>> Jim:  This is going to be one of the first of a series of critical conversations within the independent living movement.  This idea championed by Bob Williams, up here on the stage, and Lex Frieden, who we're trying to get hooked up via remote telecommunications technology.  We're having a little difficulty right at the moment, so bear with us.  If you're supposed to be at another work or you think this is the other workshop, you're in the wrong place.  If you want to come hear about where we've been and where we're at, and more importantly where we're going to focus the conversation is where we want to be and need to be in the future as a national network of independent living centers and SILCs into the entire OIG movement.  So we're going to have a conversation up here with each other on some of the specific points that have been gathered up into this point.  And then as we wind down that conversation, we're going to open it up to you and ask you for your comments and your opinions and your ideas about what the future of independent living, a healthy independent living network in the future looks like.  And what challenges that might pose to us and what opportunities that might create.
	So that's sort of a broad brush description, did I fairly characterize that?
	>> Yeah.
	>> Great.  So we're going to do that as soon as we can get Lex on the line, and we're working on that right now.
	For folks coming into the room, we're trying to get a technology issue resolved, to get Lex onscreen remotely.  Once we do that we'll start on the left side of the table and do introductions so you know who is involved in this conversation.
	We're going to start by having folks up on the stage, we're going to be having a conversation among ourselves.  Starting on the far left, my far left.
	>> I'm Ron Garcia, executive director of the Center for Independent Living in Santa Fe, New Mexico.  
	>> Hi, good afternoon.  I'm Larry Wanger, executive director of the state independent living council in Arizona.  
	>> I'm Bob Williams, director of the independent living administration and ACL.
	>> I'm Billy Altom, I'm the executive director of the Association of Programs for Rural Independent Living.
	>> I'm Jim Sheehan from Wisconsin the current president of APRIL as well the executive director of the center back in Wisconsin.
	>> Kelly Barlett, National Council of Independent Living.  
	>> I'm Sukie Blake, I am the youth transition coordinator and social media specialist with the Center for Independent Living in Metro Atlanta disABILITY LINK, and I prefer the pronouns he, him and his.
	>> My name is Bob Anton, I'm the CEO of the Montana Independent Living Project in Helena, Montana.  
	>> My name is Whitney Harris, I work for the Florida Chamber Foundation which is the research leg of the Florida Chamber of Commerce, and my preferred pronouns are she, her and hers.
	>> Jim:  Thank you.  Bob has some prepared remarks that we'll go into here in a minute.  I just want to elaborate just a bit on what we're trying to begin and accomplish with this session.  
	You know, the independent living movement predates any federal legislation.  And it -- you know, it's an organic thing, right?  It's a living, breathing thing.  Because the movement itself, while it's grounded in the bedrock philosophy of nothing about us without us, the movement is people.  Right?  And it's their lives.  It's our lives, our collective lives, as a part of this great society.  And so what we're going to try to accomplish is to explore the challenges and opportunities for a vibrant, healthy, philosophically grounded IL movement in the future.  That sounds glorious, doesn't it?  But we all know that has enormous challenges to it.  It could very well threaten the identity of who we are.  And I think a large part of our conversation with each other is going to be about those things.  So Bob, if you want to go kick it off and then we'll just get into it.
	>> Bob:  I want to thank you for joining us and being part of this first conversation on building and strengthen the future of independent living across our country.  I largely said my piece yesterday about my believe it is a crucial time and very much the right time for ACL to hold and engage in these constructive and iterative discussions with the members, and then led, directed and controlled by our community of what the future can hand us becomes more (inaudible) over the next two or 5 years, and over next decade because your job becomes (inaudible) leads to a clearer understanding, we can generate and share of where it is that our community entrusts and expects us to lead and enable them to reach.  I know something about the power of speaking of the earth and creating the future, a better and more just future.  And it is the work IL has done over the last 4 to 5 decades, and my hope and strong belief that is by engaging each other in deep and deliberative conversation, we will be better prepared and better able to push forward and strengthen IL over the coming years.  In reflecting on what Jim vandenberg said in this morning's session about dreams, in the words of Tom Harkin, (inaudible) of community integration has got me thinking about how essential the advancing of physical, economic, political, social, technological, mobility, is everything we do.  Let's move.
	>> Terrific.
	>> Lex: Thank you very much, I appreciate it.  Bob, what you said is right on, and I won't try to add too much at this point except to say we're well beyond 5 decades of independent living.  First decade we tried to define ourselves.  Second decade we were expanding rapidly, probably faster than the McDonald's franchises.  The third decade we were standardizing our services, and I remember just trying to figure out what everybody else was doing, and to do some of the same kind of things, so that people could expect from one center to the next, what is in the next, to find an independent living center they could relate to.  The next decade we'll be expanding our services to new populations, some of those we should have been serving from the beginning, but we've begun to expand our services and we've begun to reach new populations.  But that I think is the challenge of the next decade.  That is, to make independent living centers vital to every community, vital to every population.  As we look at disability now we can see how it's changing.  People with disabilities are becoming older in the majority, retiring people now, the largest demographic bubble in the history of the United States are beginning to become people with disabilities.
