                       THE BRAILLE MONITOR



                    Kenneth Jernigan, Editor
                Barbara Pierce, Associate Editor


     Published in inkprint, Braille, on talking-book disc, 
                        and cassette by 


              THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND 
                     MARC MAURER, PRESIDENT 
 


                         National Office
                       1800 Johnson Street
                   Baltimore, Maryland 21230 

                             * * * *



           Letters to the President, address changes,
        subscription requests, orders for NFB literature,
       articles for the Monitor, and letters to the Editor
             should be sent to the National Office. 

                             * * * *
 


Monitor subscriptions cost the Federation about twenty-five 
dollars per year. Members are invited, and non-members are
requested, to cover the subscription cost. Donations should be
made payable to National Federation of the Blind and sent to: 
 

                National Federation of the Blind
                       1800 Johnson Street
                   Baltimore, Maryland 21230 

                             * * * *

THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND IS NOT AN ORGANIZATION
SPEAKING FOR THE BLIND--IT IS THE BLIND SPEAKING FOR THEMSELVES



ISSN 0006-8829THE BRAILLE MONITOR
PUBLICATION OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND

                            CONTENTS

                                                      APRIL, 1992

A PYRRHIC VICTORY FOR NAC
by Barbara Pierce

NAC DOWN FOR THE COUNT IN OHIO
by Barbara Pierce

A POWERFUL TESTIMONY FOR BRAILLE

THE WASHINGTON SEMINAR: HARD WORK, EXCITEMENT, AND FUN IN
FEBRUARY

TRIBUTE TO A FEDERATIONIST
by Jon Deden

ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, THE ADA, AND THE NFB
by Ed Eames

INTEGRITY, INDEPENDENCE, AND THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
by Barbara Pierce

TOURS WITH ALLURE IN CHARLOTTE
by Wayne E. Shevlin

CONVENTION ATTRACTIONS

RECIPES

MONITOR MINIATURES
















     Copyright National Federation of the Blind, Inc., 1992
[2 PHOTOS/CAPTION: If you haven't yet made your room reservation
for the 1992 convention of the National Federation of the Blind
in Charlotte, North Carolina, June 28 through July 4, you don't
have much time left. Queen Charlotte (above), consort of King
George III of Great Britain, stands ready to greet you at the
Charlotte airport. The Carolina Mall (below) provides only one of
many tempting ways available to spend free hours during the
convention; and, of course, the convention activities, the vast
array of exhibits, the friendships to be made or re-established,
and most of all the exciting and important convention agenda
items will make the 1992 NFB convention unforgettable. 
     But reservations must be made soon! We have four convention
hotels, but space is at a premium. Contact the National Center
for the Blind, 1800 Johnson Street, Baltimore, MD  21230; (410)
659-9314. A deposit of $40 is necessary to hold each room being
reserved. Send checks (made payable to the National Federation of
the Blind); money orders; or Visa, Discover, or MasterCard credit
card numbers to the National Center for the Blind to hold your
room. Remember to indicate the dates of your arrival and
departure, the type of room you want, and the names of the people
who will share it. Do it today!]

                    A PYRRHIC VICTORY FOR NAC
                        by Barbara Pierce

     Some victories, like that of King Pyrrhus over Rome in the
third century B.C., are so costly that ultimate defeat is as
certain an outcome as an outright loss would have been. On
February 4, 1992, the National Accreditation Council for Agencies
Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped (NAC) may well have
sustained such a victory. On that date the National Advisory
Committee on Accreditation and Institutional Eligibility heard
public testimony concerning whether to keep NAC on the U.S.
Department of Education's list of approved accrediting agencies.
NAC had appeared on that list since 1971 and was due to undergo
its regular five-year review last May--a month during which NAC
was grappling with the question of whether or not to declare
bankruptcy. In the circumstances the Advisory Committee voted to
postpone its consideration until the fall when the issue of NAC's
continued existence would be a little clearer. By November the
agency was still staggering from month to month, but by then the
Committee's schedule had become complicated, so the hearing,
which should have taken place at that time, was rescheduled for
early February of this year.
     The hearing took place late on the afternoon of Tuesday,
February 4, and when the dust settled at about 6:30 p.m., the
Committee had voted (eight to two) to approve its staff's
recommendation to Secretary of Education Lamar Alexander, who
will make the actual decision. As the Braille Monitor goes to
press in late March, the outcome of the Secretary's decision is
still anybody's guess. But the Advisory Committee has recommended
that NAC be given, not the standard five-year extension that it
had hoped for, but two more years with rigorous auditing reports
required periodically in the interim. Not a single member of the
Committee spoke in support of NAC's record or program, only (as
the seconder of the final motion put it) of giving NAC one more
chance to fail in the hope that it just might succeed. The
hundreds of blind people who filled the hearing room at the
DuPont Plaza Hotel that afternoon had hoped to be present when
the Advisory Committee took a bold step in favor of common sense
and fiscal responsibility by removing NAC from the list--a hope
in which they were disappointed. What they did see was NAC
stripped bare--its financial and programmatic shortcomings open
to the light of day and its supporters clutching frantically at
the fig leaves of professionalism and promises of future fiscal
reform. This is the way it happened. 
     The Code of Federal Regulations (34 CFR part 602)
establishes a set of criteria which every agency seeking
inclusion on the U.S. Department of Education's list of approved
accrediting bodies must meet. The primary aim of these criteria
is to establish that accrediting agencies on the Secretary's list
be reliable authorities on the quality of education or training
offered by post-secondary educational institutions or programs
within the agencies' scope of activity. As the regulations are
written, failure to meet even one criterion provides due cause
for removing an accrediting body from the list. In the view of
those who opposed NAC's continued inclusion, there was ample
evidence that NAC fails to meet at least four of the criteria
and, therefore, should be removed. James Gashel, Director of
Governmental Affairs for the National Federation of the Blind,
stated the objections in his written testimony as follows: 

     The criteria include nine major points. NAC fails to meet
the standards for recognition in at least four respects:
     *    Accreditation is not required for programs or students
          to receive federal assistance in the blindness field;
     *    NAC is not generally accepted in the blindness field; 
     *    NAC does not have the resources to carry out its
          activities; and
     *    NAC's evaluation and reaccreditation practices do not
          follow its own stated policies for evaluations to be
          made at reasonable intervals.

     This is what Mr. Gashel said, and all of the third-party
testimony focused on presenting evidence from various
distinguished and knowledgeable individuals to support his
statements. 
     All day February 4 and into the morning of February 5, the
National Advisory Committee on Accreditation and Institutional
Eligibility met in a large room at the DuPont Plaza Hotel in
Washington, D.C., to hear testimony about various accrediting
bodies that were up for review. Interested blind people began
quietly filtering into the hearing room at about 3:00 p.m. on
Tuesday, February 4, and by the time the Committee was ready to
turn its attention to the National Accreditation Council at a
little after 3:30, the room was filled. 
     NAC was given an opportunity to present whatever information
it wished in support of its contention that it is a viable
accrediting body in the field of work with the blind with the
resources to do its work and the capacity to accredit member
agencies at the appropriate times. Since one of the Department's
criteria specifies that the agencies on its list must provide
accreditation for institutions which would not (or whose students
would not) be eligible for federal funds without such
accreditation, NAC was also compelled to demonstrate that some of
its members or their students would be deprived of federal funds
without NAC's services.
     Three representatives spoke in support of NAC. The first was
Dr. Richard Welsh, Vice President of the NAC Board and Executive
Director of the Greater Pittsburgh Guild for the Blind. He was
followed by Kathleen Megivern, the Executive Director of the
Association for Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and
Visually Impaired, and Oral Miller, the National Representative
of the American Council of the Blind. Ruth Westman, NAC's Program
Administrator, was also present to answer questions as needed. 
     Their task was not an enviable one. To those who know
something about the field of work with the blind, their
explanations and excuses appeared thin, to say the least. First
the Affiliated Leadership League of and for the Blind (ALL) was
trotted out from its obscure and lethargic corner in an attempt
to provide, yet once again, some substance to the fiction that
NAC is generally respected in the field. ALL was created in the
first place because NAC needed an official-sounding body to wave
the flag of respectability over NAC's head--ALL has never done
anything else of note--but Dr. Welsh and company spent several
minutes assuring the Committee that ALL continues to applaud NAC.
     The financial straits in which NAC increasingly finds itself
and about which the Advisory Committee's own staff expressed
grave concern in its report were dismissed as temporary and due
completely to the disappearance of the American Foundation for
the Blind and National Industries for the Blind grants last year.
According to Dr. Welsh, NAC is seeking new grants and
contributions from its own circle of individual supporters; and,
considering the alleged excellence of NAC accreditation (in his
own words, "the quality of the product, which is our most
important asset"), other benefactors will very soon be jumping on
the bandwagon. 
     Dr. Welsh assured the Committee that the shrinkage in NAC's
staff and board will make no difference in the quality of the
agency's program. Before the financial crisis last year, the
executive director never played any part in the accreditation
process, so his absence will apparently hardly be noticed.
Besides, NAC's roster of professionals (who now volunteer their
time to do the accreditations) are now getting used to doing on-
site visits and evaluations without any NAC staff present.
Moreover, members of the reduced Board of Directors are busy
doing fundraising, developing alternative dues structures,
negotiating with the landlord, and developing grant proposals and
a membership campaign--all duties which at one time belonged to
the executive director.
     In short, with a total disregard for the fact that
volunteers must have staff supervision and support, Dr. Welsh
argued that the staff reductions necessitated by near bankruptcy
have left NAC as well positioned as other accrediting bodies.
Citing no figures to bolster the contention, he said that NAC's
staff-to-member ratio is as good as, or better than, those of
many other accrediting bodies. The hard truth that an accrediting
body must maintain a certain number of staff members to establish
and maintain adequate supervision of its accrediting program
seems to have been conveniently ignored. Because of economy of
scale, expanding an existing accreditation program does not
require that the staff grow at the same rate as does the number
of organizations seeking evaluation. But the real significance of
NAC's staff reductions and its shift to volunteers is that it was
carried out as a result of the threat of bankruptcy. Unless NAC
was being more than commonly inefficient in the good old days,
one presumes that the members of the larger staff all found
useful things to do. Eliminating their jobs means that difficult
changes have been forced upon NAC, and the most likely victim of
the alterations is the accreditation program. 
     At one point in his testimony Dr. Welsh addressed himself to
the concern raised by many people that NAC allows agencies
reaching the date of their reaccreditation to postpone the
process for considerable lengths of time. With no explanation
that in 1991 NAC reassigned later review dates to twenty
agencies, Dr. Welsh offered explanations for three postponements,
leaving those listeners who did not know better to assume that
the three he mentioned constituted the only instances of delayed
evaluation. 
     Dr. Welsh's most remarkable effort at creative misdirection
occurred when he admitted that none of the agencies currently
accredited by NAC and none of their students were in danger of
losing federal funds if NAC were to be removed from the
Department of Education list. Lest anyone conclude correctly from
this admission that NAC, therefore, does not meet one of the
Department of Education criteria, he went on to suggest that the
time might come when member agencies had students applying for
Pell grants or GSL loans. If that were to happen, NAC's inclusion
on the Department's list would enable such federal funds to be
used for grants at member agencies. The only trouble with that
argument is that the Department of Education is supposed to
concern itself with things as they are and not as they may be at
some future time. 
     Dr. Welsh was the primary spokesperson for the NAC position,
and Ms. Megivern and Mr. Miller were appointed to direct their
comments respectively to the issues of professional and consumer
recognition of NAC. Here is the official text of Dr. Welsh's
testimony as transcribed for the Department of Education. Dashes
appear to be inserted at points where the transcriptionist was
uncertain of the text: 

     DR. WELSH: I am Dr. Richard Welsh, and I appear before you
today as the Vice President of the National Accreditation
Council. I have served as the Vice President since last May and
have served on the board of directors four years. I recently
completed a term of six years on the Commission on Accreditation.
     For twelve years I was the superintendent of the Maryland
School for the Blind in Baltimore, which was the first
residential school for blind children to be accredited by NAC,
and recently I am serving as the President of the Greater
Pittsburgh Guild for the Blind, which has recently made its first
application for accreditation.
     I'm joined by Mrs. Ruth Westman, who is the Executive
Director of the Council. She's been a member of the staff since
1983 and is very well respected as an accreditation professional
by the folks who have dealt with her in her role at NAC.
     We're also joined by Kathleen Megivern, the Executive
Director of the Association for Education and Rehabilitation for
Blind and Visually Impaired, which is the major professional
association in our field, and by Oral Miller, the National
Representative of the American Council of the Blind, which is the
consumer organization.
     We regret that our president, Dr. N. Ed Miller of Reno,
Nevada, retired as the president of the University of Nevada at
Reno, was not able to be here with us today. Some of you may know
Dr. Miller from his many years of involvement with accreditation
as a college university president, as chair of the Commission of
the Northwest Association of Colleges and Schools, and during the
1970s as a member and chairman of this Advisory Commission on
Accreditation. We are very pleased to have him as the president
of NAC and a strong supporter of our effort.
     I also want to acknowledge that with us today but not here
at the table is Mr. John Profitt, who has been a member of the
board of NAC and recent past chair of our Commission on
Accreditation, also well known to many of you for his involvement
in the accreditation field, having served as the director of the
staff for this committee previously.
     You've reviewed the basic information about the Council. We
have heard the analysis and the recommendation provided by the
staff. We believe that the analysis is thorough and the
recommendation is fair.
     I would like to comment on the problem area identified by
the staff and three areas in need of strengthening, and then two
other areas in the detailed analysis the staff suggested we be
prepared to address at this meeting. Then I will ask Ms. Megivern
and Mr. Miller to make their remarks. Following that, then Ms.
Westman and I will be available to answer any questions you may
have.
     Our relation to the problem area related to criterion
602.14A: that the agency demonstrates that its policies,
evaluation methods, and decisions are accepted throughout the
United States by educators and educational institutions. We are
pleased that the only national coalition of organizations of
blind people and organizations which provide services to blind
people, the Affiliated Leadership League of and for the Blind of
America, has strongly endorsed the Council and urge you to
continue our recognition as an accrediting agency.
     As members of that coalition and individually, the American
Foundation for the Blind, the Association for Education and
Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired, the American
Council of the Blind, the Council of Schools for the Blind, and
the National Industries for the Blind--five major organizations,
all national in scope and each with a different constituency, a
different primary focus, and independent leadership--all have
independently endorsed and support NAC.
     We have still other sponsoring members and a large number of
organizations as supporting members, which are available in the
materials that you had to review.
     We have accredited agencies in thirty-five states, Puerto
Rico, and Canada. We are the only recognized accreditation body
which specializes in programs, schools, and agencies for people
who are blind or visually impaired.
     We have had broad and active participation in the
development and the updating of our standards from people from
all over the country. No other organization has developed and
carried out such a broad-based process of establishing a test and
quality standards in this field.
     There is no question that we are accepted and endorsed
throughout the United States, and while there is strong
opposition noted by the staff from one national organization, we
think we clearly meet this standard as we have met it in past
reviews, even though the same opposition has been stated at
previous reviews.
     We recognize the staff's concern with the volume of
correspondence that you've received in opposition to NAC.
However, we have focused our response on providing the factual
answers to the staff's concerns, and we have not really focused
on orchestrating a strong letter response or a long list of
witnesses today.
     In relation to the areas listed in need of strengthening, in
reference to criterion 602.15A, the staff have properly indicated
that the concern exists currently in the area of the Council's
financial resources. This has resulted primarily from our loss of
major operating grants from our two largest contributing
organizations.
     From its very beginning, the Council has enjoyed outstanding
support from the American Foundation for the Blind and, to an
increasing degree in more recent years, from the National
Industries for the Blind. The availability of this support
permitted NAC to develop a high-quality accreditation process,
which very early in its history met the rigorous standards for
recognition which your Committee and the Department administers.
     Adjusting to the loss of this type of support after such a
long time is indeed a really significant challenge for us. Our
plan for doing so has several components. First, we have reduced
our expenses through a reduction in our occupancy costs with more
improvements to come once our current lease expires in January.
     Second, we have reduced the size of our professional staff
to the minimum that's required to continue to administer the size
of the accreditation program which we currently manage. The ratio
of staff size to the number of accredited members is similar to
that of many other specialized accrediting agencies and still
better than some others. We have reduced the size of the Board of
Directors and the Commission on Accreditation while still
retaining the balance between number of consumers, number of
professionals, and the number of members from the general
community on each body.
     Before considering a dues increase, we are reviewing the
accreditation process to determine if, without losing the quality
of the product, which is our most important asset, it can be
streamlined further to reduce the cost of self-study and on-site
review to the agency, thus making a possible dues increase more
acceptable.
     We have developed and implemented a fund-raising campaign,
which Mr. Rogers mentioned, beginning with the staff and the
Board and the Commission members and extending out from there to
past Board members, past Commission members, and previous donors.
     We want to establish an ongoing base of support among those
who know best the quality of the contribution which NAC makes to
our field. From there we will extend our campaign to other
foundations and corporations and organizations, which we hope
will be motivated by an indication of support we receive from
those closest to the organization and closest to the need.
     We've made an excellent beginning by developing a balanced
budget for this year, which is realistic and currently on target.
We have made recent changes in our support staff which represent
the more efficient use of our resources and which will provide
more support to the professional staff.
     Over the past few years the accreditation process itself has
been managed by one full-time professional, Mrs. Westman. The
previous executive director was not involved in the on-site
reviews or in the processing of progress reports or in scheduling
of the site visits.
     The volunteer Board has picked up on some of the duties
previously handled by the executive director, including the
management of the fund-raising campaigns, the developing of
proposals to the board regarding alternative dues structures,
negotiating with the landlord, and developing grant proposals--
also in developing a campaign for seeking additional members.
     We don't expect that this new staffing pattern will prevent
us from administering a strong accreditation program. We will
require more use of staffless on-site reviews, which is something
that we have been doing on a partial basis over the past few
years, and we feel we have a cadre of experienced reviewers
available to serve as the chairpersons for on-site review teams
when staff are not present.
     As our membership increases, income from dues will increase,
and the staff size can be adjusted as necessary. The important
point is the financial solvency of NAC will, for the first time,
be directly related to NAC's ability to deliver a quality product
that agencies will select and pay for. Since this is NAC's
strength, we fully expect that it will succeed.
     In relation to criterion 602.16C, the staff has recommended
that NAC include a policy in its published policies and
procedures regarding a time frame for the opportunity for comment
by interested parties on proposed changes to our criteria for
accreditation. Our practice has always been to allow three to six
months for comment. We have been commended for this practice in
the past.
     We understand that it would strengthen our position to have
this practice expressed in a formal written policy, which we will
do for consideration by our Board at its next meeting this
summer.
     In relation to criterion 602.16G, the staff has recommended
that NAC publish a more explicit policy related to conflict of
interest. Such a policy has been developed and approved by the
Board of Directors as an amendment to our bylaws and will be
published in the revised bylaws in the very near future.
     Turning now from the recommendations page of the staff's
report to the staff's more detailed analysis, I would like to
comment briefly on two other areas. First, on page eight, in
reference to criterion 602.12B, regarding the scope of activity,
the staff, while concluding that NAC meets the requirements of
this section, alludes to an area of confusion in our petition
which has been a point of concern in many of the letters that you
have received from opponents to the National Accreditation
Council.
     Staff felt that in responding in a general way to this
criterion and in discussing the various types of Federal funding
that are used by schools and agencies that NAC accredits that our
petition appears to imply that accreditation of institutions or
programs is required by an agency approved by the Secretary in
order for students to participate in programs of financial
assistance provided through the Rehabilitation Act.
     We apologize for the confusion which that response has
created. NAC clearly understands, and we know that the Committee
does too, that even though a number of State rehabilitation
agencies require, recommend, or encourage accreditation by NAC
for agencies delivering Federally-funded rehabilitation services,
that that is not a Federal requirement.
     We did mention these State requirements in response to
criterion 602.14B, which refers to national recognition, but not
in reference to criterion 602.12B, the scope of activity.
     However, in relation to scope of activity, the staff pointed
out in the background review that NAC was originally included on
the Secretary's list because of our accreditation of residential
schools for the blind.
     However, in 1984 we requested and received an expansion of
our scope of recognition at the request of one of our agencies,
which was seeking to use funding under Title IV of the Higher
Education Act, which provides for Pell Grants and GSL loans and
other sources of Federal support directly for students. This
agency was looking to fund one of their--a secretarial training
course for blind students from those sources. So we applied for
extension of our scope to include that.
     As far as we know, we are the only accrediting agency that
is in a position to provide accreditation to agencies for the
blind which wish to pursue that funding option. While none of the
accredited agencies we currently serve are taking advantage of
that funding stream, as Federal grant funding becomes less
available and loan funding more prevalent in post-secondary
education, we expect to see other agencies consider this option.
If NAC is not able to provide the approved accreditation, that
option will be closed to our agencies.
     Finally, on page 17 of the staff's analysis in relation to
the criterion 602.16B, which requires that the agency reevaluate
institutions and programs at reasonable intervals, the staff has
asked that we address the concerns expressed by third-party
testimony that three specific agencies had their accreditation
extended without being evaluated.
     The staff's understanding of this issue is generally
correct. One of the three agencies received a postponement of
this evaluation from 1991 to 1992 due to major construction and
renovation going on in its facility at that time, an extension
which is consistent with our published guidelines for extension.
     The other two agencies mentioned were scheduled for on-site
reviews last spring at the time when the Board had proposed that
the council be dissolved. Out of fairness to the agencies and in
view of the expense of hosting the on-site review, the chairman
of the Council's Commission on Accreditation granted an extension
of accreditation to the two agencies in question until such time
as the status of the Council was determined. One of the two
agencies is currently scheduled for accreditation review this
spring, and discussions are underway with the other one about a
suitable review date.
                      ____________________
     There you have Dr. Welsh's statement. Those by the
representatives from the Association for Education and
Rehabilitation (AER) and the ACB were about what could have been
expected. Then came the comments of various third-party witnesses
who, from their different perspectives, had reservations about
NAC's continued inclusion on the Secretary's list. The first of
these was Richard Edlund, who had to leave almost immediately to
catch a plane. What follows is the text of the written statement
he gave to the Committee:

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Richard Edlund, Representative, 33rd
District, Wyandotte County, Kansas.]

