |
Vehicle Modification & Transportation | 01 | $150 | $0 | $150 |
Computers and Related | 03 | $669 | $0 | $669 |
Recreation, Sports and Leisure | 01 | $1,600 | $0 | $1,600 |
Total | 203 | $240,975 | $26 | $240,949 |
Edgar (not his real name) is a 47-year-old man with a bilateral above-the-elbow amputation. One of his main concerns was independent feeding; thus, a low-cost orthosis with an integrated spoon was created through PRATP's AT fabrication initiative. Edgar could use the device adequately but putting on and taking off the orthosis support harness proved too difficult for him. It was evident that Edgar would benefit from using an automatic feeding device, but such technologies were well out of his reach, ranging from about $6,000 to over $8,000. Coincidentally, around that time, PRATP received the donation of a feeding device that was quickly restored to optimal condition and offered to Edgar for free through the AT Reuse initiative. The device got configured to enable Edgar to control the spoon movement and the plate rotation through a chin switch. With this equipment, Edgar can now feed himself independently and with the dignity, that every human being deserves in carrying out the basic activities of daily life.
Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
1. Could only afford the AT through the AT program. | 07 | 00 | 68 | 75 |
2. AT was only available through the AT program. | 02 | 00 | 14 | 16 |
3. AT was available through other programs, but the system was too complex or the wait time too long. | 07 | 01 | 55 | 63 |
4. Subtotal | 16 | 01 | 137 | 154 |
5. None of the above | 01 | 00 | 04 | 05 |
6. Subtotal | 17 | 01 | 141 | 159 |
7. Nonrespondent | 00 | 00 | 01 | 01 |
8. Total | 17 | 01 | 142 | 160 |
9. Performance on this measure | 94.12% | 100% | 96.48% |
Customer Rating of Services | Number of Customers | Percent |
---|---|---|
Highly satisfied | 157 | 98.13% |
Satisfied | 02 | 1.25% |
Satisfied somewhat | 00 | 0% |
Not at all satisfied | 00 | 0% |
Nonrespondent | 01 | 0.63% |
Total Surveyed | 160 | |
Response rate % | 99.38% |
Primary Purpose of Short-Term Device Loan | Number |
---|---|
Assist in decision-making (device trial or evaluation) | 33 |
Serve as loaner during service repair or while waiting for funding | 02 |
Provide an accommodation on a short-term basis for a time-limited event/situation | 02 |
Conduct training, self-education or other professional development activity | 06 |
Total | 43 |
Type of Individual or Entity | Number of Device Borrowers | ||
---|---|---|---|
Desicion-making | All other Purposes | Total | |
Individuals with Disabilities | 30 | 03 | 33 |
Family Members, Guardians, and Authorized Representatives | 01 | 00 | 01 |
Representative of Education | 00 | 01 | 01 |
Representative of Employment | 00 | 00 | 00 |
Representatives of Health, Allied Health, and Rehabilitation | 00 | 03 | 03 |
Representatives of Community Living | 00 | 01 | 01 |
Representatives of Technology | 02 | 02 | 04 |
Total | 33 | 10 | 43 |
Length of Short-Term Device Loan in Days | 30 |
---|
Type of AT Device | Number of Devices | ||
---|---|---|---|
Desicion-making | All other Purposes | Total | |
Vision | 01 | 00 | 01 |
Hearing | 01 | 00 | 01 |
Speech Communication | 18 | 06 | 24 |
Learning, Cognition and Developmental | 09 | 01 | 10 |
Mobility, Seating and Positioning | 11 | 03 | 14 |
Daily Living | 02 | 00 | 02 |
Environmental Adaptations | 00 | 00 | 00 |
Vehicle Modification and Transportation | 00 | 00 | 00 |
Computers and Related | 00 | 00 | 00 |
Recreation, Sports and Leisure | 00 | 01 | 01 |
Total | 42 | 11 | 53 |
Sofía (not her real name) is a 12-year-old girl with ADHD. Her mother had heard about the potential benefits of using an FM system to increase focus and attention in the classroom. She contacted PRATP to learn more about it and to see if she could try an FM system before acquiring one. Through PRATP’s AT loan program, Sofía could try out an FM system at her school and see how it worked for her in various classroom settings and diverse school tasks. Several days into the “field test”, Sofía’s teacher called the mother to inform her that the FM system had indeed been beneficial for Sofía, clearly increasing her attention level. This experience helped Sofía and her mother makes an informed decision to acquire her own FM system. Being in a private school that does not provide AT, Sofía’s mother again requested PRATP’s help since the kind of FM system her daughter needed was too expensive for her to acquire (over $700). PRATP’s Reuse program provided an appropriate FM system free of charge.
Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
Decided that AT device/service will meet needs | 11 | 03 | 13 | 27 |
Decided that an AT device/ service will not meet needs | 00 | 00 | 01 | 01 |
Subtotal | 11 | 03 | 14 | 28 |
Have not made a decision | 02 | 00 | 01 | 03 |
Subtotal | 13 | 03 | 15 | 31 |
Nonrespondent | 00 | 00 | 02 | 02 |
Total | 13 | 03 | 17 | 33 |
Performance on this measure | 84.62% | 100% | 93.33% |
Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
1. Could only afford the AT through the AT program. | 02 | 00 | 03 | 05 |
2. AT was only available through the AT program. | 01 | 00 | 00 | 01 |
3. AT was available through other programs, but the system was too complex or the wait time too long. | 01 | 00 | 00 | 01 |
4. Subtotal | 04 | 00 | 03 | 07 |
5. None of the above | 01 | 00 | 00 | 01 |
6. Subtotal | 05 | 00 | 03 | 08 |
7. Nonrespondent | 00 | 00 | 02 | 02 |
8. Total | 05 | 00 | 05 | 10 |
9. Performance on this measure | 80% | NaN% | 92.31% |
Customer Rating of Services | Number of Customers | Percent |
---|---|---|
Highly satisfied | 39 | 90.7% |
Satisfied | 03 | 6.98% |
Satisfied somewhat | 00 | 0% |
Not at all satisfied | 00 | 0% |
Nonrespondent | 01 | 2.33% |
Total Surveyed | 43 | |
Response rate % | 97.67% |
Type of AT Device / Service | Number of Demonstrations of AT Devices / Services |
---|---|
Vision | 07 |
Hearing | 01 |
Speech Communication | 37 |
Learning, Cognition and Developmental | 06 |
Mobility, Seating and Positioning | 09 |
Daily Living | 06 |
Environmental Adaptations | 02 |
Vehicle Modification and Transportation | 00 |
Computers and Related | 06 |
Recreation, Sports and Leisure | 01 |
Total # of Device Demonstrations | 75 |
Type of Participant | Decision-Makers | Other Participants | Total |
---|---|---|---|
Individuals with Disabilities | 46 | 07 | 53 |
Family Members, Guardians, and Authorized Representatives | 23 | 53 | 76 |
Representatives of Education | 01 | 02 | 03 |
Representatives of Employment | 00 | 00 | 00 |
Health, Allied Health, Rehabilitation | 05 | 02 | 07 |
Representative of Community Living | 00 | 00 | 00 |
Representative of Technology | 00 | 00 | 00 |
Total | 75 | 64 | 139 |
Type of Entity | Number of Referrals |
---|---|
Funding Source (non-AT program) | 00 |
Service Provider | 01 |
Vendor | 06 |
Repair Service | 00 |
Others | 01 |
Total | 08 |
Melissa (not her real name) is a 36-year-old social worker with degenerative vision impairment. Her work was located close to her home, and she was also pursuing graduate studies; in both cases, her family assisted her with transportation. She used a video magnifier (CCTV) at work and in graduate school to compensate for her remaining functional vision. Due to the progression of her condition, she experienced a drastic and unexpected visual loss that led her to quit her job and graduate studies as she felt she had no other choice. Afterward, her CCTV broke, and she had no money to fix it or buy another one. Then, she recalled having obtained her CCTV through the PRATP’s AT reuse program, and she contacted PRATP with the expectation of acquiring another CCTV. During the interview, it became evident that a CCTV could no longer address her needs and that she needed additional AT tools. An AT demonstration was coordinated, and Melissa had the opportunity to try out screen readers that allowed her to use audio rather than vision to control the computer, check emails, and navigate the Internet, among other tasks. The demonstration also included AT devices for converting printed material into digital text and audio through optical character recognition (OCR) software. After seeing the possibilities provided by these AT tools, Melissa indicated that she should not have given up her profession or her studies. She expressed her intention to return to the work that she loves so much and to continue her studies and academic aspirations.
Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
Decided that AT device/service will meet needs | 32 | 03 | 36 | 71 |
Decided that an AT device/ service will not meet needs | 00 | 00 | 01 | 01 |
Subtotal | 32 | 03 | 37 | 72 |
Have not made a decision | 00 | 01 | 01 | 02 |
Subtotal | 32 | 04 | 38 | 74 |
Nonrespondent | 01 | 00 | 00 | 01 |
Total | 33 | 04 | 38 | 75 |
Performance on this measure | 96.97% | 75% | 97.37% |
Customer Rating of Services | Number of Customers | Percent |
---|---|---|
Highly satisfied | 115 | 82.73% |
Satisfied | 04 | 2.88% |
Satisfied somewhat | 00 | 0% |
Not at all satisfied | 00 | 0% |
Nonrespondent | 20 | 14.39% |
Total | 139 | |
Response rate % | 85.61% |
Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
1. Could only afford the AT through the AT program. | 09 | 00 | 81 | 90 |
2. AT was only available through the AT program. | 06 | 01 | 31 | 38 |
3. AT was available through other programs, but the system was too complex or the wait time too long. | 08 | 01 | 55 | 64 |
4. Subtotal | 23 | 02 | 167 | 192 |
5. None of the above | 02 | 00 | 04 | 06 |
6. Subtotal | 25 | 02 | 171 | 198 |
7. Nonrespondent | 00 | 00 | 03 | 03 |
8. Total | 25 | 02 | 174 | 201 |
9. Performance on this measure | 60% | 50% | 65.12% | 64.32% |
ACL Performance Measure | 85% | |||
Met/Not Met | Not Met |
Response | Primary Purpose for Which AT is Needed | Total | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Education | Employment | Community Living | ||
Decided that AT device/service will meet needs | 43 | 06 | 49 | 98 |
Decided that an AT device/ service will not meet needs | 00 | 00 | 02 | 02 |
Subtotal | 43 | 06 | 51 | 100 |
Have not made a decision | 02 | 01 | 02 | 05 |
Subtotal | 45 | 07 | 53 | 105 |
Nonrespondent | 01 | 00 | 02 | 03 |
Total | 46 | 07 | 55 | 108 |
Performance on this measure | 93.48% | 85.71% | 96.23% | 94.34% |
ACL Performance Measure | 90% | |||
Met/Not Met | Met |
Customer Rating of Services | Percent | ACL Target | Met/Not Met |
---|---|---|---|
Highly satisfied and satisfied | 100% | 95% | Met |
Response Rate | 94.10% | 90% | Met |
Type of Participant | Number |
---|---|
Individuals with Disabilities | 96 |
Family Members, Guardians and Authorized Representatives | 43 |
Representatives of Education | 835 |
Representatives of Employment | 109 |
Rep Health, Allied Health, and Rehabilitation | 77 |
Representatives of Community Living | 502 |
Representatives of Technology | 39 |
Unable to Categorize | 26 |
TOTAL | 1,727 |
Metro | Non Metro | Unknown | TOTAL |
---|---|---|---|
1,703 | 19 | 05 | 1,727 |
Primary Topic of Training | Participants |
---|---|
AT Products/Services | 1,467 |
AT Funding/Policy/ Practice | 00 |
Combination of any/all of the above | 191 |
Information Technology/Telecommunication Access | 48 |
Transition | 21 |
Total | 1,727 |
Describe innovative one high-impact assistance training activity conducted during the reporting period:
During FY 2022, the Puerto Rico Assistive Technology Program (PRATP) offered a series of training entitled “Assistive Technology for Accessible Communication” to 323 representatives of Puerto Rico’s Judicial Branch. In the past, PRATP provided technical assistance to the Puerto Rico Tribunal Administration Office (TAO), the Accessibility Program of the Judicial Branch, and the Court Improvement Program (Justice for Children Project) to create a Communication Board that would help determine the best strategy for communicating with a person with disabilities or a non-Spanish or English speaker. This portable two-sided communication board with a dry-erase writing area was distributed Island-wide throughout the Judicial Branch of Puerto Rico. PRATP’s AT specialists designed and delivered the “AT for Accessible Communication” as a hands-on training for Puerto Rico’s Judicial Branch personnel to learn and practice the use of the Communication Board for identifying and selecting functional communication methods to address various disabilities. The training also focused on using the Communication Board as a tool to select appropriate AT devices already available at the Puerto Rico Judicial Branch and those that can be provided through PRATP’s AT Loan Program. Participants included judges, attorneys, bailiffs, interpreters, clerks, and Puerto Rico Tribunal Administration Office personnel, The technical assistance and the training provided by PRATP are part of the “Access to Justice” initiative geared to make all areas of the Puerto Rico Judicial Branch more accessible and inclusive for persons with disabilities.