Dear Committee Members:
     My name is Richard J. (Dick) Edlund, and I am appearing in
opposition to the petition of renewal which has been submitted by
the National Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind
and Visually Handicapped (NAC).
     Currently I represent the Thirty-third District, Kansas
City, Kansas, in the Kansas House of Representatives; and I am a
retired small businessman, who owned and operated a hardware
store for over forty years. Accidentally blinded about fifty
years ago, I have had the opportunity to serve and to be served
by a variety of blind organizations at the local, state, and
national levels. My involvement with the organized blind movement
has allowed me to visit and advocate for the blind all across the
United States.
     I have been especially appalled at NAC's involvement in
litigation activities against blind people who have sought to
form labor unions in sheltered workshops. NAC has assisted the
workshops in resisting orders of the National Labor Relations
Board, which may be in direct violation of the law. In addition,
NAC has refused to take action against NAC-accredited workshops
which have been found to be in violation of regulations
pertaining to sub-minimum wages. Therefore, NAC is viewed by many
blind workshop employees, and by some law-abiding workshops, as
an advocate of oppressive wages and is certainly not recognized
as a reputable accreditation agency.
     Nationally NAC accreditation is accepted by a small
percentage of agencies serving the blind; and several of these
agencies, such as the Florida School for the Deaf and Blind, have
experienced serious scandals while enjoying NAC accreditation. In
my own State of Kansas there are approximately twenty-four blind
services listed in the twenty-third edition of the Directory of
Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped, which is
published by the American Foundation for the Blind. Only one of
these service providers (a sheltered workshop) is currently
accredited by NAC. The major service providers in my state,
including the state school for the visually handicapped and the
publicly funded state vocational rehabilitation agency, are not
NAC-accredited.
     It also appears that NAC's accreditation of residential
schools for the blind providing elementary and secondary
educational services no longer falls within the scope of part
602, since the Secretary of Education no longer recognizes
accrediting agencies outside the field of post-secondary
education. However, I would like to point out that the Kansas
School for the Visually Handicapped has not chosen to pursue NAC
accreditation.
     In an April 5, 1991, letter to Charles L. Griffith, the
school's position was summarized as follows:
     
     NAC is not considered a reliable accrediting authority, who
constantly fails to reach consensus in the field of blindness,
and experiences a lack of financial support from accredited
agencies. Also, NAC accreditation is not sought since there are
other, better recognized accrediting procedures. And finally,
NAC's accrediting methods have failed to keep up with recognized
advances in accreditation through the "outcomes" models that are
currently used in Kansas and surrounding states.

     In conclusion I can assure you, from personal experience,
that NAC has failed to measure up to the criteria established by
the Secretary of Education and, in my opinion, has actually held
back the progress of blind men and women in our country. NAC has
not earned the right to continue as a recipient of your
recognition. Please do not continue this travesty.
     Your concern is appreciated, and I thank you for taking the
time to review my comments.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                                Richard J. Edlund
                             Thirty-third District Representative
                                              Kansas City, Kansas
                                 Kansas House of Representatives 
                      ____________________
     When Mr. Edlund had departed, Joyce Scanlan, the director of
a private adult rehabilitation facility, came to the microphone.
Here is her statement:

[PHOTO: Joyce Scanlan seated at table. CAPTION: Joyce Scanlan,
Executive Director, BLIND, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota.]

     My name is Joyce Scanlan. As the executive director of
Blindness, Learning in New Dimensions (BLIND, Inc.) I wish to
present testimony in opposition to the recognition of the
National Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and
Visually Handicapped (NAC) as an accrediting body for educational
programs for the blind. I wish to thank the advisory committee
for the opportunity to provide the following information.
     Although I have been blind all of my life and have been both
a student in a residential school for the blind and a
rehabilitation client of public and private agencies for the
blind, it has only been during the past twenty years that I have
come to recognize that not all entities dealing with blindness
promote the same positive philosophy and administer the same
quality program for the blind as we would like to think. Yet it
is the philosophy of blindness underlying the entire operation of
an organization serving the blind which makes the difference
between run-of-the-mill and quality services. For more than
twenty years I have followed the activities of NAC, and because
of my familiarity with the work of several agencies accredited by
NAC, I am convinced that this advisory committee must reject
NAC'S application to be placed on the list of recognized
accrediting bodies for educational programs for the blind.
     Prior to becoming the executive director of BLIND, Inc., I
held several positions. I taught English, foreign languages, and
social studies at the secondary school level in a residential
school for the blind and in three different public high schools.
I worked for many years as an advocate, assisting blind people in
their efforts to reach productive and meaningful lives through
use of rehabilitation and educational services provided by
various agencies in our state. I have a master's degree in
English and have completed post-graduate work toward a doctorate
in the area of social welfare.
     Blind people in Minnesota struggled to find better services
to help them gain skills in the use of alternative techniques and
more positive attitudes concerning blindness. Their efforts met
with rebuff at every turn, since the only program in the state at
the time providing such services was one accredited by NAC. That
agency was totally unresponsive and turned a deaf ear to their
pleas for a program which promoted a positive image of blindness.
After several years of trying in vain to reform an existing
agency, the blind of the state decided to establish a new
program. That is how BLIND, Inc. came into being.
     BLIND, Inc. has operated now for four years and serves a
national audience. Besides Minnesota, we have served blind people
from six other states. Blind people from many other states have
also found it necessary to move to Minnesota to take advantage of
training in our program. We have attracted international
recognition as well, having hosted delegations from seven foreign
countries.
     The funding of BLIND, Inc. is not contingent upon
accreditation from NAC. We are, however, required to meet certain
state standards. We have an operating agreement with the state
rehabilitation agency for the blind and are subject to ongoing
monitoring and regular program and financial audits. We must have
consumer involvement and be evaluated for outcomes of services by
the state agency. All of this is done without any call for NAC.
BLIND, Inc., is accredited by the National Center for the Blind
and has met all requirements for program standards and staff
qualifications established by the state.
     Because there is no requirement of accreditation for
agencies to receive funding, NAC does not affect the distribution
of federal funds. Furthermore, it has long been apparent that
very few programs have seen fit to seek NAC accreditation. And
many of those who have received NAC accreditation have decided
subsequently to drop that accreditation. NAC has never been
widely accepted in the field of blindness, and the low-level
acceptance it has had has steadily decreased over recent years.
     To evaluate the results and effectiveness of training by
agencies from which the state rehab agency for the blind
purchases services, Minnesota State Services for the Blind
conducted a facilities effectiveness survey in 1990. Clients of
the three programs used by the state agency were surveyed to
determine what skills learned in the training program they were
using, how they felt about themselves and their ability to
participate in society, and what they were doing with their lives
subsequent to the training. The three agencies surveyed were
BLIND, Inc.; the Minneapolis Society for the Blind (MSB); and the
Duluth Lighthouse for the Blind (DLB). Both MSB and DLB were, at
the time, accredited by NAC. MSB has since withdrawn from NAC.
The results of the training provided by the three programs are
strikingly different. While rehab counselors and some other
professionals claimed that the three programs were primarily the
same, all providing a type of comprehensive instruction with some
varying levels of component services, the three programs yielded
very different outcomes.
     The attached survey summary report shows graphically how
different the three programs really are. For example, the skills
used chart on Page 5 shows that 65% of the students who finished
BLIND, Inc., read Braille every week, while only 11% of those who
finished training at DLB and 38% of those who finished training
at MSB, the two NAC-accredited agencies, used Braille every week.
Also, of those who finished training at BLIND, Inc., 57% traveled
independently with a white cane every day, while only 23% from
MSB and 7% from DLB traveled independently with a white cane
every day. On Page 6 the chart on activity after training shows
that the most common activity for people who had completed
training at BLIND, Inc. was continuing to prepare for employment,
while the most common activity for those who completed training
from the NAC-accredited agencies was doing nothing. On Page 10
the attitudes and confidence after training chart reveals that
87% of the students from BLIND, Inc. believed they could do as
well in life as sighted people; of the graduates of the
NAC-accredited programs, on the other hand, only 22% believed
they could compete with sighted people.
     Another glaring difference demonstrated by the results of
the effectiveness survey done by the state rehabilitation agency
for the blind was how much the people who completed the training
were likely to use the skills learned in the program. The
students from the NAC-accredited agencies were less than half as
likely to use skills learned after leaving the program as those
who graduated from the BLIND, Inc., program.
     This survey report gives definite comparisons between
agencies accredited by NAC and another not accredited by NAC. The
outcomes clearly demonstrate that NAC accreditation provides no
guarantee as to desired outcomes. Evidence points to the fact
that NAC accreditation is no guarantee of quality services.
     I urge the advisory committee to deny the application of NAC
for recognition by the Department of Education as an accrediting
body. The field of blindness has already strenuously rejected
NAC. Blind Americans have never supported NAC as a viable
accrediting body. And during the past few years even previous
financial and professional supporters of NAC have withdrawn their
support. NAC's accreditation is meaningless. The field of
blindness does need standards and ongoing evaluation, but NAC has
shown no capacity to provide meaningful standards and assure
quality services.
                      ____________________
     After Mrs. Scanlan completed her testimony, Dr. Homer Page,
President of the Colorado Center for the Blind and a Boulder
County Commissioner, delivered a statement. Here it is:

[PHOTO: Homer Page seated at table microphone. CAPTION: Homer
Page, Chairman, Board of Directors, Colorado Center for the
Blind; Chairman, Advisory Board, Colorado School for the Deaf and
Blind; and Member, Board of Commissioners, Boulder County,
Colorado.]

     My name is Homer Page. I live in Boulder, Colorado. I am a
member of the Boulder County Board of Commissioners. For fourteen
years prior to my election, I directed the Office of Services to
Disabled students at the University of Colorado at Boulder. I
teach in the Graduate School of Education at the University of
Colorado. I also chair the Advisory Board of the Colorado School
for the Deaf and Blind, and I am the Chair of the Board for the
Colorado Center for the Blind. I am the founder of the Boulder
County Center for People with Disabilities, and for eight years I
chaired the Board. During May, 1991, I lectured and gave
workshops on the topic of blindness and providing rehabilitation
services to blind persons in Sweden. These lectures and workshops
were conducted with Swedish educators and rehabilitation
counselors, the Swedish Institute for Research in Special
Education, and the Swedish National Program for the Employment of
Blind Persons. 
     I come before you today to ask that you not recommend
renewal of the Department of Education's recognition of the
National Accreditation Council as an accrediting agency in the
field of work with the blind. There are three reasons for making
this request. They are as follows:
     1. NAC is very controversial in the field of work with the
blind. In 1988 the Colorado School for the Deaf and Blind was a
troubled institution, having come under serious attack by the
state legislature, and was in danger of being closed down. The
superintendent and the principal of the school supported the idea
of CSDB's pursuing NAC accreditation. They sought an ally in
their struggle for survival. Fortunately, the Commissioner of
Education, to whom the Superintendent reports, terminated this
pursuit when he learned what difficulties NAC-accredited schools
for the blind have experienced.
     Since 1988 CSDB has undergone a state legislative audit
review, has made many personnel changes, has significantly
redefined its mission, and is now on the way to becoming a
healthy institution. This transformation took place without NAC
accreditation. I think most persons associated with the school
recognize that NAC accreditation would have impeded genuine
reform.
     Why is this true? The answer is clear. NAC would have been
brought into this situation to do battle on behalf of entrenched
and unproductive policies and personnel. NAC accreditation has
nothing to do with standards or with the improvement of services;
it is political through and through. For most of the life of NAC,
its member agencies were banded together to fend off demands for
quality services made by those who would consume those services.
NAC accreditation at CSDB would have meant the creation of a
fortress mentality, and most likely it would have led to the
demise of the institution.
     2. Those who support NAC often say its critics are simply
opposed to accreditation. Nothing could be further from the
truth. In my own case, I have supported accreditation and
certification for both the Center for People with Disabilities
and the Colorado Center for the Blind. I led the CPWD agency
through the CARF accrediting process, which was successful. While
CPWD was in compliance with most of the CARF standards, we were
able to improve our personnel and fiscal management, and we
especially gained from the process in the area of program
evaluation. The Colorado Center for the Blind participates in an
annual certification process conducted by the Colorado State
Department of Social Services. CCB participates in this process
voluntarily, and there is no requirement that the agency be
certified, but we have found the process to be helpful.
     The issue is not "Do we oppose accreditation?" It is rather,
"Is there an objective external agency in the field of work with
the blind that can conduct a genuine accreditation program?" We
do not believe that such an agency exists at this time. Certainly
NAC does not qualify.
     3. Even if NAC were dedicated to an objective accreditation
process, it could not conduct a viable program. It simply lacks
the resources to be credible. During this fiscal year NAC will
most likely have to operate with a budget under $200,000. Its
resources are shrinking. Whatever purpose it may have once had
for existing has long since passed. It is time for the field of
work with the blind to be freed from the political intrigues,
climate of intimidation, and bitter confrontations that have
marked it for the past two decades. You can help us to move
forward with the creation of a genuine accreditation process by
ending DOE's recognition of NAC.
     In conclusion I wish to state once again that I come before
you to request that you recommend against the renewal of
recognition of NAC. The issue before you is not, "Can NAC survive
for another two years?" It is, "Can you make a positive
contribution to promoting the development of a credible
accreditation process for agencies serving the blind?" The
situation in which we find ourselves now is much like a Monopoly
game which has progressed far beyond the point when the outcome
is in doubt. Yet the game drags on, it is boring and tedious to
its players, and it is wasteful because it prevents them from
engaging in other meaningful activity.
     You can help the blind of this nation by contributing to the
closing of the NAC operation. This would not signal an end to the
accreditation effort in the field of work with the blind. It
would rather set us free to try again. Uniform standards,
accountability, and a consistent voice for quality services are
much-needed aspects of a widely supported accreditation program.
Won't you help us bring such a process into being?
                      ____________________
     Dr. Page's testimony was followed by that of Joanne Wilson,
Executive Director of the Louisiana Center for the Blind, an
adult rehabilitation center. This is what she had to say:

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Joanne Wilson, Director, Louisiana
Center for the Blind, Ruston, Louisiana.]

     My name is Joanne Wilson. I am the director of the Louisiana
Center for the Blind, located in Ruston, Louisiana. The Louisiana
Center for the Blind is a private rehabilitation agency which
trains blind persons from throughout Louisiana and the country in
the skills of blindness and instills positive attitudes and self-
confidence through its innovative and unique programs. It has
become a model for other training centers as well as a respected
site for professional training. Never in its history has it been
accredited by the National Accreditation Council for Agencies
Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped. Furthermore, it will
never seek accreditation from NAC. Other programs in the state
which are not NAC-accredited nor seeking accreditation include
the Training and Resource Center for the Blind at the University
of New Orleans, which is also recognized as a model program, and
the Louisiana School for the Visually Impaired. Both the
Louisiana Center for the Blind and the Training and Resource
Center for the Blind have been recognized by the Governor and the
state of Louisiana as the finest programs for rehabilitation in
the state.
     Although not opposed to the concept of accreditation and the
accountability which should accompany such a process, the
Louisiana Center for the Blind believes strongly that such
accreditation should be meaningful. In the Center's experience
NAC accreditation essentially carries no meaning. Although two
agencies in Louisiana--workshop facilities--are accredited by
NAC, no significance is attributed to this accreditation in the
selection of these providers for client services by Louisiana
Rehabilitation Services. In fact, it is widely recognized
throughout the state and publicly admitted by these agencies that
they are on shaky ground both financially and programmatically.
There has never been any requirement or policy adopted by the
state of Louisiana to have providers of services for the blind
seek NAC accreditation, although other accrediting bodies have
been recognized over the years.
     Specifically, in the state of Louisiana professionals have
agreed (even those in NAC-accredited workshops) that NAC
accreditation is a stamp of approval at a lofty cost, given
without regard for the quality of services or NAC's own
standards. At a statewide meeting of blind persons and
professionals in April of 1991, a member of the NAC accrediting
team, who was also the director of a NAC agency in Louisiana,
publicly stated that he voted to dissolve NAC when balloting was
undertaken to resolve the shaky future of NAC.
     As I see it, NAC is simply fighting a losing battle in its
attempt to restore its livelihood and credibility among
professionals and agencies serving the blind. Because of its
history of accrediting many agencies which are viewed as
substandard and the indiscriminate way in which agencies are
granted accreditation, blind persons and professionals have
written it off as a vehicle for insuring quality standards and
services. In summary, it is apparent to me and to my colleagues
in the field of rehabilitation of the blind in Louisiana that NAC
does not meet the criteria to be recognized by the U.S.
Department of Education. Thank you for this opportunity to
present my comments on this matter.
                      ____________________
     Dr. Abraham Nemeth, creator of the Nemeth mathematics
Braille Code and Chairman of the Michigan Commission for the
Blind, was the next individual to offer comments to the
Committee. This is what he said:

[PHOTO: Abraham Nemeth standing at podium microphone. CAPTION:
Abraham Nemeth, Chairman, Michigan Commission for the Blind, and
Professor Emeritus of Mathematics and Computer Science,
Southfield, Michigan.]