Briefly describe one training activity related to transition conducted during the reporting period:
During the fiscal year 2022, the Puerto Rico Assistive Technology Program (PRATP) provided training entitled "Transition Planning and Assistive Technology" to Assistive Technology Specialists from the Puerto Rico Department of Education. In August 2021, the Puerto Rico Department of Education prepared a new Transition Guide to establish the policy that will govern the provision of educational, related, and complementary services to students with disabilities; the transition process from school to post-secondary life for eligible students will also be established. The Department of Education identified a need to train its specialists on the importance of integrating assistive technology into the transition process. This training emphasized the importance of including assistive technology devices and services in transition planning. The topics discussed were: The SETT Framework and its application in the transition - The SETT Framework premise is: (1) to identify the characteristics of the Student; (2) identify the environments in which the student learns and grows; (3) establish the Tasks required to be an active learner in those environments (4) before trying to identify a system of Tools that allows the student to participate in the previously established tasks. This training highlighted the importance of self-determination and advocacy as the student approaches to the transition. The training concluded with a discussion of several sample questioning techniques that can be used during transition meetings.
Briefly describe one training activity related to Information and Communication Technology accessibility:
The Puerto Rico Assistive Technology Program provided training to web developers, administrators, and trainers responsible for developing and carrying out educational initiatives in the Center for the Development of Ethical Thought of the Puerto Rico Office of Government Ethics. The mission of this Office is to design and carry out educational initiatives on ethics, values, and comprehensive development for the entire society, as established in Article 3.1 of PR Law 4-2012; this includes the provision of face-to-face and online training to all government employees. This training addressed six fundamental aspects to create accessible presentations: templates and themes, slide layout, reading order, alt text, descriptive links, and unique titles. Additionally, during this training, we were presented with the tools available in PowerPoint to adjust these parameters and to verify the accessibility of presentations.
Outcome/Result From IT/Telecommunications Training Received | Number |
---|---|
IT and Telecommunications Procurement or Dev Policies | 32 |
Training or Technical Assistance will be developed or implemented | 08 |
No known outcome at this time | 07 |
Nonrespondent | 01 |
Total | 48 |
Performance Measure Percentage | 83.3% |
ACL Target Percentage | 70% |
Met/Not Met | Met |
Education | 59% |
---|---|
Employment | 06% |
Health, Allied Health, Rehabilitation | 00% |
Community Living | 20% |
Technology (IT, Telecom, AT) | 15% |
Total | 100% |
Describe Innovative one high-impact assistance activity that is not related to transition:
The Puerto Rico Assistive Technology Program (PRATP) provided technical assistance to the One-Step Employment Center (Centro de Gestión Única Laboral) at the Carolina municipality in Puerto Rico to help persons with disabilities transition into the workforce. As part of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), this Center provides access to various technologies needed to seek employment, create resumes, post applications, and learn computer-related skills, among other tasks. PRATP AT specialists offered technical training to the Center’s staff during this reporting period on installing, configuring, and using all the acquired technologies. Among other topics, the training focused on accessibility options for computers and tablets, hardware and software for alternate computer access, and AT solutions for learning and cognitive disabilities. The One-Step Employ Center at Carolina is now a model of accessibility and inclusion for other WIOA-based programs.
Breifly describe one technical assistance activity related to transition conducted during the reporting period:
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. On April 6, 2022, Puerto Rico and the United States celebrated "National Assistive Technology Awareness Day.” As part of this celebration, the PRATP conducted a broad media campaign under the slogan "Living without Barriers" to promote the use of AT equipment and services to increase the functional capacities of persons with disabilities. This campaign included television interviews on local channels 6 (Notiseis) and channel 13 (mi Gente), Facebook Live events, digital and printed newsletters distribution, and communications via e-mail and social networks. Also, an AT educational video was recorded for the University of Puerto Rico’s Medical Sciences Campus. The estimated number of people reaching island wide through these various initiatives is over 100,000.
2. On May 26, 2022, The Puerto Rico Assistive Technology Program (PRATP) participated in the Congress of Individuals with Disabilities: Inclusion, Education, and Equity. Over 800 persons with disabilities, family members, and service providers attended the event, covered by all major media around the Island. At PRATP’s booth, people had first–hand contact with assistive technologies. In addition, the participants had the opportunity to complete an assistive technology needs survey. This survey helps us to determine the met and unmet needs for assistive technology.