   My name is Dr. Abraham Nemeth. I am congenitally blind and was
educated using the techniques and skills of blindness. For thirty
years before my retirement in 1985 I taught mathematics and
computer science at the University of Detroit. I am the author of
the "Nemeth Braille Code for Mathematics and Science," a system
now standard in the United States, Canada, New Zealand, and other
English-speaking countries throughout the world. In July of 1991
Governor Engler of Michigan appointed me to be the Chairman of
the Michigan Commission for the Blind. I am here to speak in
opposition to the inclusion of NAC on the Department of
Education's list of recognized accrediting agencies.
   The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) has as one of its
criteria that an accrediting agency should enjoy wide recognition
in the field in which it operates. Out of a total of 500 agencies
serving the blind which NAC itself has identified as eligible for
accreditation, barely 100 are now accredited by NAC after twenty-
five years since its inception. This certainly does not indicate
wide acceptance of NAC in its field. Many agencies have declined
NAC accreditation, and many others, having once been accredited,
have decided to terminate their NAC affiliation. In Michigan,
from which I come, two of the best known agencies have declined
NAC accreditation. One is Leader Dogs for the Blind of Rochester,
Michigan. This organization enjoys a national as well as a local
reputation for excellence. The other is the Michigan School for
the Blind in Lansing, our capital. Important agencies in other
states have chosen not to be NAC-accredited. Some of these are
Kansas State Services for the Blind, Governor Morehead School for
the Blind in North Carolina, and Rhode Island State Services for
the Blind. The National Braille Association, one of the largest
groups of volunteers in the nation, who produce Braille, large
print, and recorded materials for the blind, and of which I am a
charter member, has also terminated its NAC affiliation, having
been accredited for many years. Directors of agencies for the
blind are hard put to name any tangible benefits resulting from
NAC accreditation. Mr. Griffith's staff has on file many letters
which indicate that NAC accreditation is neither required nor
suggested as a condition for federal funding.
   Several years before my tenure on the Michigan Commission for
the Blind, that Commission voted not to purchase goods or
services from NAC-accredited agencies if comparable quality goods
and services were available elsewhere. Subsequently the Attorney
General ruled this Commission action to be illegal. As a result
the Commission's actions were changed, but not its opinion.
   Another criterion cited in the CFR is that an accrediting
agency must have sufficient resources to carry out its mission.
So bankrupt is NAC that its Board of Directors in April, 1991,
voted to recommend dissolving NAC. This decision was rejected by
a subsequent vote of the NAC membership, but only by a narrow
margin. NAC currently operates with a skeleton staff. It has no
current executive director. In past years more than half of its
funding came from the American Foundation for the Blind and
National Industries for the Blind. Both of these agencies have
now withdrawn their funding because they perceive no likelihood
that NAC can generate income from other sources. A large number
of agencies due for reaccreditation in 1991 and earlier have had
their accreditation renewed by NAC without reevaluation for lack
of resources. NAC accreditation is unrelated to quality of
service. Some of the most regressive agencies, as perceived in
the blindness community, are NAC-accredited, while many of the
best agencies are not.
     For these and other reasons for which time does not permit
elaboration, I strongly urge that NAC not be included on the
Department of Education's list of accrediting agencies. By such
an action the Department would help to minimize the controversy
in the blindness community over NAC. The strong showing at this
hearing against NAC is evidence in itself that NAC does not enjoy
wide recognition in its field. Thank you for the opportunity you
have accorded me to be heard today.
                      ____________________
     Dr. Nemeth was followed by James Gashel, Director of
Governmental Affairs of the National Federation of the Blind.
Here is the testimony he provided to the Advisory Committee: 

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: James Gashel, Director of Governmental
Affairs, National Federation of the Blind, Baltimore, Maryland.]

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is James Gashel, and I am
appearing on behalf of the National Federation of the Blind. My
address is 1800 Johnson Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21230;
telephone (410) 659-9314. We strongly oppose continued
recognition of the National Accreditation Council for Agencies
Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped (NAC) by the Secretary
of Education. In this statement I will present evidence to show
that NAC does not meet the Secretary's criteria for recognized
accrediting agencies. 
     The National Federation of the Blind is the principal
membership organization of blind persons in the United States. We
have over fifty thousand members, and the vast majority of them
are blind. We have a state affiliate in each of the fifty states
and the District of Columbia, and local Federation chapters exist
in most sizable population areas. In general the Federation is a
self-help organization of blind people with a substantial, direct
interest in the quality of education, rehabilitation, employment,
and training services available to the blind everywhere in this
country. The Federation is the blind speaking for themselves. 
Since its founding twenty-five years ago, NAC has been a harmful
force in the lives of blind people. The primary purpose for
placing an accrediting agency on the Secretary's list is that the
group has been found to be a reliable authority on the quality of
education or training offered by post-secondary educational
institutions or programs within the agency's scope of activity.
We submit that NAC fails to meet this test. The number of
agencies affiliated with NAC is shrinking year by year, and the
number of agencies that have dropped their NAC accreditation is
growing. During 1991 alone seven agencies terminated their
involvement in NAC. 
     One-fourth of the agencies that once affiliated with NAC
have now withdrawn. They include the Virginia School for the
Blind and the Virginia Department for the Blind, serving blind
adults; Columbia Lighthouse for the Blind, Washington, D.C.;
Recording for the Blind, the nation's largest book transcribing
organization for post-secondary students; the Division of
Services to the Visually Impaired, State of South Dakota; Hadley
School for the Blind, an internationally recognized
correspondence school for the blind, providing services at the
post-secondary level; Blind Work Association, New York; Governor
Morehead School for the Blind, North Carolina; Rhode Island State
Services for the Blind and Visually Impaired; Michigan School for
the Blind; Kansas Division of Services for the Blind; Cleveland
Society for the Blind; Oregon School for the Blind; Massachusetts
Association for the Blind; and Blind Industries and Services of
Maryland. These are only some of the agencies that have decided
not to continue their affiliation with NAC. 
   The American Foundation for the Blind (AFB) spearheaded the
creation of NAC in the 1960s and has provided most of NAC's
financial support ever since. But the Foundation withdrew its
funding of NAC last year because of NAC's inability to obtain
more accredited member agencies and to secure other sources of
substantial funding. Financial support provided by National
Industries for the Blind (NIB) was also withdrawn last year. The
letter from NIB's president, explaining the withdrawal of funds,
gave NAC's failures in membership development and acquisition of
stable financing as reasons for terminating support one year
earlier than promised. 
     It is clear that NAC cannot continue to function as anything
more than the shell of an organization. There is no longer an
executive director and now only one program person on NAC's
staff. The organization is dependent upon volunteers for almost
everything it does except the day-to-day operation of the office.
As a result, although the accreditation of thirty-four agencies
expires this year, only two actual site visits are scheduled so
far. 
     An agency in this situation certainly does not meet the
specific criteria described in 34 CFR part 602. The criteria
include nine major points. NAC fails to meet the standards for
recognition in at least four respects:
     * Accreditation is not required for programs or students to
receive federal assistance in the blindness field;
     * NAC is not generally accepted in the blindness field; 
     * NAC does not have the resources to carry out its
activities; and
     * NAC's evaluation and reaccreditation practices do not
follow its own stated policies for evaluations to be made at
reasonable intervals.
     These points will be discussed in the order in which they
are listed. 
     1. NAC Does Not Accredit in a Field Where Accreditation Is
Required for Federal Assistance. Section 602.12 (b) of the
Secretary's regulations specifies that the recognized accrediting
organization must operate in a field where accreditation is
necessary for institutions or students to be eligible to
participate in one or more federal programs. Post-secondary
programs serving the blind that could apply for membership in NAC
are subject to direct monitoring and audits performed by the
Department of Education and other federal and state agencies. As
a consequence there are no federal programs in the blindness
field that have accreditation as a condition for participation by
agencies or students. 
     In Exhibit B (2) to its petition, NAC has listed thirteen
agencies in nine states which it has accredited and which NAC
says fall within the scope of its Department of Education
recognition. The implication is that these agencies would lose
federal assistance if they were not accredited. The fact is that
the list provided by NAC as Exhibit B (2) is both misleading and
false. During the comment period many commenters submitted
evidence showing that accreditation is not required for these or
other agencies to receive federal financial assistance. 
     NAC vaguely asserts that funding from the Department of
Veterans Affairs and the Rehabilitation Services Administration
is somehow related to accreditation. With respect to the
Department of Veterans Affairs, I have submitted evidence that VA
funding of individuals or programs has no relationship to the
accredited status of agencies in the blindness field. The VA
itself has rejected NAC accreditation for the blind
rehabilitation centers which it operates. 
     NAC accreditation is also not required for agencies to
receive funding under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.
In a memorandum submitted during the comment period, the deputy
commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration
informed the advisory committee that "there are no federal
requirements for accreditation of rehabilitation facilities
serving clients sponsored by State rehabilitation programs." 
     NAC has been concerned about the lack of an accreditation
requirement for programs that receive federal funds. At a meeting
of its Board of Directors held in November, 1990, NAC disclosed
plans to lobby for federal legislation which would create an
accreditation requirement for programs receiving funds under the
Rehabilitation Act and other federal laws. Mr. Robert Humphreys
(a Washington, D.C., attorney specializing in the disabilities
field) was retained by NAC to spearhead a lobbying effort in the
Congress leading to the passage of this legislation. The
Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration, which
is part of the Department of Education, has said that NAC's
proposed accreditation requirement is not consistent with the
policies of the Bush administration. 
     Attachment A is a list of agencies which, according to NAC,
are the only post-secondary programs that fall within its scope
of recognition. NAC has alleged that twelve states require
accreditation as a condition for distributing federal funds to
private non-profit agencies serving the blind. However,
Attachment A shows that only two states, Illinois and Ohio,
actually have such a requirement. That information was confirmed
by way of a memorandum submitted to the Advisory Committee's
staff from the Deputy Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services
Administration in the Department of Education. So the information
shows that, rather than having thirteen agencies in nine states
that fall within its scope of recognition, NAC has at best two
agencies in two states that fall within its scope of recognition.
Staff of the Rehabilitation Services Commission in Ohio will
shortly recommend that NAC not be recognized as an accrediting
agency in that state. [The Ohio Rehabilitation Services
Commission voted unanimously on February 18 to remove NAC from
its list of approved accrediting bodies. See the March, 1992,
issue of the Braille Monitor and the article elsewhere in this
issue.] If NAC is removed from the Secretary's list of
accrediting agencies, no agency within its scope of recognition
will lose federal funds, because accreditation is also available
from at least one other source, namely the Commission on
Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF).
     In saying that accreditation has no relationship to federal
funding of post-secondary programs for the blind, I am not
arguing the merits of whether or not this should be the case.
That would be for Congress and the Administration to decide. The
point is that the Secretary of Education recognizes only
accrediting agencies that perform accreditation for post-
secondary programs in order for those programs to receive federal
funds. That is not the case with respect to NAC, so NAC fails to
meet criterion 602.12 (b). 
     2. NAC Is Not Generally Accepted in the Field in Which It
Offers Accreditation. Section 602.14 of the Secretary's
regulations specifies that the accreditation agency's policies,
evaluation methods, and decisions must be accepted throughout the
United States. Again the evidence shows that NAC fails to meet
this criterion. 
     It is beyond dispute that, after twenty-five years, NAC has
accumulated only ninety-six member agencies. The reason is lack
of acceptance, not that the standards are difficult to meet.
One-fourth of the agencies that have been accredited members of
NAC have now withdrawn. Attachment B shows these agencies. The
seven shaded agencies terminated their membership in 1991, all of
them by their own volition. In fact, NAC's membership is
shrinking year by year. It should also be noted that by NAC's own
admission, forty-eight of its members voted to dissolve the
corporation. 
     On pages 19 and 20 of its petition for renewal, NAC provides
a list of state vocational rehabilitation agencies (both general
and blind) that, according to NAC, require, strongly encourage,
or recommend accreditation by NAC. This list is apparently
offered to convey the impression of broad acceptance in the
field. But the list is overblown in its attribution of alleged
support. Information provided to the advisory committee by over
eighty commenters shows that NAC's claimed support does not
exist. In fact, only eight rehabilitation agencies have agreed to
accept NAC accreditation. 
     NAC is actually not recognized or accepted by the vast
majority of public agencies providing post-secondary services to
blind people. Attachment C shows the state vocational
rehabilitation agencies that do not recognize NAC. These are only
the public agencies. They are joined by hundreds of private
agencies that also do not recognize NAC. Only eight of the public
vocational rehabilitation agencies do recognize NAC. 
     3. NAC Does Not Have the Resources Necessary to Carry Out
Its Accreditation Activities. Section 602.15 specifies that the
accrediting agency must have or be likely to have sufficient
resources to carry out its accreditation function. Financially,
NAC is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. From 1967 until 1989
the American Foundation for the Blind provided NAC's principal
financial support. During most years the Foundation's grants met
nearly 60% of NAC's operating expenses. This arrangement changed
in 1989 when the Foundation wanted to cut its level of
commitment. 
     A new financing plan then evolved in which National
Industries for the Blind agreed to make up the difference
resulting from AFB's diminished support. It was thought that NIB
and AFB would help to keep NAC afloat for a three-year period
while NAC itself would make an effort to obtain long-range
support from other sources. Building membership was one of the
key features of the three-year plan. In fact, the funding agreed
to by AFB and NIB was contingent on NAC's success in expanding
its accredited membership support base. 
     As of July 1, 1991, both AFB and NIB ceased providing grants
to NAC one year earlier than originally planned. A letter from
Mr. George Mertz, NIB's president, explained his agency's
decision as follows: "This decision to discontinue funding for
the third year of NAC's plan to achieve financial independence
was based on the fact that there was minimal progress reported by
NAC in their goal of achieving this objective. It was also felt
that this goal could not be accomplished during the third year of
their plan." In a later comment in his letter, Mr. Mertz stated
forthrightly that "the NIB Board has not and never will advocate
mandatory accreditation as a means for acquiring federal funds
under the Rehabilitation Act. Also the Board was very emphatic
that NIB has not and will not be involved in any lobbying effort
to promote this concept."
     NAC's 1991 fiscal year closed on June 30, 1991. For the year
which ended at that time, NAC spent in excess of $460,000. The
same is true of the year before. Income for this two-year period
trailed spending by $60,000. I have rounded these numbers for
simplicity. Here are some more exact figures. As of June 30,
1990, NAC reported a fund balance of $118,307. However, a
financial report made by the NAC treasurer to the NAC board in
April, 1991, reported a fund balance of $82,145 at the end of
March, 1991. By the end of the fiscal year, June 30, 1991, NAC's
reserves were down to $64,179. These figures show that NAC's
spending was out of balance with income even before the AFB and
NIB grants were withdrawn. 
     For fiscal year 1992 NAC is anticipating that its income
will be down by 47% from the amount actually received in 1991.
NAC's currently adopted budget, which was submitted to the
accreditation and institutional eligibility staff in September,
1991, projects income of $216,065 for fiscal 1992 and spending of
precisely the same amount. Roughly 37 percent of this budget
(almost $80,000 of the projected income) is soft money. For
example, in excess of $35,000 is shown as grants from
foundations, and $27,000 from "other." The DOE criteria suggest
that letters of commitment should be furnished to support the
budget, but there are no such letters accompanying NAC's
petition.
     NAC's actual performance last year and so far this year
suggests that its current income estimates are overblown. For
instance, one NAC report, sent to its members in April, 1991,
candidly acknowledged that income for the first 6 months of 1991
had been under budget by $65,716 and that grants which had been
anticipated from two foundations and one corporation would not be
received. NAC will also be losing the dues of seven agencies
whose membership ended in 1991. NAC's newly accredited agencies
are extremely small, so their dues will not make up for the
amount being lost from the withdrawal of substantially larger
dues-paying members. 
     As of December 31, 1991, NAC's fund balance had diminished
from $64,179 to $63,895. With respect to income, NAC was on or
over its revenue estimates in two categories and below budget in
seven. Referring to the figures which I have described as soft
money, NAC has received only 12% of the amount budgeted from
foundations and corporations, and one-third of the amount
anticipated from other sources. Only 26% of the donations hoped
for from individuals was actually received with 50% of the year
now gone. 
     Sales of NAC's standards have been only 27% of the amount
expected. This means that fewer agencies are indicating an
interest in joining NAC at some point in the future. It is true
that NAC has received 49.8% of expected income half-way through
the year, but there are serious problems as shown by these
figures. The remaining time left in this year will tell the
story. Unless there is a dramatic turnaround, NAC's fund balance
will show a further decline at the end of the year.
     NAC has already spent 53% of the amount budgeted. In travel
alone, the amount spent so far has been almost 71% of the amount
budgeted. Spending has also exceeded the budget in contract
services, for dues and subscriptions, and for occupancy. 
     From the figures available the absence of program activity
is also evident. In the six months of operation since July, 1991,
NAC spent only $543 of a budgeted $4,000 on postage; for
supplies, only $550 of the budgeted $4,000. Only $129 has been
spent on printing. Cost of publications sold was only $281, and
the total income from publications sold during this six-month
period has been a princely $682. These figures demonstrate the
virtually complete absence of a viable program. 
     The lack of financial resources is having a devastating
impact on NAC's performance of programmatic commitments. As a
consequence the meaning of accreditation is being diluted. In
point of fact, accreditation by NAC has never been a mark of
quality; now it is even less so. This is because the accredited
status of many of NAC's members is actually being extended from
year to year without evaluation of the members' programs. In some
instances agencies that are not current in the payment of their
dues to NAC are simply carried along as fully-accredited members.
In the light of the agency's desperate need for income from any
source, the only credible explanation is that NAC is afraid to
lose more members. 
     NAC started fiscal year 1991 with forty-one member agencies
coming due for evaluation. Many of these agencies had been
extended without evaluation from prior years. The accreditation
of others was expiring in the normal cycle. Attachment D is a
list of these forty-one agencies. Roughly half of them were
extended without evaluation--sixteen carried over to 1992 and
four to 1993. Of the remaining twenty-one agency members, seven
withdrew from membership in NAC by their own volition, and
fourteen were reaccredited during the year. 
     NAC started fiscal year 1992 with thirty-six agencies coming
due for evaluation, five fewer than were due for evaluation in
1991. The agencies currently due for evaluation are shown in
Attachment E. Note that sixteen of these agencies were also shown
on Attachment D because they were simply extended from one year
to the next. Following NAC's usual pattern, only a fraction of
them will actually be reviewed this year, and the rest will be
moved forward to next year or the year after. As for the backlog,
the raw figures are a little deceptive. Since seven agencies
withdrew in 1991, the backlog dropped from forty-one to thirty-
four. Though it may appear that NAC is decreasing its backlog,
this erosion is achieved by losing members. At some point NAC may
not show a backlog at all, but there will also be no members left
to worry about.
     The conclusion is that NAC's resources are not sufficient
even to keep up with the periodic expiration of the accredited
status of its existing members--never mind accrediting new
members and keeping its standards current as well. In 1991 NAC
could reaccredit only fourteen of its forty-one member agencies
then due for review, and twenty were carried over to the future.
As already shown, a group of thirty-six agencies have their
accreditation status expiring this year. In 1990, before the loss
of its major grants, NAC reviewed eight agencies and extended
eighteen. The point is that NAC did not have in 1990 and does not
now have the resources to evaluate even its member agencies at
their regularly scheduled times, and as a result the backlog of
agencies carried over is out of hand. 
     NAC's staff resources are also insufficient to support
meaningful accreditation activities. The position of executive
director was eliminated as of June 1, 1991. The associate
executive director is serving as a "program administrator." This
is the only professional staff position left under NAC's reduced
budget. The amount budgeted for compensation of staff is $86,054,
apparently including fringe benefits. Based on the June 30, 1990,
audited financial statement, NAC provides fringe benefits at the
rate of twenty-four percent of total personnel costs. Assuming
that the fringe benefit rate has not changed in proportion to
total compensation, the amount now being paid in actual salaries
is $65,401. This is hardly enough to maintain anything other than
a caretaker staff commitment at the rates of compensation
expected and paid in New York City. 
     4. NAC's Evaluation and Reaccreditation Practices Do Not
Follow Its Own Stated Policies for Evaluations to Be Made at
Reasonable Intervals. Section 602.16 (b) specifies that the
agency must revaluate its accredited members at reasonable
intervals. No one disputes that NAC has a written policy for
reevaluation of its member agencies. However, we have just shown
that the policy is often not strictly observed. According to the
policy, when an agency first affiliates with NAC, it enters a
five-year cycle of review, but accredited status is sometimes
granted for less than five years. There are many instances in
which agencies are extended into a new accreditation cycle
without receiving any apparent evaluation.
     Attachment F is a list of agencies for which the accredited
status expired in 1991 or before. Each of the agencies on this
list still appears on NAC's membership list even though there is
no record of the specific reaccreditation action that is supposed
to be necessary to continue the membership. A careful
consideration of NAC's frequent practice of postponing reviews of
member agencies leads necessarily to the conclusion that many of
the agencies shown on Attachment F will not be reviewed even at
the new date specified. Under these circumstances it cannot be
said that NAC has a policy of reviewing its members at reasonable
intervals when it often does not follow its own policy. During
1991 NAC followed its policy with respect to fourteen programs
and failed to do so with respect to many others. It is therefore
clear that this performance does not comport with criterion
602.16 (b).
     Conclusion. The ultimate basis for retaining any accrediting
organization on the Secretary of Education's list of recognized
agencies is that the organization serves as a reliable authority
on the quality of post-secondary programs receiving federal
assistance. Judged by this standard, NAC does not measure up. If
it did, agencies for the blind would be anxious to sign up for
accreditation by NAC. But exactly the opposite is the case. 
     NAC has stated that there are five hundred or more agencies
serving the blind that would be potential candidates for its
accreditation. However, in twenty-five years of trying, NAC has
managed to convince only ninety-six of these agencies to enlist
and remain as its accredited members. The number of NAC's member
agencies is actually shrinking year by year. Membership is
extended without timely evaluation. Resources are dwindling, and
even the principal professional position in the organization--
the executive director--has been eliminated. This embarrassing
record hardly demonstrates national acceptance. 
     More to the point, virtually half of NAC's members voted to
dissolve the corporation. During the months since that vote NAC
has barely managed to stay afloat. In the acknowledged view of
some of its board members, they did not want to give up "without
a fight." Regardless of their efforts to keep NAC alive as a
corporation, there is no question that the organization has
ceased to conduct a viable accreditation program. Some would say
that it never had one. While NAC is still technically alive as a
legal entity, it is not truly in business as an accrediting
agency. Its failure to be accepted by agencies in the blindness
field is persuasive evidence that NAC is not regarded as a
reliable authority on the quality of programs within its sphere
of operation. This is the ultimate test for the Secretary of
Education's recognition, and NAC has failed to measure up.
                      ____________________
     The final speaker opposing the inclusion of NAC on the
Department of Education's list was R. Creig Slayton, Director of
the Iowa Department for the Blind. Here are his remarks:

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: R. Creig Slayton, Director, Iowa
Department for the Blind, and Immediate Past President, National
Council of State Agencies for the Blind, Des Moines, Iowa.]

     I have been employed in the federal-state vocational
rehabilitation program for over twenty-six years. For the past
five years I have been Director of the Iowa Department for the
Blind and active in national organizations which represent the
state vocational rehabilitation agencies. I serve on the
Executive Committee of the Council of State Administrators of
Vocational Rehabilitation, and I am immediate past president of
the National Council of State Agencies for the Blind. I come to
you today as a concerned director of a state vocational
rehabilitation agency serving blind persons to request that this
advisory Committee oppose the U.S. Department of Education's
recognition of the National Accreditation Council for Agencies
Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped (NAC) as a suitable
accrediting organization.
     I am not certain that post-secondary training services for
blind persons need special accreditation. The Rehabilitation
Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Education does
not require such accreditation because they, themselves, are
heavily into monitoring activities. However, I do know that NAC
is not the organization to fill this role of primary accrediting
body for the field.
     NAC was conceived and born in controversy, has failed to
meet expectations, and continues to exist in a semicomatose
state. Many of its standards are seen as irrelevant, not
uniformly applied, and scoffed at by blind consumers. Most state
agencies for the blind choose not to recognize NAC as a suitable
accrediting organization. Private agencies for the blind have
likewise failed to answer the call to be accredited by NAC. As a
result NAC has begun to offer its questionable accreditation to
diverse groups of service providers. For example, in the State of
Iowa, NAC recently accredited a hospital-based low vision center
which provides medical eye examinations and prescriptive lenses.
     Perhaps NAC's greatest disservice to rehabilitation is its
failure to recognize that the time has come for it to step aside
and clear the way for a new accrediting body.
     In conclusion, the National Accreditation Council for
Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped has failed to
develop relevant standards, to apply standards in a uniform
manner, and most important, it has failed to achieve the respect
which is absolutely essential to a standard-setting organization.
                      ____________________
     That was what the immediate past president of the NCSAB had
to say about NAC, and when the testimony was complete, the
Committee began asking questions of the NAC representatives. It
was clear that, having no grasp of the NFB's efforts through the
years to participate meaningfully in the creation and
deliberations of NAC, Committee members were distressed to see
the steadiness of the NFB's determination to see that NAC ceases
once and for all to be a divisive force in the field of work with
the blind. They kept returning to the notion that the NFB could
participate "adversarially" in NAC--whatever that may mean. But
even with these misgivings, they were clearly dissatisfied with
NAC's explanations and promises of reform. 
     John Hirschfeld, the member charged with carefully reading
all the documents in this case, complained about NAC's budget,
which he clearly thought to be simplistic with its category of
"other" that conveniently provides the $27,700 needed to balance
the NAC budget this year. 
     He then asked whether AER and the ACB were prepared to
underline their strong endorsement of NAC with contributions. Ms.
Westman explained that both organizations are sponsoring members
of NAC and therefore make an annual contribution based on their
size. Mr. Hirschfeld then said, "So the answer would be that they
do not?" [meaning that neither organization is likely to make
large grants to NAC]. Ms. Westman replied, "Yes they do" [an
answer which reflected a narrow interpretation of Mr.
Hirschfeld's question]. At that point the subject was dropped,
but it was clear that the Committee understood that no matter how
noisy AER and ACB support of NAC may be, it will never translate
into substantial financial assistance. 
     Several Committee members raised questions to which NAC
representatives gave misleading answers. When asked if it were
true that NAC standards prevent member agencies from employing
blind orientation and mobility instructors, Ms. Westman answered
that they do not. Mr. Gashel was left to point out that, since
the standards require that such teachers be certified by AER,
which does not allow blind professionals to be certified, the
effect of the standard is to prevent blind people from teaching
cane travel.   Dr. Welsh said directly that there was nothing to
prevent NFB members from becoming members of the NAC Board, a
statement which is technically correct. Mr. Gashel, however,
explained that, since the NFB is not an agency seeking
accreditation or a sponsoring member of NAC, there is no
mechanism by which NFB representatives could be elected to the
Board--a concept rendered ludicrous by the long and painful
history of Board harassment of NFB representatives in the early
days of the accrediting body. 
     The Committee then spent some little time fretting over the
problems that would be faced by the thirteen NAC-accredited
agencies on NAC's list of post-secondary institutions, if NAC
were to be removed from the Secretary's list. Dr. Welsh admitted
again that none of the thirteen received federal money now that
they would not be entitled to, even if NAC were off the list, and
Mr. Gashel pointed out that many other NAC-accredited agencies do
post-secondary instruction of various kinds despite their not
having been included on NAC's list of thirteen. 
     At this point one member of the Committee showed a shrewd
grasp of the central question facing the Committee. The text is
lifted from the official transcript prepared by the Department of
Education. Here is what she said:

     SISTER MARY ANDREW: I was a reader in May, '91, and had
worked my way through a considerable stack of material before the
agency withdrew its petition at that time--while the issue of
whether it would dissolve was being dealt with.
     I am now more up to date on that issue, and I think it's
important to think about the link between the agency's function
as an accrediting agency and being on the Secretary's list. If
the agency were not on the Secretary's list, it could continue as
an accrediting agency. It could continue to accredit the thirteen
post-secondary programs and the other eighty-three programs that
it now has and any additional programs that would apply for that
accreditation. States could continue to recognize NAC for
purposes of dispersing their vocational rehabilitation funds if
they so choose.
     My concern, and I think I have it clear now, is whether we
would be hurting students if this agency were not on the
Secretary's list, and I think the answer to that question is that
as of now we would not be hurting any students if this agency
were not on the Secretary's list because no students in post-
secondary programs accredited by this agency are now applying for
or receiving Title IV funding. And even in the States that
require accreditation by NAC for vocational rehab funding, they
don't require that NAC have recognition by the Secretary.
     So I want to suggest that we look at the issue in a narrower
framework than the future of NAC, because NAC can work out its
future apart from action that would be taken by this group
regarding recognition by the Secretary.
     I'm suggesting this because I think this is very complex.
There's a lot of strongly-held belief on both sides of the issue,
but I think that's almost irrelevant to the work of this
Committee because there isn't any current link to any Federal
mandate in terms of eligibility for programs.

     The Committee continued to wrangle and agonize among
themselves over the complex matter before them. An excerpt from
their discussion will demonstrate their perplexity: 

     MR. KUNKEL: I want to present a case that says that here's
an organization [NAC] that was not a full enough organization the
last time we met even to present the status of its business.
Here's an organization in which our own staff found two criteria
very, very weak, one of which is the whole health of the
organization.
     So I'm sitting here wondering at what point do we really say
an agency is so weak in any of the Secretary's criteria that we
would say to the Secretary, "This body is not a reliable body to
do business in the name of the Secretary" I am very close to
saying that about what I've heard here today--what I saw six
months ago when hardly a person could come into this room and
tell us about a board meeting that was going to go on, at which
it sounded to me today like the board meeting even voted to
dissolve at that meeting.
     So I think there's total, strong evidence to say that the
weaknesses that the staff found are not corrected. In my
judgment, they are even more profound than the way they were
written up. At what time do we finally sit back and say, "The
word is no. We recommend to the Secretary that you do not
continue this body on your list"? They know precisely what they
ought to do. They ought to get their shop in order, and they
ought to demonstrate in performance the kinds of things we've
heard said hopefully today.
     The history of this presentation, the hopeful message, was a
really short history. In fact, I'm not sure it was even history
yet. I heard hope in the future. I heard no accomplished record.
I hear everything is going downhill instead of uphill.
     So why should we tell the Secretary to continue recognition,
even for a year? Let's tell the Secretary, we recommend no--if
the Secretary in a more caring way wants to give them another six
months or a year, it's totally in his prerogative. But we looked
at the data on a bankrupt program and a bankrupt dollar, and
there is no reason to keep saying yes.
     CHAIRMAN TROW: Thank you Richard. Bernard?
     DR. FRYSHMAN: Yes. Richard, you said two things. You talked
about the bankrupt program and bankrupt dollar.
     MR. KUNKEL: Yes.
     DR. FRYSHMAN: Could you expand on where you see the bankrupt
program?
     MR. KUNKEL: I'm not at all satisfied with the evidence about
why groups were moved on. Apparently there was no body to carry
on the business. That's a bankrupt program of an accrediting
agency, as far as I'm concerned. And I don't care whether the
number's one or four. They have not been carrying on the business
of an accrediting body as far as I'm concerned.
     DR. FRYSHMAN: I just want to continue with you, because you
were also the head of an accrediting body. I'm looking for
clarification in my own mind, and I'll use you as a sounding
board, if I may. Are their standards satisfactory to you?
     MR. KUNKEL: I'm not making judgment on their standards. I'm
making a judgment on two of the Secretary's criteria for
compliance. I'm very concerned about the overall carrying out of
their business and their financial stability and a workforce to
carry off their task. I'm paraphrasing the language, but it's in
the compliance criteria, and you know it is.
     DR. FRYSHMAN: But in terms of the standards per se, that's--
     MR. KUNKEL: That's not the grounds I'm finding, so I don't
want to debate their standards.
     DR. FRYSHMAN: Okay, all right. That's--
     MR. KUNKEL: My argument is based on two strong criteria that
I think they ought to behave positively and the evidence is weak.
     DR. FRYSHMAN: The reason I'm pushing in this direction is
twofold. Number one, I do respect the judgment of staff. I think
that they had an opportunity to review this agency in a way that
I didn't, and I suspect they were aware of all the difficulties
and all the problems and so forth. Based on the report they gave,
my judgment is that NAC does meet the standards in large measure.
     The other thing that concerns me, and I have other concerns
too, but the main, the big concern that's troubling everybody, is
the--well, the virtual bankruptcy, the money problem. But I would
venture to say that they're not the first accrediting agency to
suddenly come up against the terrible drop in assets.
     We had one this morning...I was part of the group about five
years ago that voted to ignore the fact that that agency lost as
much money as they did and gave them another chance to continue.
     Richard, were you there too? I think so.
     MR. KUNKEL: Yes. I'm not going to let that be a norm.
     DR. FRYSHMAN: No, no, no. [Laughter.]
     DR. FRYSHMAN: I hope that we won't ever find that, but it
seems to me that what this agency is facing is not the sort of
thing that happens all the time. I'm influenced by the fact that
this agency has been in existence since 1975 as a recognized
body. This isn't a Johnny-come-lately group. This isn't a fly-by-
night organization. They're a body which has merited the
confidence of the Secretary for many, many years, longer than
most other agencies on the list, I would venture to say.
     So dropping them is, I think, a precipitous--well, I
wouldn't say it's a precipitous action, but it's a serious
action. It's something that I would not do easily, and I'm
groping and grasping for a reason to convince everybody else, in
particular myself, why we should not do this sort of thing. I--
     MR. KUNKEL: You won't get any help from me. [Laughter.]
     DR. FRYSHMAN: Just on the face of it, I would be inclined to
give the benefit of the doubt to the staff report as it now
stands. I'm troubled by the lack of funds, but I haven't seen
anything of a fatal nature. I do recognize the emotion in the
letters, in the presentations, the fact that so many people came
at such terrible inconvenience--I appreciate it and I understand
that there's a real serious factor taking place here, but as was
pointed out earlier, this kind of energy put into creating
another agency would have had some very positive outcomes, and I
suspect that this body would have been prepared to recognize an
additional agency if there were no possibility of coming
together.
     I do sense also that there is a willingness or at least a
readiness on the part of this body to open its procedures. I
think we've all seen situations where there were groups of
individuals at loggerheads, and they have come close. We have an
almost merger, and I suspect that that's also something that
could continue.
     What interests me, and this was mentioned by people whose
accomplishments are unquestioned, there are still ninety-six
bodies which seek accreditation. That means there is something
valuable. It's true, it's ninety-six out of five hundred--that's
not a very impressive number.
     Nonetheless, for many of these organizations, money is not a
consideration. They're not there because they want access to the
Federal dollar. They're there for a different reason. I don't
really understand that reason, and I wish some of these schools
were here to discuss that with us, but I see these all as
favorable indicators, and if I had to vote right now, I probably
would vote to support the staff recommendation.
     CHAIRMAN TROW: You may have to pretty soon. George?
     DR. PRUITT: Yes, I have a question, again for the staff. The
customary action of the Committee is five years, and staff is
recommending two, and I think I read in that that you're trying
to give them a shortened time period because the jury's out.
There's a built-in skepticism from the staff view about whether
this [agency] is going to make it or not.
     MR. ROGERS [member of the Committee's staff]: That's
correct, Dr. Pruitt. We also thought that a lesser amount of time
would not be sufficient for them to carry through the fund-
raising effort which they are now making and the reorganization
of their program.
     DR. PRUITT: The number--I am confused about the numbers
here. I thought the number we were dealing with was thirteen
institutions. 
     MR. ROGERS: That is correct.
     DR. PRUITT: So it's not--
     CHAIRMAN TROW: Post-secondary. The rest are--
     DR. PRUITT: The scope of this group is concerned about
thirteen?
     MR. ROGERS: Yes.
     DR. PRUITT: They have ninety-six that they can look to for
support? Usually accrediting [agencies]depend on the people they
accredit to provide the resources, but if their universe of
resources is limited to thirteen institutions, it's unlikely that
that's going to be sufficient.
     MR. SAUNDERS [Director, Higher Education Program Management
Service]: Let me clarify that for just a second. It's only the
thirteen post-secondary institutions that you and we are
concerned about. The staff report for two years is yes, a very
minimal period, and we have indicated in there that if you go
along with that, we intend to monitor this very closely over the
two years.
     It's going to be very difficult to monitor it in a very
short period of time because there'll be very few institutions
coming up. But we will go on those site visits. We will be sure
what standards are, that the standards are met. We've been on one
site visit in the last year. That's all we had an opportunity to
go on. That one appeared to be satisfactory, but that's only a
sample of one.
     CHAIRMAN TROW: Sister Mary, and then Richard.
     MR. ROGERS: I did attend both a board meeting and a
committee meeting also.
     CHAIRMAN TROW: I'm sorry.
     SISTER MARY ANDREW: Again, I want to emphasize that, as I
see it, an action on our part to recommend to the Secretary not
to continue to recognize this agency doesn't have anything to do
in any direct way with its future as an accrediting agency
because it is already recognized by the ninety-six or the
thirteen or the however many you want to count for reasons that
have nothing to do with Federal Title IV programs, and it would
be entirely possible for them to continue to function; to build
their financial base; to grow; and, if at some point it becomes
important for some of their members to qualify for Title IV
funding, to come back in here again and ask to be recognized.
     So there are other agencies that function very well without
ever being on the Secretary's list because there isn't a need for
them to be there for purposes of Title IV funding and because
they don't choose to be there for purposes of recognition of
their procedures.
     So these are two separate issues in my mind.
     MR. PAPPAS [Executive Director of the Committee Staff]:
Maybe I can just clarify one thing--the point about Title IV.
Accreditation and recognition by the Secretary are used in a
number of ways: by States, local governments, and other kinds of
agencies, besides Title IV; just so you all know that Title IV is
not just the only thing that recognition does.
     SISTER MARY ANDREW: But we have clarified that vocational
rehabilitation funding does not depend on the Secretary's
recommendation.
                      ____________________
     And so the discussion ranged over the issues in question.
Gradually it became evident that a majority of the Committee
neither grasped fully the actual situation which NAC has created
for itself nor had the courage to take a stand other than that
recommended by its staff. Not a single member of the Committee
was prepared to speak in support of NAC, but most of them were
unwilling to take a part, however peripheral, in ending the
group's agony. John Hirschfeld, the man designated as the reader
in this case, eventually moved that the committee accept the
staff recommendation to continue NAC on the Secretary's list for
two more years with close supervision and audit reports required.
The general attitude of the Committee was captured accurately by
the member who seconded this motion. This is the comment he made
in explanation of his second: 

     MR. GUESS: I appreciate people who wage a struggle for
survival, and my reading of the material presented here today,
listening to the testimony that I heard, indicated to me that we
have an organization who has been in business for a number of
years who hit upon difficult times. I guess during the course of
my life, have also hit upon difficult times and appreciated those
who gave me an opportunity to fail again.
     And it would appear to me that the only thing they've asked
for is the opportunity to fail. That also gives them the
opportunity to succeed, and I think that's important based on my
own personal travails in life that people be given.
                      ____________________
     There you have it, and with that statement the Committee
voted eight to two to recommend to Secretary of Education Lamar
Alexander that NAC be given a chance to fail yet again. No one on
the Committee could find a good word to say for NAC or even
muster much hope for its future. Steve Pappas, Executive Director
of the Committee's staff, characterized the recommendation to the
Secretary as constituting a message of grave warning to NAC, not
a mandate. 
     NAC had hoped for five more years of recognition by the
Department of Education. It was looking for vindication and
renewed respectability. Instead the best it can expect is close
supervision and the ignominy of frequent audit reports. That is
the most that can come out of this debacle, for by mid-March
Secretary Alexander had still not made a final decision. NAC may
boast of this experience as a victory, but another such and NAC,
like King Pyrrhus before it, will be undone.


[PHOTO: Barbara Pierce standing at podium microphone. CAPTION:
Barbara Pierce, Presdent of the National Federation of the Blind
of Ohio.]

                 NAC DOWN FOR THE COUNT IN OHIO
                        by Barbara Pierce

     In the March, 1992, issue of the Braille Monitor we reported
the unanimous February 18 decision of the Ohio Rehabilitation
Services Commission (ORSC) to remove NAC (the National
Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually
Handicapped) from the Commission's list of approved accrediting
bodies. It was a tremendous step forward for the blind citizens
of Ohio, so no one was surprised when NAC reacted with howls of
outrage and vehement accusations of unfair practice. 
     The next step in the implementation of the new policy was to
have it reviewed by the Joint Committee for Agency Rule Review, a
body composed of equal numbers of State Senators and
Representatives. The Committee's job is to see that state
agencies establish or revise policies only within their statutory
authority, and the Committee tries to make certain that no new
policy is in conflict with established state regulations. The
Committee's authority is restricted to these narrow statutory
questions. 
     This fact, however, did not stop the NAC defenders. They
asked to testify before the Committee, and they generated a few
letters to members of the Committee, urging that the proposed
rule change be sent back to the Commission for further
consideration. 
     In the meantime, knowing that Ohio's inclusion of NAC on its
list of approved accrediting bodies had been used by NAC
representatives in the U.S. Department of Education hearing on
February 4 (see the article elsewhere in this issue) to argue
that Ohio required NAC accreditation for agencies doing state
contract work, Robert Rabe, Administrator of the ORSC, wrote to
Secretary of Education Lamar Alexander, notifying him of the
RSC's decision. Here is Mr. Rabe's letter: 

                                                   Columbus, Ohio
                                                    March 2, 1992

Mr. Lamar Alexander, Secretary
U.S. Department of Education
Washington, D.C.