Types of Recipients | AT Device/ Service |
AT Funding | Total |
---|---|---|---|
Individuals with Disabilities | 193 | 01 | 194 |
Family Members, Guardians and Authorized Representatives | 380 | 05 | 385 |
Representative of Education | 70 | 04 | 74 |
Representative of Employment | 09 | 01 | 10 |
Representative of Health, Allied Health, and Rehabilitation | 54 | 01 | 55 |
Representative of Community Living | 52 | 03 | 55 |
Representative of Technology | 04 | 00 | 04 |
Unable to Categorize | 01 | 00 | 01 |
Total | 763 | 15 | 778 |
During this year, the Program changed its strategy and began to post announcements using the social network to promote specific assistive technology devices available. The post included a description of the device and cost (most of the devices in our database are free of charge). It is important to emphasize that this new strategy was possible due to the recent creation of a database system to manage the inventory of devices belonging to the Reuse Program. This database allows the Program to identify the assistive technology devices and the amount available. There was a correlation between the spikes in the statistics, posts on the Facebook Program Page d, and the consumers requests. For example, in November 2021 and May 2022, over 8,000 people saw the content on the page. During these months, PRATP announced specific devices available through the Reuse Program. During this period, the consumer's requests related to the type of devices announced increased by 18%.
Referral sources: a) 27% of referrals came from the Program's electronic platforms (Website and social networks). Our Facebook page has proven to be a tool of massive reach that has allowed us to disseminate the Program services; b) 12 % of referrals came from non-governmental organizations (hospitals, Independent Living Organizations, and organizations related to providing services to people with disabilities, etc.); c) 11% of referrals came from Governmental Agencies (Puerto Rico Department of Education, Rehabilitation Services Administration, Municipalities Offices, etc.,); d) 10% of referrals came from practitioners (speech-language pathologists, physical therapists, occupational therapists, social workers, medicine doctors); e) 9% of the referrals came from the Program awareness 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? | 1 |
---|
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 Puerto Rico Assistive Technology Program (PRATP) collaborated with the University of Puerto Rico (UPR), Engineering Department to assign a Capstone course to the design and development of low-cost assistive technologies as part of the AT fabrication initiative. Puerto Rico does not have a Rehabilitation Engineering program; therefore, we partner with the leading mechanical engineering department in the Island to augment our AT fabrication capacity, thus expanding the reach of this state financing activity. PRATP’s AT specialists identify AT fabrication needs appropriate for Capstone level projects and works throughout the semester with engineering students, faculty and individuals with disabilities in the design and development of custom devices. At the end of the process, the resulting devices are evaluated, optimized and tested to determine if they are ready to be given to the target individual. If the device is deemed not quite ready, it is then carried over into the next Capstone courser for further development and optimization. The initiative was implemented using federal and state funds.
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.
During this reporting period, six (6) devices were developed to address particular needs not currently addressed by the technologies available in the market. After evaluation and testing, each device was directly given to the person with disabilities who had requested it. A lesson learned was that social innovation is a strong motivator for mechanical engineering students to step out their comfort zone and, given the proper guidance, use their skills to create technologies that improve the quality of life of persons with disabilities. This partnership allowed us to engage local talent in the creation of cost-effective solutions to address primary needs of individuals with disabilities and to expand the capacity of PRATP's Low Cost Device Design and Development (LD3) initiative by adding highly specialized human and technical resources to the services provided. This initiative will be a continuous one and we are hoping to engage other engineering programs in the near future. As an advice, we would recommend for the technology development groups to meet with the target user early on and to incorporate him/her and other stakeholders into the e design process. We also would advise keeping the budget quite low so as to boost creativity in the development of replicable low-cost technologies that would in turn increase device acquisition.
3. What focus areas(s) were addressed by the initiative?
Other: Underserved groups;
4. What AT Act authorized activity(s) were addressed?
State Financing;
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 |
---|
Did you have Additional and Leveraged Funding to Report? | Yes |
---|
Fund Source | Amount | Use of Funds | Data Reported |
---|---|---|---|
State Appropriations | $30,000 | State Financing | True |
Private | $3,806 | State Financing | True |
State Appropriations | $20,000 | Device Loan | True |
State Appropriations | $20,000 | Technical Assistance | True |
State Appropriations | $45,000 | Reuse | True |
State Appropriations | $50,000 | Public Awareness, I&A | True |
State Appropriations | $50,000 | Training | True |
State Appropriations | $40,000 | Device Loan | True |
Amount: $258,806 |
B. Public Health Workforce Grant Award |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
All Section 4 AT Act grantees were awarded $80,000.00 in supplimental Public Health Workforce grant funding to increase the full-time equivalent (FTE) of staff withing the disability and aging network for public health professionals. Please document the status of these funds below. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Center for Assistive Technology Act Data Assistance . Saved: Tue Feb 14 2023 16:39:19 GMT-0600 (Central Standard Time)