Dear Secretary Alexander:
     It is my understanding that you are considering whether to
retain certification (by the Department of Education) of the
National Accreditation Council (NAC). During this process, I
understand that you were informed by NAC that the Ohio
Rehabilitation Services Commission (ORSC) required NAC
accreditation for the purchases of rehabilitation services. This
letter is meant to inform you that the Commissioners of ORSC
unanimously voted, on February 18, 1992, no longer to require NAC
accreditation.
     We have been provided information that indicates to us that
NAC can no longer provide accreditation services on a national
basis. The deletion of NAC is projected to be effective after
final administration review by the State of Ohio and a vote by
the Commissioners on March 21, 1992.
     If you have any questions regarding this action, please
contact me.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                    Robert L. Rabe, Administrator
                                                    State of Ohio
                               Rehabilitation Services Commission
                      ____________________
     That was the text of Administrator Rabe's letter, and one
can only hope that the information it communicated was useful to
the Secretary in his deliberations. 
     March 10 was set as the date for the meeting of the Joint
Committee for Agency Rule Review at which the RSC policy was to
be considered. As president of the Ohio affiliate of the National
Federation of the Blind, I decided that I had better be present
at the hearing, and I was glad I was there. 
     The general counsel for the Rehabilitation Services
Commission presented a succinct summary of the involved process
by which the Commission went about notifying interested parties
and the general public of its intention to consider revising the
administrative rule which includes the list of approved
accrediting bodies. Interested agencies and members of the RSC's
Consumer Advisory Council received clearly written notices of the
public hearing and invitations to submit comments prior to that
meeting.
     Given the virtual programmatic and financial bankruptcy of
NAC, the National Federation of the Blind of Ohio would have been
remiss if it had done anything other than submit information to
the Commission arguing that the time was ripe for removing NAC
from its list because NAC could obviously not provide the RSC
with assurance that its member agencies had met standards of good
practice.
     The general counsel then recounted the conclusions which the
Commission had reached in the process of making its decision. He
described NAC's inability to reaccredit its member agencies in a
timely fashion and the financial crisis that has exacerbated this
grave problem. He then pointed out that the National Council of
State Agencies for the Blind, the professional organization of
public agencies serving blind consumers, had refused steadfastly
in recent years to endorse NAC despite repeated attempts by NAC
supporters to have it do so.
     This conscious refusal to take positive action on the part
of the NCSAB was interpreted by the Commission as a clear
statement of the professional organization's reservations about
NAC. The general counsel said that the Commission was uneasy
about NAC's method of recruiting the teams of professionals who
make on-site visits. He explained that CARF (the accrediting body
which evaluates general rehabilitation facilities, including an
increasing number of agencies serving the blind) temporarily
hires the professionals that do its reviews. This establishes a
professional and official relationship between CARF and the team
and helps to insure that reports will be completed quickly and
objectively.
     The long-standing NAC system of having the agency being
studied pay the team has always had the appearance of
compromising the impartiality of NAC's studies. Now that unpaid
volunteers are being recruited, there is even more reason to fear
that the system will break down. The tendency will be to find
volunteers close to home among the very group of professional
colleagues with which the agency staff work in regional and
statewide organizations. Moreover, the people most likely to rise
to the call are those who, or whose employers, are most
sympathetic to NAC and are therefore likely to underwrite the
cost of staff time away for the on-site visit. In addition, if
NAC cannot find a professional who is expert in a particular
aspect of the agency's program, the temptation will be to ignore
the gap and fill in with whoever is willing to come. The RSC does
not believe that this group of problems and policies can be
combined in a nationwide accrediting body capable of providing
trustworthy evaluations. 
     The NAC supporters were led by Dr. Richard Welsh from
Pittsburgh, who had carried out the same assignment a month
earlier before the U.S. Department of Education's Advisory
Committee. With him were two agency directors whose Ohio
facilities are currently accredited by NAC and two members of the
American Council of the Blind, including the volunteer Executive
Director of the ACB state office. Dr. Welsh covered many of the
same points he had made in the earlier hearing. The only notable
departure from his defense before the Department of Education was
his assertion that in this country there is no indicator of
excellence for accrediting bodies in this field, other than the
Secretary of Education's list of approved agencies. He then
explained that the Department had conducted an exhaustive hearing
in February examining NAC and, as a result, decided to retain NAC
on its list. The conclusion which he drew from this inaccurate
summary of the action of the Advisory Committee was that the Ohio
RSC had removed an accrediting body in good standing from its
list of approved organizations. The National Federation of the
Blind's testimony eventually corrected the misinformation
provided by Dr. Welsh, but it is interesting to note just how
much weight NAC places on the DOE list even though none of NAC's
member agencies would lose federal funds if it were to be removed
from that list.
     Although the committee patiently sifted through the tangle
of defensive explanations and self-serving justifications, the
only point in which the members seemed interested was the
question of whether the RSC had given due notice of the public
hearing and of the matter to be considered in the administrative
rule under consideration. One of the two agency directors
admitted that Ohio agencies had received the notice, and the copy
of the notice that the Committee had in its possession indicated
that the entire text of the rule had been reproduced.
     Much of the Federation's testimony was devoted to clearing
up the points of confusion created by the NAC supporters. Richard
Oestreich, Executive Director of the Vision Center of Central
Ohio, had confused and concerned the Committee by strongly
implying that if NAC accreditation were not acceptable to the
state agency, his agency, which does a great deal of business
with the RSC, would be powerless to train blind people for the
state. That would mean, he suggested with a straight face, that
blind people would not get the rehabilitation they need. It was
left for me to point out that the Cleveland Society for the
Blind, which does even more business with the state in most
years, disaffiliated from NAC almost a decade ago and continues
to contract with the state because of its CARF accreditation. The
primary ACB spokesman opined that he knew everyone at RSC
headquarters and that it was inconceivable that a public hearing
could have been planned and executed in which NAC was discussed
without his being informed. As a member of the public who was at
that crowded hearing, I could assure the Committee that plenty of
Ohioans had heard of the meeting and were present to comment. 
     As so often happens in such official gatherings, the end of
the committee meeting was anticlimactic. When all was said and
done, the Committee recognized that it had wandered into the
cross-fire between two warring parties. The members took refuge
in the narrow definition of their responsibility. There was never
any question about whether the Rehabilitation Services Commission
had the authority to remove the name of one accrediting body from
a list that it had constructed in the first place, and it was
obvious that no other statutes or regulations could conflict with
the revised RSC policy. So the Joint Committee refused to
intervene, and the administrative rule was returned to the
Rehabilitation Services Commission for final approval at its
April meeting.
     Of course, NAC representatives asked to attend the April RSC
meeting--which, at the time of this writing, has not yet
occurred. When the April meeting is held, the NAC supporters will
be addressing the body which reviewed the evidence in the first
place and voted unanimously to remove NAC from the list of
acceptable accrediting organizations.
     Even so, Yogi Berra was, of course, right: "It ain't over
'til it's over," but in Ohio it's getting close.


                A POWERFUL TESTIMONY FOR BRAILLE


     From the Editor: This article appeared in the February,
1992, Observer, the newsletter of our Montana affiliate. It is
one more evidence of the need for the emphasis we continue to
place on Braille:

     Carolyn Brock is a relatively new member of the Montana
affiliate of the National Federation of the Blind, having joined
just about a year ago. She is a French teacher at Big Sky High
School in Missoula. She also has very limited eyesight.
     Last year Mrs. Brock applied for but did not receive one of
the NFB scholarships. At that time she was not familiar with
Braille. However, the literature that came with the application,
"started me thinking about learning Braille, doing more mobility
training, and adopting various alternative techniques that have
vastly improved my life this past year," she says. She now writes
excellent grade two Braille.
     The following is excerpted from a letter of January 27,
written in Braille by Mrs. Brock, and is a powerful testimony in
support of Braille literacy:
     "You may remember that I spent four months in France this
fall. The trip was wonderful, and I learned a great deal. As I
was just starting to read Braille in English, I was very
enthusiastic about adding the French system to my repertoire.
There was no organization for the blind in the little town where
I was living, so I contacted the group in Dijon, the regional
capital. The people there were so helpful and hospitable; Charles
and Diana would not have gotten a warmer welcome. They ordered
the necessary material from Paris for me, and gave me all the
help I needed to start reading and writing French.
     "On their recommendation, I visited two organizations in
Paris during the two weeks we spent there in November. I was
always given the same enthusiastic welcome. I saw the computer
adaptations they are using: the visual enhancement and voice
synthesis systems I worked with at the University of Montana last
summer, and also the Braille display the Europeans are now using.
I was also able to order a year's subscription to a magazine in
French grade two Braille, a wonderfully sophisticated system
which reduces a text to about one-third its grade one length. I
have not been able to read in French for years, and I am
thrilled!
     "I could not have accomplished all this without the
encouragement and expertise of David Bell of the Missoula Visual
Services who not only encouraged me in learning Braille, but is
also extremely up to date about technological developments
abroad, as well as in the United States.
     "Please continue your efforts to encourage blind and
visually impaired people, adults as well as children, to learn
Braille. It has given me back my sense of literacy and put me
back in touch with the world of learning."


[PHOTO: Columbia Room, filled with seated attendees. CAPTION: As
usual, it was standing room only at the Sunday night briefing of
the 1992 Washington Seminar.]

[PHOTO: Judy Sanders hands materials to visitors to the Mercury
Room. CAPTION: Judy Sanders (right) hands out materials in the
Mercury Room as eager Federationists prepare for visits to
Capitol Hill.]

[PHOTO: Four blind students seated, preparing for dialogue of
skit. CAPTION: Left to right Heather Kirkwood (Kansas), David
Cohen (Ohio), Pam Dubel (Ohio), and Holly Pilcher (Massachusetts)
take part in "The Young and the Skillless," a skit written
especially for the Mid-Winter Conference of the National
Association of Blind Students by Jerry Whittle of Louisiana.]

                     THE WASHINGTON SEMINAR:
           HARD WORK, EXCITEMENT, AND FUN IN FEBRUARY

     In most parts of the country February is a month that needs
help. It's cold, dreary, and gray; and stimulating activity is
welcome to everyone. Federationists enthusiastically refer to the
Washington Seminar as the most important event of the winter
social season because it bursts onto the calendar at a time when
everyone is eager for some excitement. 
     This year the dates of the actual seminar were February 2 to
5, and as usual the first people on the scene were the college
and graduate students as well as other Federationists
particularly interested in the work of the National Association
of Blind Students (NABS). The Students Division's Mid-Winter
Conference was scheduled for Saturday, February 1, 1992, and by
Friday evening scores of students had checked in at the Holiday
Inn Capitol and were ready for the pre-conference party. 
     There were rumors that some people never made it to bed that
night, but everyone was on hand early Saturday morning for the
conference opening. There were a number of thought-provoking
agenda items, but far and away the funniest was a play, written
by Jerry Whittle of Louisiana and performed by a number of
members of the student division. It was titled "The Young and the
Skill-less," and it was a soap-operatic rendering of the
adventures of a lovely but skill-less young college student who
finds life-long competence and immediate personal satisfaction by
taking the advice of friends who urge her to leave school and get
the training she needs from a good adult rehabilitation center.
Much of the play's humor derived from the audience's knowing the
actors and its recognition of the character-types being
portrayed. 
     From small group discussions on the nature of equality to
presentations about two cases of injustice on university campuses
experienced by NABS members, the day was filled with stimulating
ideas and talk, and everyone learned much from the discussion.
Scott LaBarre and the other members of the NABS Board of
Directors can take well-deserved pride in the event. 
     As usual the high point of the day was the evening banquet
emceed by Ollie Cantos, President of the California Association
of Blind Students and Member of the NABS Board of Directors.
Diane McGeorge was the featured speaker for the evening, and she
gathered the themes of the day into a moving and inspirational
challenge to her audience to live up to the Federation's ideals
and to rededicate themselves to helping all blind people to
succeed. 
     Sunday, February 2, nearly a hundred people piled into the
NFB bus and several vans for the trip to Baltimore and a tour of
the National Center for the Blind and the International Braille
and Technology Center for the Blind at our national headquarters.
The group was back in time for the Associates workshop in the
afternoon and some visiting with friends before the actual
seminar began. 
     All day hundreds of eager Federationists had been pouring
into the hotel in preparation for the 5:00 p.m. briefing.
Cassette recordings of the legislative memorandum and the three
fact sheets we were to discuss with members of Congress were
circulating, and by mid-afternoon the Mercury Room, the
headquarters for data collection and material distribution, was
open for business on the second floor. As always, Sandy Halverson
and her dedicated and efficient staff ran this aspect of the
seminar with speed and accuracy, taking reports, keeping track of
appointments, and producing summary counts when Mr. Gashel needed
them. 
     By five o'clock a standing-room-only crowd of more than 400
filled the Columbia Room for the briefing. Dr. Jernigan and
President Maurer brought the group up to date on nationwide NFB
activities of national importance. Then James Gashel, Director of
Governmental Affairs, discussed the issues we were taking to
Capitol Hill and answered questions. He also announced that those
who wished to do so were encouraged to join a group attending the
Tuesday afternoon meeting of the Department of Education Advisory
Committee on Accreditation and Institutional Eligibility that
would be considering the request of the National Accreditation
Council (NAC) for five more years on the Department's list of
approved accrediting bodies. (See the article elsewhere in this
issue.) 
     As it turned out, many appointments with Members of Congress
were scheduled for Tuesday and could not be moved, so a large
percentage of Federationists in Washington were compelled to miss
the hearing. But the crowd that did attend filled the large
meeting room at the DuPont Plaza Hotel. The group was large but
silent, as Mr. Gashel had asked people to be. One small but
impressive mark of the crowd's dignity and discipline occurred
when, early in the proceedings, the chairman of the committee
indicated that the observers could now be excused so that the
committee could carry on its own discussion. His intention was to
have the NAC and third-party witnesses leave the table and return
to their seats, but virtually everyone in the audience assumed
that he wanted the room cleared. The order came as a shock and a
keen disappointment since we were there to observe the
committee's deliberations, but without a murmur or protest, or
even a word of whispered comment, the group of hundreds rose and
prepared to file out of the room. Seeing what was happening and
recognizing the misunderstanding, the chairman quickly clarified
his request, and the audience subsided again with gratitude. 
     By Wednesday afternoon every appointment had been kept and
every report filed with the Mercury crew. Federationists packed
bags, checked out, and headed for vans, trains, and airplanes.
The 1992 Washington Seminar was history, but the National
Federation of the Blind will be back next year. Our work is never
finished. The task of educating the public about blindness is
unending. There are always new people to deal with and old
acquaintances who have more to learn. 
     An excellent illustration of this exhausting truth occurred
on the Friday when people were first arriving. We have used the
Holiday Inn Capitol as our headquarters for almost ten years, and
one would hope that the staff had learned something about
treating blind hotel guests like others. But that morning hotel
maids began collecting the free-standing lamps from the rooms of
NFB guests. When Sharon Gold, President of the National
Federation of the Blind of California, asked why they were doing
so, one of the staff explained that the blind people wouldn't
need the light and they might knock over the lamps and break
valuable property. Sheryl Pickering, Sharon's roommate for the
seminar and manager of the NFB of California office, protested
that she would need the lamp to work at her computer, so the
maids retreated empty-handed. But Sharon explained the hotel's
reasoning to another Californian, Paul McIntire, who immediately
went to the front desk and demanded a ten-percent discount on his
room on the grounds that he didn't have as much light as other
hotel guests. There was a quick conference of hotel personnel,
and the missing lamps were returned. 
     No, our work has not ended, not with the 102nd Congress and
not with the Holiday Inn Capitol staff. We will return next year,
and in the meantime we will remain in contact with our Senators
and Members of Congress to insure that they remember the National
Federation of the Blind and the issues we tell them are important
to the nation's blind citizens.



[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Jon Deden.]

                   TRIBUTE TO A FEDERATIONIST
                          by Jon Deden

     From the Associate Editor: Every day Federationists go out
of their way to help other blind people who need their support or
expertise. They do it because they are dedicated to making life
better for all blind people and because the National Federation
of the Blind has supported and assisted them. For the most part
we don't think twice about this loving service. It isn't that we
take it for granted, but it is like the air we breathe--always
there when we need it. 
     Recently Dr. Jernigan received a letter from Jon Deden, an
active member of the National Federation of the Blind of Denver.
In a few lines Mr. Deden captures the spirit of Federationism as
he experienced it when he was in need. As you will see, Curtis
Chong was able and happy to help Jon Deden, but what makes this
anecdote truly worth noting is the fact that, though Curtis Chong
is as good a Federationist as we have, he is not extraordinary.
That is the true strength of the National Federation of the
Blind. Here is Jon Deden's letter: 

                                                November 22, 1991

Dear Mr. Jernigan:
     I am proud to be a member of the National Federation of the
Blind and to be affiliated with all of the wonderful people in
the organization. I can think of no one finer in the NFB than
Curtis Chong, President of the NFB in Computer Science.  
     Curtis has been of more help to me in the computer field
than anyone could ever imagine. When I first started working at
the Colorado Student Loan Program, I had no idea what type of
computer equipment to get or how to install it. I called Diane
McGeorge and asked if she could recommend anyone to help me.
Immediately she said, "I know of a great person--Curtis Chong."
Diane gave me Curtis's work number, but I was a little hesitant
to call him there for help because he didn't know me, and I hate
to bother people at work anyway.
     When I called Curtis, what I encountered was one of the
nicest people I had ever talked to--more than willing at any time
to go out of his way to help me. To say I was impressed with
Curtis would be an understatement. He was instrumental in helping
me choose the correct equipment for my job, and without his
assistance I don't think the equipment would ever have been
properly installed.
     The computer people at the Colorado Student Loan Program
worked for two days trying to get the equipment installed--to no
avail. When I finally did what I should have done in the first
place, called Curtis, within five minutes my system was up and
running!
     I recently started a new job as a Securities Examiner. Once
again Curtis was invaluable--helping me not only to get my system
to work but also assisting me to obtain the position. When I
first interviewed at the Colorado Division of Securities, they
said they would like to offer me a position if my equipment would
be compatible with their computer system, which was fairly
complicated because they use a local area network. I was unable
to convince them with the limited amount of computer knowledge I
have that my system would work, so I referred them to Curtis. He
told them that he was 99% sure that it would, but they were still
very hesitant. On at least ten separate occasions Curtis took
time out of his busy schedule to discuss the software that we
would need and to convince my superiors that my system would
work. Even after all of that, they were still skeptical and
wanted me to bring my equipment over to test on their system
before I was offered a position. Once again Curtis was there to
help get my system to work.
     Two so-called computer wizards worked for three hours but
were unable to get my system up and running. By that time it was
about 7:00 p.m. Minnesota time, and in a last ditch effort, I
called Curtis. Of course, once again, within five minutes my
system was up and running.
     Curtis Chong exemplifies what the National Federation of the
Blind is all about: the blind working together to obtain a common
goal--whether it be with employment or any facet of life.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                                        Jon Deden
                                      Board Member, NFB of Denver



         ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, THE ADA, AND THE NFB
                           by Ed Eames

     From the Editors: Ed Eames is one of the leaders of the
National Federation of the Blind of California. His article about
the Americans with Disabilities Act is worth contemplating. It
reminds us of the necessity of winning our freedom anew every
day. Here it is:

     The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) will have a
profound effect on many aspects of our lives. The National
Federation of the Blind insisted on an amendment to protect us
from some of the most invidious side effects of this mammoth
piece of legislation. This amendment guarantees our right to
refuse any accommodation we do not want, including the right to
reject front seats on buses, bulkhead seating on airplanes,
accommodation in accessible hotel rooms, etc.
     One major area of ADA regulation is public transportation.
On September 6, 1991, the Federal Register contained the new
rules regarding fixed route and paratransit service. All transit
authorities had to develop a five-year plan to show how they will
conform to these new regulations. Most of these rules are related
to making public transportation accessible for mobility impaired
people, but several of the proposed changes have a direct effect
on those of us who are blind.
     Sharon Gold, President of the National Federation of the
Blind of California, asked me to act as coordinator of issues and
activities related to public transportation and the ADA in our
state. Shortly thereafter, I received a call from Eric Foss,
President of the Kern County Chapter of the NFB of California.
The director of operations of the Bakersfield transit system had
announced that, in accordance with the ADA regulations, a blind
passenger boarding a bus at a stop where two or more routes
intersected would be required to hold up a placard with the
number of the desired bus route on it. The argument used for this
procedure was that it was part of the ADA and would speed up bus
service.
     This demand shocked me. My wife Toni and I began listing the
practical as well as the ideological reasons for our opposition
to this system. Here are some of the questions and scenarios we
conjured as we pondered its implications:
     (1) If you had a long white cane or the leash and harness
handle of a guide dog in one hand and a package, brief case, or
infant in the other, how would you display this numbered route
placard?
     (2) If you were traveling several routes in the same day,
where would you store the placards? Most women carry purses, but
most men do not. Where would men keep these items, and would
women want to add this additional bulk to their purses?
     (3) Many bus stops have shelters to protect people from
rain, cold, and heat. Why should blind people be forced to
abandon these shelters and stand at the curb, waving numbered
signs?
     (4) Who would determine the proper height at which these
signs should be displayed in order to communicate with bus
drivers?
     (5) What would happen if a blind person forgot the mandated
cards?
     (6) How is a blind visitor to Bakersfield supposed to use
the bus system without a card or cards?
     (7) If the desired bus is late, how long are we supposed to
stand at the curb waving the card?
     What made no sense was the inclusion of such a system in the
ADA transportation regulations. I couldn't believe it existed.
After consulting the voluminous September 6 Federal Register, I
found on page 45,755, Appendix D, the following:
     "Some transit properties have used colored mitts or numbered
cards to allow passengers to inform drivers of what route they
wanted to use. The idea is to prevent at a stop where vehicles
from a number of routes arrive a person with a visual impairment
from having to ask every driver whether the bus is the right
one."
     Feeling somewhat panicky, I called the National Center for
the Blind concerning this problem. President Maurer's response
was simple: "What's wrong with the old system, where a bus pulled
up, the driver opened the door, and I asked what bus is this?"
Jim Gashel had an equally acrid response: "The first bus that
passes me by because I don't have a numbered card will lead to
the fastest protest they've ever seen."
     After these comments, and with Sharon Gold's backing, Eric
approached the Bakersfield transit director once again. Our
message was simple: The public transportation regulations were
established to have the system accommodate us, not have us
accommodate the system. The Bakersfield public transportation
manager remained adamant in his commitment to numbered cards. At
this point Sharon did some persuasive telephoning, and the idea
was officially abandoned.
     In the ADA transportation regulations, the suggested use of
numbered mitts or cards is made as a suggestion of one strategy
to help accommodate blind people. However, the Bakersfield
administrator, looking for a solution to what is really a
nonexistent problem, accepted this suggestion without seeing its
implications. We persuaded him to abandon this effort before he
put the scheme into operation. Had he persisted, we would have
invoked that section of the ADA insisted on by this organization,
which permits us to refuse this or any other invidious form of
accommodation. Section D, 501, of the Americans with Disabilities
Act states:
     "Accommodations and Services. Nothing in this act shall be
construed to require an individual with a disability to accept an
accommodation, aid, opportunity, service, or benefit which such
individual chooses not to accept."


     [PHOTO/CAPTION: At 8:30 Saturday morning, February 1,
students were beginning to gather for registration at the 1992
Mid-Winter Conference of the National Association of Blind
Students.]
     [PHOTO: Room full of students seated while Barbara Pierce
speaks from podium microphone. CAPTION: The Conference opened at
9:00 a.m. with a keynote address delivered by Barbara Pierce,
Associate Editor of the BRAILLE MONITOR.]
     [PHOTO: Seven students seated together for small group
discussion. CAPTION: During the afternoon session conferees
divided into small groups for discussion of the issues raised
during the day.]

                  INTEGRITY, INDEPENDENCE, AND 
              THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
                        by Barbara Pierce

     From the Associate Editor: This speech was the keynote
address at the mid-winter conference of the National Association
of Blind Students, conducted February 1, 1992, immediately
preceding the National Federation of the Blind's Washington
Seminar:

     When I was first invited to deliver this keynote address, I
began thinking about the most valuable gifts I have received from
the Federation; or, to put it another way, if I had the capacity
to wave a magic wand over you this morning, what are the
Federation gifts I would bestow upon you right now? After reading
over what I prepared to say, I now realize that perhaps I have
left out two of the most important ones. Therefore, I would like
to take a moment at the beginning to say that fun of the kind
that you had last evening getting to know all these wonderful,
witty people here is certainly a valuable gift. You have
discovered that already. The other gift is love--the kind of love
that springs up among us here is something that is almost unique
in organizations like this one. Just because I'm not talking
about either of these two gifts, I don't intend to discount their
importance. 
     I found the Federation long after my student days, but I
have been aware, since the first days of my exposure to
Federation ideas and thinking, how valuable it would have been
for me and, yes, how much different my life would have been, had
I been exposed to the Federation when I was in college. That is
true even though I went to school long before the siren song of
the disabled students' office and the all-pervasive temptation to
let the experts do it. 
     Open-minded consideration and adoption of Federation
principles develop one's intellectual integrity and moral
toughness, for it is a fact that every world view, every decision
that we make have both advantages and disadvantages--that is,
they do if they have any significance at all. It behooves us all
to get used to analyzing those advantages and disadvantages in
order to understand the consequences of our decisions and
actions. 
     For example, escort services: these have sprung up in recent
years for all students who happen to be traveling alone late at
night and who feel uncomfortable and would like company. That's a
fine thing. As the mother of two female college students, I'm
very happy that there are escort services. I know of some
disabled students' offices, however, that have begun piggy-
backing an especially insidious disabled-student service
(particularly for blind students) onto the general escort service
program. The idea is that escorts will be available to accompany
a blind student wherever and whenever he or she wishes to go. Now
this is a vastly convenient thing. It means that you don't have
to learn the campus; you can crook your little finger--if you're
lucky enough to find someone on duty--and an escort will take you
where you want to go. All you lose is your independence, your
autonomy, and, most destructive of all, the chance to have other
people think of you and treat you as an adult. 
     Or how about note-takers? Note-takers have become more and
more fashionable, it seems to me, in disabled students' offices.
There are appropriate times and situations for them. I remember a
deaf student who was in one of my husband's classes at Oberlin.
She was a pretty good lip-reader, but sometimes the other
students forgot to face her when they spoke. It made sense for
her to glance over at what her note-taker was writing in order to
keep up with the discussion. The alternative would have been an
interpreter, which would have been more expensive and more
intrusive. 
     It is understandable why more and more blind students are
being encouraged to use note-takers as the solution to the
problem of getting class notes. If you do not have handwriting
that is legible and if you do not wish to invest twice or three
times the amount of time the lecture took to listen repeatedly to
a recording, you have a problem. Even though I am married to a
professor, I assure you that they are like the rest of us--most
of what they say is a waste of time. There are pearls to be
found--ideas and arguments that are important; but it is better
if you can write down the pearls for yourself. The problem with
note-takers is, of course, that they write down what they think
are pearls, which may not be at all what you need to remember.
You end up with notes that don't provide the information you need
for the exam. But if you are one of the increasing number of
students who are being denied Braille instruction and are not
taught to use Braille note-writing equipment like the slate and
stylus or the Braille 'n Speak, you have a real problem. What are
you going to do? The obvious answer, learn Braille, seems hard
and too time-consuming. 
     I don't know how to break this news to you gently, but the
ultimate disadvantage of using human note-takers is that out in
the real world, where employers are hiring and paying people to
do jobs, they don't supply note-takers. If you have a family
business and can enter as a senior executive, you might begin
with a secretary, who will follow you around, writing things down
for you, but most of us begin at the bottom of the employment
ladder, and we are expected to write down what we need to know
and read it for ourselves. This is not a skill that is cultivated
by the use of student note-takers.
     How about managing readers? There are many disabled
students' offices that insist upon hiring, supervising, paying,
and passing out the assignments to all readers for blind
students. Again, this way of handling readers is convenient for
the blind student. You don't have to cope with all the paper
work; you don't have to organize people; you don't have to worry
about recruiting readers or arrange to be in designated places at
certain times to hand out or collect cassettes--all very
convenient. The only problem is that you are assigned Russian
readers who can't read Russian, economics readers who can't
describe graphs, math readers who don't know a parenthesis from a
bracket. The disabled students' office is closed when you need to
pick up the tapes. Practically illiterate people with work study
grants record your poetry assignments. And the worst of it is
that you don't acquire the managerial and supervisory experience
that would enhance your employability, and without assuming the
responsibility of paying and supervising your readers directly,
you have no control over them and have difficulty exerting the
authority to have them follow your directions. 
     In short, applying the experience and the wisdom of the
National Federation of the Blind in the cases I have just been
talking about (learning to travel, to use Braille, and to take
control of one's academic and personal life) cultivates self-
confidence and tough-mindedness. The Federation's philosophy
breeds courage and builds the strength of purpose to become
anything you have the capacity to and also the honesty to face
hard truths about yourself. 
     When I was in college, there was philosophy. I simply had to
learn that I do not have a philosophical turn of mind. It is all
silliness and mud to me, and my poor performance in the course
had nothing to do with the large reading list. I found those
books and articles crashingly dull. It was very easy at the time
to tell myself that I was not doing well in philosophy because I
was blind, but the truth was that I was not a philosopher.
Actually, that was a distressing but necessary thing for me to
learn. 
     Acquiring and cultivating all of these fine characteristics
is not like taking a pill every morning; you can't just swallow
it and be done for the day. In meetings such as this one and, if
I'm doing my job correctly, in the pages of the Braille Monitor,
Federationists grapple with the hard issues and the temptations
that face us all as blind people. It is this struggle that forges
character. Observing and assisting those whom one respects as
they work their way toward healthy solutions to their problems
makes it easier to choose and achieve one's personal goals. The
capacity to weigh options and consciously to reach for the more
valuable is one important measure of maturity. 
     The danger for each one of us is that, when we go back home,
when we are alone, we will let the low expectations of other
people compromise our own integrity, independence, and growing
self-respect. Despite what people say about how much they respect
blind people and admire what we do, it is true that most of them
do not believe we have very much capacity. That is why it is
vitally important for each of us to come to meetings such as this
one, to attend chapter meetings, to attend state and national
conventions, and to read the Braille Monitor faithfully, because
being in contact with other Federationists who are struggling
with the same issues and coming to healthy conclusions will
inspire and encourage each one of us as we walk through the
individual complications of our own days. We do serve as role
models for one another, and it is not that those of us who are
senior to you college students parade around ready to inspire and
to guide you along the way. When I first came into the
Federation, I remember being staggered to realize that there were
people throughout this movement (a lot of them younger than I
was) who thought nothing of being dropped off at an airport,
checking luggage, finding out what gate they needed and then
going to it, and beating off the wheelchair jockeys. At the other
end they reversed the process, finding the right luggage carousel
and, most amazing of all, identifying their own suitcases. Just
thinking about going to the airport, even with my husband,  made
me feel weak. But I looked around and thought: if they can do it,
there is no reason why I can't. If anybody had told me then that
I would spend my life on airplanes, I probably would have fainted
dead away. But luckily we don't know what the future holds, and
therefore we take one step at a time. 
     I think of Michael Baillif. Who would have thought that a
blind student could apply for and get a Watson Fellowship, which
is strictly for travel and research in Europe, and then could hie
himself off to England and Scandinavia, to look at services for
blind people and analyze them independently? What a wonderful
example for all of us Michael is. 
     It's important for us to know about those students who are
out there, not only surviving Chem Lab 101, but majoring in
chemistry, linguistics, economics--all the disciplines that
people believe we can't master.  It's important for us to know
that others have blazed the trail and to draw from them the
inspiration that knowledge gives to us.
     Contrary to what a lot of people would have you believe, the
National Federation of the Blind does not impose off-the-rack
solutions to problems and situations. Rather it teaches a way of
looking at blindness and the world that strips away
preconceptions and enables us to look in a clear-eyed way at our
actual choices. The Federation does not so much provide answers
as equip us with the tools to reach the answers that we need.
     Should blind students use the services of disabled students'
offices? It depends. It depends on how paternalistic or open-
minded the office staff are. It depends on how bureaucratic the
institution is--can you get things done without using the office,
or do faculty members listen only to the experts? If that is the
case, you will probably have to convert the staff into seeing the
world from your point of view. Do they intend from first to last
to spoon-feed disabled students, or is the driving force in the
office the conviction that disabled students should be encouraged
to do as much as possible for themselves? All of these
considerations will determine how much you work with the disabled
students' office or how insistent you have to be that you will do
things independently. 
     Should blind students do all the work assigned in a
particular course? The simple, and I hope obvious, answer is of
course they should. But I remember an East Asian history course I
took when I was in college in which the professor was perturbed
because people did not have a clear grasp of the geography of
Southeast Asia. One day he handed out blank outline maps of the
region and said, "Your assignment is to draw the national
boundaries, color and label the countries, and indicate and label
the major rivers and cities that appear on this map. You will
learn the geography of Southeast Asia, and you will be
responsible for this information on the next exam." 
     I went to him after class and said, "I can hire a reader to
color the map, but I wonder if that is the most constructive use
of my reader funds. Perhaps we can work out some other way for me
to master the information." 
     He said, "I certainly didn't intend for this assignment to
apply to you. There is no reason why you should learn the
geography of Southeast Asia." 
     I said, "If that's the way you feel about it, I will turn in
the map because I insist on being held responsible for the
information. If you have geographic material on the examination,
I assume we'll figure out some way for me to communicate to you
that I know the locations of the cities, rivers, and national
boundaries of Southeast Asia. But the question is, should I
physically turn in the colored map if there is no way for me
personally to create the thing?" We agreed that there wasn't any
reason for me to turn in the map but that I would answer the
question on the exam, which is in fact what happened. 
     I cannot say that I exhibited the same Federation attitudes
in that philosophy course I mentioned to you earlier. First of
all, it was my sophomore year, and I still didn't know which end
was up. I really thought that my inability to get through the
reading was that there was so much of it. It was really that I
just didn't understand philosophy, and I didn't care whether a
tree falling in an empty forest made a noise. But I allowed the
professor to let me off the hook on some of the reading. It
didn't help me, it eroded his respect for me and all blind
students, and I certainly didn't do any better in the course; I
still got a C-plus. But we all make some mistakes. 
     What can you do when you find yourself in a situation in
which you physically cannot do some of the work? I think about
biology laboratories. My lab partner and I worked out an
arrangement whereby she looked through the microscope, and my job
was to know what she was supposed to see. Then we kept working at
the lab until she actually saw and understood what she was
looking at and could describe it to me and draw it. It seemed to
be a fine system. She ultimately saw what she was supposed to,
which gave her an advantage over a number of the other students
in the class. It was a system that worked fine for me while
helping my partner, and I was able to do well on the biology lab
exams. There was no way that I physically could see the things I
was supposed to through the microscope; I had to devise a fair
and workable alternative.  
     Here is another example, and a tough one--should those with
residual sight use it or the alternative techniques of blindness?
Again, it depends. Is the eye condition stable? Are you likely to
lose vision from other causes later on? Can you read for hours
together at several hundred words per minute without fatigue, and
in varying amounts of light? Can you honestly say to yourself
that you can travel anywhere day or night in safety, or do you
have to say, as long as there aren't steps, or as long as I've
been there before? The decision depends on what your skills
really are. It behooves us all to have as broad a set of tools to
work with as we can, and the problem with the alternative
techniques of blindness is that you cannot learn them and then
tidily put them away in the toolbox until you need them. You have
to keep using them from time to time and sometimes fairly
steadily if you're going to be confident enough to depend on
them. Finally, you have to know when to use each of your tools. 
     I have one last example for your consideration. When should
we as blind people fight for equal treatment, and when should we
fight for equality? Equal treatment occurs, for example,  when
all students are assigned right-handed desks for taking exams.
Left-handed students would be expected to use those right-handed
desks. Everybody has received exactly the same treatment.
Equality, on the other hand, demands that you provide some left-
handed desks for those members of the class who are left-handed. 
     In the Federation's ongoing debates with bus companies about
front-row seating for blind passengers, what we want (because it
is appropriate) is equal treatment. There is nothing about
blindness that prevents one from standing in a crowded bus or
walking back to an empty seat in the rear. If one has no
complicating condition such as old age or arthritis, which may
make movement difficult, it is appropriate to insist on equal
treatment from the bus company. But there are other times when
equal treatment, such as handing a Braille reader a print
examination, would not be appropriate or fair. In this case
equality demands that there be reasonable accommodation. All of
these are situations in which there is no clear, crisp answer
that can be applied like a band-aid. You must analyze the problem
accurately and open-mindedly.
     Integrity, independence, self-respect, discipline, and
toughness: these are all among the most valuable gifts of the
Federation. If you dare, they are yours for the cultivating.
Welcome to the 1992 mid-winter conference of the National
Association of Blind Students.








                 ******************************
     If you or a friend would like to remember the National Federation of the
Blind in your will, you can do so by employing the following language:
     "I give, devise, and bequeath unto National Federation of the Blind,
1800 Johnson Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21230, a District of Columbia
nonprofit corporation, the sum of $_____ (or "_____ percent of my net estate"
or "The following stocks and bonds: _____") to be used for its worthy purposes
on behalf of blind persons."
                 ******************************

[PHOTO/CAPTION: One of the most spectacular landmarks in
Charlotte is the beautiful Calvary Church, the largest house of
worship in the Carolinas.]

                 TOURS WITH ALLURE IN CHARLOTTE
                       by Wayne E. Shevlin

     From the Associate Editor: Wayne Shevlin is the first vice
president of the National Federation of the Blind of North
Carolina and the man in charge of organizing the special tours
during the 1992 convention that will help to make this year's
visit to the Tar Heel State our most memorable. Here is what he
has to say: 

     It won't be long now until it will be time for our National
Convention in Charlotte, and that means tours. We think we have
several things lined up this year that you will really enjoy.

                        SATURDAY, JUNE 27

                       The Railroad Museum

     We have a tour of the Railroad Museum in Spencer, about an
hour and a half from Charlotte. Spencer, halfway between
Washington, D.C., and Atlanta, was at one time the main repair
facility for Southern Railways and is listed as a National
Historic site. This tour consists of such things as the
roundhouse; several restored posh antique railroad cars; other
transportation from a dugout canoe to a single-seater airplane;
and the highlight of the tour, a ride on a train. On Saturday,
the train will be pulled by a diesel engine, but if your plans
allow you to take this tour on Thursday, July 2, the train will
be pulled by a restored steam locomotive. As mentioned, this tour
will be offered again on Thursday, and the cost is $15 and
includes transportation and the price of admission.

                            Old Salem

     We will offer a tour of Old Salem, which is an eighteenth-
century town founded by devout Moravians and is recognized as one
of the most authentic restorations in the country. You can smell
the bread baking as you visit the Winkler Bakery, hear the gentle
taps of the tinsmith's hammer, visit the Old Salem Tavern, and
smell the smoke of the wood fires from the Market Fire House.
Knowledgeable hosts and hostesses, some in dress of the period,
are stationed in each building to welcome you, demonstrate
crafts, answer questions, and provide information. You will have
plenty of time to shop for arts and crafts. There will be about a
two-hour ride each way to Old Salem, and the cost will be $25,
which includes transportation and the tour.

                       The Charlotte Tour

     We have one more item of interest planned for Saturday. This
is a tour of the City of Charlotte, which is known as the Queen
City. This is a bus tour and includes a visit to the Mint Museum,
the first Mint in the United States; a ride through Myers Park,
which is listed in the National Register of historic 
neighborhoods; a view of the rapidly-changing skyline of the
city; and many other points of interest. You can get to know
Charlotte, the host city of the 1992 convention. This tour will
be offered again on Sunday, June 28, and will cost $15.

                         SUNDAY, JUNE 28

                     The North Carolina Zoo

     The first tour on Sunday is a visit to the North Carolina
Zoo in Asheboro, about a two-hour ride from Charlotte. This will
be an all-day trip. The North Carolina Zoo has been called one of
the best habitat zoos in the world. Visitors are not separated
from the animals by fences but by moats and other natural
barriers. Besides the aviary, where you spend time among the
birds and small animals who live there, the Zoo includes
gorillas, elephants, zebras, giraffes, rhinoceros, many types of
deer, and many other species of animals. You may take a tram from
place to place in the zoo. Wheelchairs and scooters are available
for those who need them. The cost of this tour is $18, which
includes transportation and admission.

                            Carowinds

     The other activity we have planned for Sunday is a visit to
Carowinds. This is an eighty-three-acre theme park outside of
Charlotte. The park includes water rides; a monorail; a sky ride;
and the Vortex, a five-and-a-half million dollar roller coaster
on which passengers stand to travel along two thousand feet of
track. In addition to the rides, there are also several shows
offered depending on the day. These include Country and Western,
Broadway, and Tribute to Rock and Roll Shows. The price of
admission is $28, which includes transportation, all the rides,
and whichever shows are playing on that day. This tour will also
be offered on Thursday afternoon, July 2.

                        THURSDAY, JULY 2

                         The Pig Pickin'

     We have an activity planned called a Pig Pickin'. You might
well ask what's a "Pig Pickin'"? It's what we in these here parts
call a Bar-B-Q. North Carolina Bar-B-Q pork is unlike any Bar-B-Q
you have ever tasted. Along with the food there will be beer and
music provided for your Thursday evening entertainment. Y'all
come. We will also be offering the Carowinds and Railroad Museum
tours again.

     Please fill out the Tour Registration Form, which follows.
For those of you who receive the Braille Monitor in a medium
other than print, please provide the following information along
with your payment: tour, date desired (if offered more than
once), number of tickets for each tour, and total payment due. We
also need your name, address, and telephone number. Please make
your check or money order payable to National Federation of the
Blind of North Carolina (NFB of N.C.), and mail to NFB of N.C.
Tours, P. O. Box 18087, Raleigh, North Carolina 27619.
     Tour registration forms and payment must be received on or
before May 15 so that we can make the final preparations. Check
with the North Carolina suite for updated information about tours
and about where to pick up your tickets.
=================================================================
                     **********************
                     TOUR REGISTRATION FORM
                     **********************

                    Departure      Price     #of       Amount
                    Time                     Tickets

SATURDAY, JUNE 27

Railroad             1:00 PM       $15       _____     $_____
Old Salem           10:00 AM       $25       _____     $_____
Charlotte Tour       1:30 PM       $15       _____     $_____


SUNDAY, JUNE 28

Zoo                 10:00 AM       $18       _____     $_____
Carowinds            1:00 PM       $28       _____     $_____
Charlotte Tour       2:00 PM       $15       _____     $_____


THURSDAY, JULY 2

Carowinds            1:00 PM       $28       _____     $_____
Railroad             1:00 PM       $15       _____     $_____
Pig Pickin'          5:00 PM       $20       _____     $_____


                         Total Amount of Payment       $_____


Name ____________________________________________________________

Address _________________________________________________________

City _______________________   State ________     Zip ___________

Phone Number ____________________________________________________

                     CONVENTION ATTRACTIONS

     From the Associate Editor: Every year's National Convention
is an absolutely unique event. The agenda items, the exhibits,
the new friends and business acquaintances: all these give each
convention its own character and significance. Some activities
lend a luster to the convention in part because they do take
place every year and provide helpful fixed points in the whirl of
events. In this category are the meetings of the Resolutions
Committee and the Board of Directors, the annual banquet, and
many seminars and workshops of the various divisions and
committees. Here is a partial list of activities during the
convention that are being planned by a number of Federation
groups. Presidents of divisions and committee chairs have
provided the information. The pre-convention agenda will list the
locations of all events taking place before convention
registration on Monday, June 29. The convention agenda will
contain listings of all events taking place after that time.

                       Associate Workshops

     The Committee on Associates will present a workshop on
successfully selling associates for individuals interested in
surmounting great obstacles--themselves--and furthering the aim
of the greatest organization of blind persons in the world. It is
planned for Wednesday noon, July 1, and will last not more than
one hour. The location will be announced, and the workshop will
actually begin twenty minutes after the morning session ends.

                        Braille Workshop

     The NFB Parents of Blind Children Division is pleased to
accept the offer of Claudell Stocker, Head of the Braille
Development Section of the National Library for the Blind and
Physically Handicapped, to conduct a three-hour Braille workshop
for parents who attend our 1992 NFB National Convention in
Charlotte, North Carolina. She is the author of four textbooks:
Modern Methods of Training Braille (American Printing House for
the Blind); Listening for the Visually Impaired (Charles Thomas
Publishing Company, Springfield, Illinois); A Remedial Primer for
Teaching Braille Reading (State of Kansas, Rehabilitation Center
for the Blind, Topeka, Kansas); and Braille Writing Simplified
(unpublished). In her current position as head of the Braille
Development Section at the National Library Service for the Blind
and Physically Handicapped, she deals with issues of
certification and training of Braille teachers and is responsible
for planning the direction of Braille research and development.
     The workshop will be conducted the evening of Wednesday,
July 1, from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. The exact location of the
workshop will be in the NFB Convention Agenda, which you will
receive when you register for the convention in Charlotte. A
small fee of $5 will help cover the cost of a slate and stylus
and other materials. The workshop is limited to twenty-five
persons on a first-come, first-served basis. You may reserve a
spot for yourself in the workshop by sending a check in the
amount of $5, made payable to the NFB Parents of Blind Children
Division, together with the following information: name, address,
phone, reason for interest in this workshop (parent, other
relative, blind adult, professional, or other) and level of
Braille competence already achieved. Send registration to Barbara
Cheadle, President, NFB Parents Division, 1800 Johnson St.,
Baltimore, Maryland 21230.

[PHOTO: Four children in child care room at 1991 NFB convention
play with building blocks. CAPTION: Child care is a place to have
fun and make new friends under the supervision of caring adults.]

                     Child Care Arrangements

     Child care will be provided at this year's convention during
the all-day parent seminar on Sunday, June 28, as well as for
convention sessions and the Friday night banquet. Parents are
asked to make these donations for child care: $50 for the week
(including the banquet) for the first child and $25 for each
additional child; or $10 per child per day, and $10 per child for
the banquet night if you do not need the full week of day-care.
Parents who cannot contribute the suggested donation should
contact Carol Coulter to discuss what donation they wish to make.
In fact Carol has asked that all parents who plan to use child
care contact her so that she will know the numbers and ages of
the youngsters taking part in this program. You may contact her
at 2504 Glenn Drive, Columbia, Missouri 65202; (314) 474-3226.
Since the suggested donation does not cover all expenses, other
donations from individuals and groups are much appreciated. 

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Each year the Music Division's Showcase of Talent
attracts gifted Federationists to its competition. Pictured here
are Corene Lane of Arizona playing the violin and Roland
Wieczorek of South Dakota singing at the 1991 Showcase.]

         The Composition and Musical Showcase of Talent

  This year the Music Division is trying something different. At
the showcase of Talent, Wednesday, July 1, we would like to focus
on musical composition. We must have at least three to five
entrants to make it competitive. Compositions will be first on
the program. There will be a $100 and a $75 prize for the two
best submissions.
     Following the compositions we will conduct the popular
musical showcase of talent. Because of the fact that our NFB
family has a big event on the night of our showcase and because
of the number of contestants, we must have a tight game plan.
Talent offerings must be kept to five minutes, so we will ask
that introductions be sufficient without long conversations or
emotional pleas. Just talent, please! Also electronic music may
be used in the background, but singing in unison with a recorded
singer does not show the talent of the member and must be ruled
out.
     There are getting to be so many performers that we would
like to screen our talent. Please send cassettes of your planned
performance and a self-addressed stamped envelope before June 1
to Mary Brunoli, 31 Sherbrooke Avenue, Hartford, CT 06106; (203)
522-0206. If selected, you will be first on the showcase part of
the program. There will be a $100 and a $75 prize for the talent
showcase part of the program.
     Monday, June 29, will be the date of the music division
meeting, including, we hope, a music therapy demonstration and a
representative from the music library of the National Library
Service. 

                    Computer Science Division

     Annual meetings of the National Federation of the Blind in
Computer Science serve a variety of functions. Among other
things, they represent an excellent opportunity for people with a
technical bent to get together and talk shop. But these meetings
are of interest not only to techies. Computer users and other
people interested in computers also benefit from some of the give
and take that typically occurs. 
     At this writing we are just beginning to put together this
year's agenda. If things go according to plan, we will have a
program item dealing with the use of the computer as a device to
emulate a variety of terminals. We will almost certainly be
discussing the latest developments in IBM's Screen Reader for
OS/2 and its ability to give blind computer users access to the
graphical user interface (or at least that part of it that runs
under IBM's OS/2 Presentation Manager).
     A popular program item in years past will definitely be
repeated this year--namely, the Technical Interchange. This is a
time when people can have a free-form, open discussion about
technical problems that have been plaguing them with a very real
possibility that one or more individuals attending the meeting
will be able to contribute solutions.
     Other topics of discussion may include the necessity for the
development of expert screen-reading systems, electronic bulletin
boards, integrating Braille translation software with popular
word processors, and speech synthesizers--have they become too
expensive?
     If you have any ideas for topics that might be of interest
to people attending this year's meeting of the NFB in Computer
Science, contact Curtis Chong at 3530 Dupont Avenue North,
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55412. His phone number during evening
hours is (612) 521-3202.

                       Diabetics Division

     The annual meeting of the Diabetics Division of the National
Federation of the Blind will take place on Tuesday evening, June
30, at 7:00 p.m. In addition to the general business, Dr. Jeff
Forman, Johns Hopkins Medical Center, will address the group on
the topic "Foot Care for the Diabetic." As many of you know, Dr.
Forman is the husband of Eileen Rivera, President of the
Baltimore Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind of
Maryland. Check your agenda for the location of the meeting, and
plan to join us at the 1992 meeting of the Diabetics Division.

                     Human Services Division

     The '92 convention of the National Federation of the Blind
will once again include the annual meeting of the NFB Human
Services Division. This division has been established to serve as
a forum for Federationists working or studying in professions
dedicated to human service. This includes counselors, social
workers, psychologists, psychiatrists, advocacy and medical
professions, as well as human resources professionals and
administrators of service-related occupations. We encourage
students pursuing careers in these areas to attend, and we
provide a lower dues structure for students and unemployed
professionals.
     This year's program will once again explore many issues
relevant to human services workers. The following are a few
topics the program will focus on: accommodation procedures for
taking licensing and certification exams; the Americans with
Disabilities Act; making sure blind people are fairly represented
in seminars, task forces, and consulting efforts; a job panel of
successful blind human services workers; effective counseling for
blind individuals considering human services occupations; private
practice, pro and con.
     As you can see, we will have a full and varied agenda. Along
with the annual meeting this year, the division will be selling a
stress management tape especially prepared by the division to
assist all of us to manage the stress that demanding lives
produce. Look for this low calorie way you can contribute to the
activities of the division. See you at convention. 

              Job Opportunities for the Blind (JOB)
                      Convention Activities

     The free 1992 JOB National seminar will be held June 28,
from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. in a hotel to be announced later. Check the
pre-convention agenda when you arrive. Come by at 12:30 if you
would like to register as a JOB applicant before the seminar. The
seminar is three hours of tips and ideas from blind persons who
have been successful in breaking through the barriers of
prejudice. Learn from the best. Excellent! (Call JOB at 800-638-
7518 for a JOB sample package and application.)
     The three requirements to qualify as a JOB Applicant are to
be legally blind, a resident of the U.S., and looking for a job
in the U.S. 
     We offer three giant services, all free: a national job
hunter's magazine on cassette 8 times per year, JOB literature on
job hunting, and reference and referral service and networking
nationwide. Additional Services: a national job seminar held
yearly; state- and locally-organized JOB seminars; JOB Field
Service Network Volunteers nationwide; resume proofreading;
brain-storming; assistance to counselors, teachers, parents, and
employers.
     Miss Rovig, JOB Director, invites JOB applicants and JOB
Field Service Network Volunteers to join her for a brainstorming
"JOB Breakfast" any morning of the convention. No more than 8
people will share a table, so call her to make a reservation.
     JOB hopes to sponsor the second annual "Lawyer's Breakfast"-
-Meet and eat with the feds who want to interview "qualified
individuals with a disability." The Department of Justice/Civil
Rights is making noises about coming again. Keep tuned, budding
lawyers.
     Miss Rovig invites JOB applicants to request private
meetings or introductions to blind NFB conventioneers already at
work in the fields they wish to enter. She reminds all job
hunters to bring (1) copies of resumes; (2) a fat notebook (or
cassette tape) in order to keep track of the many contacts made
at convention; (3) comfortable shoes to travel around the giant
exhibit hall of adaptive aids and appliances, and to attend all
the special interest group meetings--blind lawyers, blind
teachers, etc.; and (4) a sweater so you can sit comfortably for
hours in the air conditioned meeting halls where the most useful
information for blind Americans and their families will be
available this year. 

                 The Merchants Division Seminar

     The Merchants Division will conduct a day-long seminar on
Sunday, June 28, beginning at 9:00 a.m. During the morning those
business people working in vending operations can learn about
their eligibility for Social Security. The afternoon will be
devoted to a program of interest to all business people, for
which there will be a modest charge. Consult the pre-convention
agenda for information about the location and for more details
about the seminar. 

             National Association of Blind Educators

     At the time of the fifty-second annual convention of the
National Federation of the Blind, the National Association of
Blind Educators (NABE) will meet on Tuesday, June 30. This year
we will focus on interviewing and discussing blindness. Peggy
Pinder, Second Vice President of the NFB and an outstanding
attorney, will take part in interviewing discussions and will
enlighten us about our rights as educators. Kathy Kannenberg, who
has just finished student teaching high school math, will show us
how the blind teach a subject like math. We will again have small
group discussions. Bring topics and questions.

[PHOTO: Blind people seated during meeting, while guide dogs lie
at their feet on the floor. CAPTION: Federationists take part in
the 1991 meeting of the National Association of Guide Dog Users.]

             National Association of Guide Dog Users

     The National Association of Guide Dog Users will conduct its
annual meeting this summer at the convention of the National
Federation of the Blind in Charlotte. There will be a number of
interesting items on the agenda for members and friends:
opportunity to talk with personnel from some of the training
schools, discussion regarding specific concerns of guide dog
owners, and updates on recent legislation. This will also be an
election year for officers of the organization.
     Full details about the convention and its activities will be
featured in the spring edition of Harness Up, edited by Bill
Isaacs. Plans are being made for emergency veterinary care during
the convention, and instructions on the best places to take the
dogs will be available at the hotels.
     For those who need them, baggies will be available so that
the areas used by the dogs will be maintained as cleanly as
possible. So come and bring your guide dog. Plan to have a good
time at the convention. Remember that it is important for each of
us to maintain personal responsibility for our dog's behavior and
care. See you in Charlotte.
     A subscription to Harness Up, the division's newsletter, is
included in the membership dues of $5. To insure receiving
Harness Up, send your name and address to Priscilla Ferris, 55
Delaware Avenue, Sommerset, Massachusetts 02726.

              National Association of Blind Lawyers

     On Tuesday, June 30, the National Association of Blind
Lawyers (NABL) will hold its annual meeting and conference as a
part of the 1992 Convention of the National Federation of the
Blind. The agenda for this conference will include informative
presentations and discussions of interest to the growing
practitioner. For the past two years the NABL conference has been
approved by state bar associations for credit toward continuing
education at bar. With the passage of the Americans with
Disabilities Act the question of the extent of legal protection
afforded to persons who are blind or otherwise disabled continues
to be of critical importance. If you are currently a member of
NABL, you will want to attend our 1992 conference. If you are not
currently a member of NABL, you are invited to attend the
conference and to join the Association. Through the support of
the National Federation of the Blind, NABL distributes the
American Bar Association Journal on cassette. NABL membership is
open to all those interested in the legal profession, including
blind lawyers, judges, law students, paralegals, legal
assistants, and legal secretaries. NABL dues are $10 per year for
practitioners and $5 per year for students. Dues for 1992 may be
sent to Sharon Gold, President, National Association of Blind
Lawyers, 5982 South Land Park Drive, Sacramento, California
95822.

                  National Association of Blind
                  Secretaries and Transcribers

     The National Association of Blind Secretaries and
Transcribers (NABST) will hold its annual meeting at the 1992
convention in Charlotte, North Carolina.
     Susan M. Turley, C.M.T., R.N., of Health Professions
Institute will be a guest speaker during our division meeting.
She will discuss information from Health Professions Institute
regarding their correspondence program for Medical
Transcriptionists. Other topics discussed will include Career
Planning, applying for and getting assistance from agencies and
service providers, and upgrading skills for today's business
market.
     As a division we will finalize the questionnaire to be sent
to all schools for the blind regarding Business and Computer
Education. Your input is important, so please attend and help us
develop a questionnaire that will cover all issues in Business
Education. Consult your convention agenda for the room and hotel
where our meeting will be held. 

[PHOTO: Card dealer and players shown at table during 1991 Monte
Carlo Night. CAPTION: Each year Monte Carlo Night provides fun
and laughter for hundreds of Federationists.]

             National Association of Blind Students

     The National Association of blind Students (NABS) will
conduct its annual convention seminar at 7:00 p.m. Monday, June
29. This event is always memorable, and for the past several
years we have had standing room only, so come early and register
so that you will be sure of receiving your own copy of The
Student Slate, the publication of the division. 
     Thursday evening, July 2, from 8:00 p.m. to midnight the
division will again sponsor our Monte Carlo Night. If you have
attended this wonderful evening before, you know what fun it is.
If you haven't, be sure that you don't make the same mistake this
year. Consult your convention agenda for the locations of both
these memorable events. 

                    NFB NET Training Seminar

     If you lie awake at night wondering what ZMODEM is, if you
don't know what a QWK packet is, or if you just want to learn how
to use your Modem or to upload or download files, then come to
the NFB NET training seminar, which will be held as part of the
1992 NFB National Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina, on
Sunday, June 28. The seminar will be from 9:00 a.m. until noon.
The exact location will be announced in the Pre-Convention
Agenda, available in Charlotte.
     Topics to be covered will include the basics of
telecommunications, how to call NFB NET, how to register,
navigating around the system, leaving and receiving messages,
using off-line readers, and more. Learn how to be among the first
to get the Braille Monitor each month, and find out about all the
late-breaking news that is regularly available to NFB NET
callers. The seminar will feature explanations and real live
examples by NFB NET's Systems Operator, David Andrews. All you
need to bring is something to take notes with and your questions.
     See you on the 28th of June in Charlotte for the first ever
NFB NET Training Seminar.

[PHOTO: Barbara Cheadle speaks to a meeting of the Parents of
Blind Children Division. CAPTION: Parents of Blind Children
Division activities take place all week long during NFB
conventions. Pictured here is a group attending the 1991 IEP
Workshop.]

                Parents of Blind Children Seminar

     The theme for this year's seminar is "Integrating Blind
Children and Youth into School and into the Community." The
keynote address will be delivered by Fred Schroeder, Director of
the New Mexico Commission for the Blind and an acknowledged
national expert on the integrated education of blind children.
Also on the agenda will be a panel of blind children and youth,
talking about their experiences with making friends, having fun,
and learning to fit in; a panel of parents; a panel of blind
adults; and numerous other speakers on topics such as independent
travel, computer technology, the deaf-blind child, and
residential schools. We encourage older youth to attend the
seminar with their parents or to visit other NFB workshops on
that day--such as the half-day Job Opportunities for the Blind
(JOB) Seminar.
     Special arrangements have also been made by the Parents of
Blind Children Division for a Children's Fun Day field trip and
other activities on Sunday, June 28. (This is the date of the
big, day-long seminar for parents of blind children.) While
parents are attending the parents seminar, children ages five to
twelve can be learning and having fun, too. Under the capable
leadership of Lori Anderson, a former kindergarten teacher, and
with the help of dedicated Federation volunteers, the children
will begin the day with get-acquainted activities, games, and
discussions and demonstrations of blindness-related skills and
techniques. The children will then go to a nearby restaurant for
lunch. (To promote independence, each child will be given money
and assisted as needed in ordering his or her own lunch.) After
lunch the group will walk to the nearby Discovery Place museum
for an afternoon of exciting hands-on experience at one of the
foremost science museums in the country. The highly popular
Discovery Place features a Science Circus, where children learn
about light, power, motion, and sound; a domed six-track sound
system Omnimax Theater; the Space Voyager Planetarium; an
Aquarium; a Collection Gallery; and a 3-story replica of a
tropical jungle--the Knight Rain Forest. The group will return in
time for children to reunite with parents following adjournment
of the parents seminar at 5:00 p.m. The cost of the Children's
Fun Day is $10.00 per child. This includes lunch and admission to
Discovery Place. In order to get group rates we must make
reservations in advance, so we ask parents to pre-register their
children by June 1. Send the following information, along with a
$10.00 fee per child to: Children's Fun Day, c/o Lori Anderson,
111 Marquette, South; Apt. 302; Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401;
(612) 371-0543. Please make checks payable to NFB Parents
Division. Pre-registration information: name, address, and phone
number of parents or responsible adult; name, age, and
description of disability (if any) of each child; and any other
pertinent information.

                    Public Employees Division

     The Annual meeting of the National Federation of the Blind
Public Employees Division will be held at 1:00 p.m. Tuesday, June
30. The meeting will occur in Charlotte in conjunction with the
National Federation of the Blind annual convention. 
     An exciting, informative program is planned. A
representative from the U.S. Department of Justice will discuss
implications of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act
for employees of state and local governments. The rights extended
to these blind workers through the ADA will be discussed. The
enforcement procedures in the ADA will also be explained.
     For years many blind federal employees have reported
discriminatory treatment with regard to requirements during
emergencies in the work place. Often the blind employee is
required to have an individual assigned to assist him or her from
the work site during fire drills. In other cases blind persons
are told they may not take the stairs but must wait at a central
point near an elevator with employees having other handicaps. Of
course most of us decline the offered assistance and safely leave
the work site in the same manner as sighted employees. However,
in some instances blind employees have been threatened with
disciplinary action for not obeying orders. 
     Just as in the case of blind persons and the airlines, the
Federal government cannot demonstrate that blind employees are a
threat to other workers, the public, or ourselves in an
emergency. The Public Employees Division has invited a
representative from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to
discuss this issue with us.
     This will be an exciting meeting. See you in Charlotte.

                    Public Relations Workshop

     The Public Relations Committee will conduct a workshop again
this year for anyone interested in learning more about
competently publicizing the National Federation of the Blind or
representing the organization more effectively in the media and
as a public speaker. The title of this year's workshop is "The
Cod Fish, the Little Red Hen, and the National Federation of the
Blind." It will take place from 1:00 to 5:00 p.m. Sunday, June
28, and everyone is welcome. If you have assigned responsibility
in this important area of the Federation's work, you should try
hard to take part in this event. 

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Greg Hanson of Iowa, a martial arts black belt,
demonstrates self-defense to Dale Cochran, Iowa State Secretary
of Agricultue.]

                      Self-Defense Seminar

     Do you know what to do if someone attacks you--that is,
besides scream? Do you know what kinds of exercises to do for
specific problem areas--besides lying down quietly until the urge
passes? Do you know how many calories you should eat per day to
lose, maintain, or gain weight--when the convention is over, that
is?
     Well, now you can come learn all about taking charge of your
physical body: things like basic self-defense, body shaping, and
weight management. You may attend session 1 on Sunday, June 28,
or session 2 on Thursday, July 2. Both sessions will run from
1:00 to 5:00 p.m. We are doing it twice to keep the groups small,
so everyone can have individual attention.
     Here's what you need to do:
     1. Pre-register by sending your name, preferred session, and
a check for $15 payable to Marie Cobb, 202 South Augusta Avenue,
Baltimore, Maryland 21229.
     2. Wear workout clothes to the seminar.
     3. Bring note-taking materials.
     We are using all blind instructors. If you have had
experience with martial arts and would be interested in helping
with self-defense, please call Julaine Arient-Rollman at (904)
331-0350.
     All age groups are welcome--both guys and gals. This
promises to be both fun and informative! We think it's exciting!
For further information contact Marie Cobb at (410) 644-6352.

                     Social Security Seminar

     On Thursday afternoon, July 2, there will be a seminar
entitled "Social Security, Supplemental Security Income: Maximum
Benefits, Alternative Strategies, and the Appeals Process." The
purpose of this seminar is to provide information on all Social
Security and Supplemental Security Income benefits for the blind.
Sharon Gold, President of the National Federation of the Blind of
California and member of the Supplemental Security Income
Modernization Project Panel of Experts, will present the seminar.

                    Writers Division Workshop

     The Writers Division will conduct a workshop from 1:30 to
4:30 p.m. on Sunday, June 28. We expect to feature editors of
periodicals, newspapers, and newsletters, especially focussing in
the latter instance on those of our state affiliates and local
chapters.


                             RECIPES

     This month's recipes are contributed by members of the
National Federation of the Blind of Arkansas. Theodora Turner is
a member of the Little Rock Chapter, and her husband is the
President of the group. Wilma Satterfield is one of the leaders
of the Little Rock Chapter and serves as Treasurer of the NFB of
Arkansas.

                      SOUR CREAM POUND CAKE
                       by Theodora Turner
Ingredients:
1 pound butter
3 cups sugar
3 cups flour
6 eggs
1 teaspoon flavoring (vanilla, lemon, etc.)
1/4 cup milk
8 ounces sour cream
Glaze:
1/2 of a 1-pound box of powdered sugar
1/4 cup milk
juice of 1 lemon
2 tablespoons butter or margarine

     Method: Cream butter, sugar, and eggs until light and
fluffy. Beat in sour cream, then flour and milk alternately. Bake
1-1/2 hour at 350 degrees in a greased and floured tube cake pan.
Allow to cool slightly before removing from pan.  Combine glaze
ingredients, and dribble over cake while it is still warm.

                    OLD-FASHIONED ICE BOX PIE
                       by Theodora Turner
Ingredients:
1 can of sweetened condensed milk
juice of 2 lemons
2 eggs
graham cracker crust

     Method: Prepare a graham cracker crumb crust by combining
and pressing against the bottom and sides of a pie plate one
packet of graham crackers, crushed, and 3 tablespoons of melted
butter or margarine. Bake this until golden brown (10 minutes or
so at 375 degrees), or chill crust thoroughly. Combine lemon
juice with beaten egg yolks, add condensed milk, and beat mixture
until it thickens. Pour into prepared graham cracker crust and
top with meringue, made by beating 2 egg whites until stiff peaks
form. Gradually beat in 3 tablespoons of sugar until it is
dissolved. Cover pie with plastic wrap and freeze until set.

     Associate Editor's note: I make this pie with a slight
variation. Instead of preparing a sweetened meringue for the top,
I fold the unsweetened stiffly beaten egg whites into the lemon
mixture before spreading it into the pie crust for freezing. It
is delicious.

                        SEVEN LAYER SALAD
                      by Wilma Satterfield

Ingredients:
1 head lettuce, washed and torn into bite-sized pieces
1 cup celery, chopped
1 cup onion, chopped
1 cup bell pepper, chopped
1 cup Miracle Whip salad dressing or 1/2 cup each sour cream and
salad dressing mixed together)
1 can LeSeur green peas, drained and rinsed (10-ounce package of
frozen peas, thawed, will also do)
6 hard-boiled eggs, chopped
1 pound bacon, fried crisp, drained, and crumbled
grated cheese (enough to cover top of salad)

     Method: Combine celery, onions, and peppers. In a large bowl
layer the ingredients in the order listed, beginning with the
lettuce and ending with the cheese. Cover and allow to chill at
least 12 hours before serving. Other ingredients may be added or
substituted in making this versatile salad. 

                           AUTUMN CAKE
                      by Wilma Satterfield

Ingredients:
2 cups self-rising flour
2 cups sugar
1/2 cup Wesson oil 
3 eggs
1/2 teaspoon cinnamon
1/2 teaspoon ground cloves
1 jar (junior size) apricot baby food
1 cup pecans, coarsely chopped

     Method: Mix dry ingredients, add eggs, oil, and baby food.
Stir in pecans and cook in greased and floured bundt pan at 350
degrees for 45 to 50  minutes. Cool slightly before removing from
pan.

                     OATMEAL COCONUT COOKIES
                      by Wilma Satterfield

Ingredients:
3/4 cup shortening
2 cups packed brown sugar
2 eggs
1 teaspoon vanilla
2 tablespoons water
2 cups flour
1 teaspoon salt
1 teaspoon soda
1 teaspoon baking powder
1 cup coconut
2 cups quick-cooking oats

     Method: Cream shortening and sugar. Add eggs and mix well.
Add vanilla and water and stir. Combine dry ingredients and add
to shortening mixture. Stir in oats and coconut, and mix well.
Drop by spoonfuls on ungreased baking sheet. Bake at 375 degrees
for 10 to 12 minutes until brown.

                     GRAHAM CRACKER COOKIES
                      by Wilma Satterfield

Ingredients:
1 package graham crackers
2 sticks butter or margarine
3/4 cup brown sugar
1 cup pecans, finely chopped
1 teaspoon vanilla

     Method: Line pan with aluminum foil and crackers. Melt
butter and add brown sugar. Simmer gently for two minutes. Remove
from heat, add nuts and vanilla, stirring mixture. Pour over
crackers, and bake in a 350-degree oven for 10 minutes. Cut while
hot.


                   * * MONITOR MINIATURES * *

**New Chapter:
     Louise Green, President of the National Federation of the
Blind of Alabama, writes as follows: On February 8, 1992, the NFB
of Alabama established the Dothan Chapter. The following officers
were elected: President, Willie Copeland; Secretary, Rosa Hurt;
and Treasurer, Frank Sullivan. There were twelve members in
attendance, along with four state officers and one national
representative.

**Seek Correspondence:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     "I am a blind employed professional and am seeking to
purchase disability insurance. One company offered a standard
policy and would rider out the blindness as a covered disability.
Another company would severely limit its coverage because of
blindness.
     "I would like to hear from anybody who has bought a standard
disability insurance policy with which they are satisfied.
Contact me in Braille or by cassette: Annette Nowakowski, 575
West Madison, #511, Chicago, Illinois 60661; phone: (312) 902-
3529 after 6:00 p.m."

**Autographed Book Auction:
     The Writers Division has asked us to carry the following
announcement:
     Autographed books and tapes are being collected from famous
and would-be famous writers and poets. These books and tapes will
be auctioned off at this year's National Convention in Charlotte.
Volunteers in the Writers Division are asking authors to
autograph books and tapes of their published materials for the
auction, and all proceeds from the sale of these books will go to
the Writers Division of the National Federation of the Blind.
     The auction will probably be held immediately after the
meeting of the Writers Division. Interested persons should be
present at the auction in order to purchase these autographed
treasures.
     The following autographed books and tapes have been received
by Tom Stevens, President of the Writers Division: Peace with God
by Billy Graham; Wildlife in America by Peter Mathiessen;
Nineteen Days in June, 1944 by Henry G. Spencer; Have a Great--
Every Day! by Norman Vincent Peale; Home-Baked Beans: Blind Men
and Women in Business by Janiece Betker; Lifeskills: A Can-Do
Program for Living with Blindness by Janiece Betker (cassette);
Never Sniff a Gift Fish by Patrick F. McManus (cassette); The
Night the Bear Ate Goombaw by Patrick F. McManus; The Missouri
Confederate Brigade by Phil Gottchalk; More than a Carpenter by
Josh McDowell.
     If you would like to donate an autographed book or tape or
if you would like to send a letter requesting a certain author to
donate a book, please contact Jerry Whittle, 22 University
Boulevard, Ruston, Louisiana 71270, phone (318) 251-2891; or Tom
Stevens, 11203 Fairview Road, Columbia, Missouri 65203.

**Blind Tuners Gather in Sacramento:
     Stanley Oliver, chairman of the Committee on Visually
Impaired Concerns of the Piano Technicians Guild, asks that we
carry the following: The national convention of the Piano
Technicians Guild takes place July 22-26, 1992, at the Hyatt
Regency in Sacramento, California. Of special interest to all
blind tuners is the assignment of Franz Mohr, Steinway's world
famous artist tuner to give two classes at the blind tuners drop-
in center. The high points of absolute accuracy and solidity
called for will be demonstrated by this superlative craftsman. A
broad-ranging question-and-answer session is likewise on the
agenda, as well as some mini-tech classes by blind tuners on
computers, cellular phone use, college-level employment, etc. For
more facts contact the PTG Home Office: 4510 Bellview Avenue,
Suite 100, Kansas City, Missouri 64111; phone (816) 753-7777.

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Al Sanchez.]

**Elected:
     Albert Sanchez, one of the leaders of the NFB of Washington,
was elected on January 25 as Chairman of the Advisory Council for
the Washington Department of Services for the Blind. The letter
of congratulations he received from Shirley A. Smith, Director of
the Department of Services for the Blind, reads as follows:

                                              Olympia, Washington
                                                 January 27, 1992

Dear Al:
     Congratulations on your election as Chair of the Advisory
Council. I'm really pleased you were recognized by the group as a
leader and also as a person who takes that appointment on the
Council seriously. You're always there and always prepared. Thank
you.
     I look forward to working with you over the coming year.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                       Shirley A. Smith, Director

     We add our congratulations to those of Shirley Smith and the
Council.

**Golf for the Blind:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement: "The
United States Blind Golf Association is looking for new members
or helping anyone interested in learning how to play blind golf.
We have a newsletter, The Midnight Golfer, and a soon to be
released instructional video for coaches and golfers. Write or
call Bob Andrews at The Midnight Golfer, 3094 Shamrock Street,
North, Tallahassee, Florida 32308; (904) 893-4511 for further
information."

**NFB Decals:
     The National Federation of the Blind of Nebraska is selling
NFB decal stickers. They are round, three inches in diameter, and
display the NFB logo in blue on a shiny silver background. They
are great for sticking on backpacks, duffle bags, posters, or
anything else your imagination can dream up. Now you can proudly
display our logo. The decals are $1 each plus shipping cost if
you order a larger quantity. For more information contact: Evelyn
Haines, 1940 South Cotner Street, Lincoln, Nebraska 68506, phone
(402) 483-4942.

**Sell or Exchange:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement: "I
have a Braille five-volume Torah that I will either sell for $10
or exchange for a Braille New Testament--not the complete 18-
volume Bible, just the New Testament. Write me in Braille only:
Mrs. Gayle Sabonaitis, 11 Maxwell Street, Worcester,
Massachusetts 01607."

**Scholarship Available:
     We recently received the following letter:

To Whom It May Concern:
     The George Washington University is pleased to invite
applicants for the Barbara Jackman Zuckert Scholarship for Blind
Part-time Students.
     The scholarship fund was established by Barbara Jackman
Zuckert in 1985 to assist visually impaired or blind students
seeking higher education at the George Washington University. It
is the goal of this scholarship to encourage enrollment of
visually impaired or blind students by extending financial
assistance when other sources of support are not available.
     Applicants for the Barbara Jackman Zuckert Scholarship must
submit a complete application (including a financial aid
statement), a letter of application, certification of disability,
and a high school or college transcript to the selection
committee. Applications must be postmarked no later than May 30.
     Applications can be obtained from the George Washington
University Office of Disabled Student Services; Rice Hall, Suite
401; 2121 Eye Street, N.W.; Washington, D.C. 20052. Please feel
free to contact me at (202) 994-8250 if you have any further
questions.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                         Christy Willis, Director
                                        Disabled Student Services
                                     George Washington University

**In Memoriam:
     Diane Hemphill, one of the leaders of the National
Federation of the Blind of Kansas, writes to report the death of
the Rev. John Van Watson. She says: 
     It saddens me to report that the Reverend John (J.V.) Van
Watson passed away January 10, 1992. J.V., blind for only five
years, became a staunch and trusted Federationist. J.V. was a big
man--6'-5"--but his heart and concern for others were bigger. We
of the NFB of Kansas will miss him dearly. J.V. was a member of
the South Central Chapter, as well as a board member of the NFB
of Kansas. May he rest in peace.

**Sell:
     We have been asked to print the following: 
     VTEK Voyager, 10" screen, only two years old, used for six
months by one person, excellent condition. Cost $2,400 new, would
like to sell for $1,200. If interested, call Myrna Harris at
(815) 932-4742. No reasonable offer refused.

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: John Halverson.]

**Promoted:
     Dr. John Halverson, President of the Public Employees
Division of the National Federation of the Blind, has been
promoted to Regional Manager of the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services Office for Civil Rights, Region VII. Effective
March 22, 1992, Dr. Halverson assumed his duties. The region
includes the states of Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, and Nebraska. 
     The Office for Civil Rights insures that HHS funds are not
spent in a discriminatory manner. It enforces laws against
discrimination on the bases of race, color, national origin,
disability, and age.
     Dr. Halverson joined the regional office staff as the second
in command in 1986. In his current position he has significant
influence over civil rights policy and practices nationwide. In
his official announcement of the promotion, Edward Mercado,
Director of the Office for Civil Rights, said the following: 

     I am delighted to announce the appointment of John Halverson
as OCR Regional Manager for Region VII, Kansas City.
     John has been with the Office for Civil Rights since 1979,
serving first in Headquarters and, since 1986, as Program
Division Director in the Kansas City Regional Office.
     John's outstanding civil rights work experience and his
expertise and activism on behalf of disabled employees provide a
superb background and unique combination for this critical
position.
     I know you will all welcome John Halverson to his new
position and offer him your cooperation and support.

     We join with Mr. Mercado and Dr. Halverson's colleagues in
giving him our sincere congratulations.

**Elected:
     Holly Laird, Treasurer of the Rose City Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of Oregon, reports the
following:
     Officers for the Rose City (Portland) Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of Oregon were elected in
November, 1991. They are Joyce Green, President; Jeff Brown, Vice
President; Holly Laird, Treasurer; and Dan Walters, Secretary.

**Cookbooks Available:
     We have been asked to print the following: 
     The Massachusetts Association for the Blind now has a large
selection of Braille cookbooks available. Hot off the griddle:
The Best of Pancake and Waffle Recipes. Anything you ever dreamed
of in a pancake and more. In one Braille volume, $10. Send for a
complete cookbook list, MAB Braille Department, 200 Ivy Street,
Brookline, Massachusetts 02146.

**Reunion:
     Judy Blanchard has asked us to print the following:
     The Alumni Association of the New York State School for the
Blind will hold its annual reunion during the weekend of June 19
to 21, 1992, at the Treadway Inn in Batavia, New York. To
register or for further information, please contact Pat Rescori,
268 Meigs Street, Rochester, New York 14607, (716) 244-9433, no
later than May 25.

**In Memoriam:
     Sandy Halverson, one of the leaders of the National
Federation of the Blind of Missouri and a close personal friend
of Harvey and Sheila Fisher, writes with sadness the following: 
     Those of us who have been a part of the National Federation
of the Blind have come to know a wide range of people. There are
those whose names are associated with national leadership
positions; there are others known primarily at the local or state
levels of affiliate activity.
     And there are those like Harvey Fisher who touched the lives
of everyone they met. Harvey was a graduate of the Colorado
School for the Blind, earned his sociology degree at Fort Hayes
State College in Kansas, and went to work as a rehabilitation
teacher for the Missouri Bureau for the Blind following his
graduation. 
     Although he attended his first national convention in 1986,
when we met in Kansas City, our philosophy was evident in his
personal and professional life. Several of his clients have told
me how his gentle but firm persistence and high expectations for
them raised them from the depths of despair, motivating them to
acquire the skills necessary to become independent and competent
blind persons.
     And yes, Harvey Fisher knew about despair. Retinoblastoma
was the cause of his blindness, and for several years he
prevailed in his war against cancer as he faced the diagnosis of
each recurrence with the same quiet determination, aggressively
pursuing all available treatment options. He was objective and
realistic about his disease and, rather than dwelling on it,
preferred discussing sports, books, and the day-to-day goings-on
of his friends and colleagues. 
     Harvey died on November 23, 1991, and all of us who knew and
loved him miss daily his kindness, love of life, and commitment
to improving circumstances for his blind brothers and sisters. It
is these characteristics which strengthen and bring unity to our
movement, and we are all stronger and nearer to our ultimate
freedom for Harvey's work among us. Our sympathy is with Sheila
and Harvey's parents.

**Sell:
     We have been asked to print the following:
     Kurzweil Personal Reader (practically new) model 7315,
complete with book edge scanner and hand-held scanner, Braille
manuals, and the latest 2.1 upgrade. Reader was used about six
months. Still under service contract and basically brand new.
Original cost $12,000. Asking $8,000. For information contact
James Kracht at (305) 375-3720 (work), or (305) 251-6983 (home).