	They have obviously had a different experience than those of us who became disabled younger in life, but they nonetheless face the same barriers and challenges that we do.  And that's both the opportunity and challenge for the future for independent living.  We have to reach this newly growing population, we have to expand our services further.  We have to concentrate on the things that we do best, and do better the things that we don't do so well.  And we have to develop new ways of supporting and sustaining the independent living movement.  
	So with that, let me turn it back to Billy, I guess.  
	>> Tim:  Yeah, it's Tim Sheehan, Lex.  Thank you.  Because sustainability is where I would like all of us to start, right?  And let me just say some things that we've said to each other in preparation for this event to sort of set the framework for the sustainability piece, because I think it is the single biggest daunting challenge to the independent living network as well as the greatest opportunity.  
	So centers that have been around a long time, like the one that I'm fortunate enough to be the executive director of, we've diversified our funding over the years to grow, right?  So this last fiscal year, our center had 27 different funding sources, one of which was part C.  
	And we were much larger, much more robust, much more connected to a diverse community across all of our 10 rural counties than we were 37 years ago.  But it's also a challenge all across this country, because there's two problems with that kind of sustainability model.  
	One is there's not enough part C to do what we're asked to do in federal law, right?  Let's get that 800 pound gorilla out here in the middle of the room right now.  So we go seek other sources.  I've seen it happen, and I'm sure it can happen to the entire network, is those other funding sources pollute, erode, corrupt the independent living philosophy, and pretty soon we're nothing more than a damn Medicaid agency, and that is not sustainable.  
	So that to me, the framework of sustainability opportunities and challenges, those are those sort of two-headed monsters.  So anyone want to jump in and start and give your thoughts about that, I'm there.  
	>> Ron:  Ron Garcia, Santa Fe, New Mexico.  I can't agree with Tim more.  I think being able to identify as a center for independent living and its philosophies are critical to the sustainability.  I can speak to the fact that our organization, our CIL, has had an identity crisis and we're dealing with it because we're a Center for Independent Living that comes from the board, that question has come up more than once, and you almost -- this last year was a rough year for us.  And I think it's a microcosm of what is probably happening all around our country to the different centers.  So identity is definitely the first piece, and you get your identity with a strong philosophy and a strong movement.  
	And the other thing, being from rural and frontier areas of New Mexico, which are like many other rural and frontier areas of our country, is that we're innovative and we're creative and we know how to improvise, and we know how to collaborate.  
	I know counties where you've got Republicans on one side, and Democrats on the other, and if somebody needs help, they help each other.  So we have bipartisanship in the communities we serve.  So we need to get creative.  And I'm willing to share some of the ideas that have come to me and that others have shared with me.
	We have to align our big partner ACL with a lot of things that they're already doing in the communities that we're unaware of.  What are those, and how -- how can we as centers for independent living contribute in meaningful ways that will support the people with disabilities.  And that's the other key piece.  We're cross-disability.  I know of no other system that says that in a way that they really try and give it their all to make happen.  
	>> Go ahead, Kelly.  
	>> Kelly:  Okay, I'll jump in a little here, I think, from a national perspective.  Or at least what I've been seeing.  We have made really some terrific gains, and I think if you look back historically, we have actually changed the base of the plan.  Having gotten a disability in 1970, a number of people in the room share this with me, we've seen what the world was like before the IL movement, and now we know where we are, and it's a completely different world.
	But at the same time where we made a lot of gains, you have to do IL administration.  a lot of things to be excited about.  Having listened to the conversation here this morning, I have to tell you, I think we've also seen our movement, and our services, actually be eroded.  
	Over the last several years, the federal government has been unable to do their work, they can't even pass a budget.  So what they do is they pass an omnibus bill and then make an across the board cut.  So those cuts have accumulated over part C and part B over the last for or five years, they've added up to about 4 or 5 million.  We're actually getting less funding today than we were 2010, and that doesn't count the interest cost that we all have to the eat.  Especially health insurance, I was listening today, with the Republicans and the Democrats, and the Republicans saying that Affordable Care Act is causing 20, 30 percent increases in health insurance, this is unprecedented, blah, blah, blah.  That's bullshit.  I've seen health insurance go up 20, 30 percent for like decades now.  Every single year it goes up 20, 30 percent.  We just have to fight to keep what we've got.  We are not making progress, we're going backward.  And listening to the people in the room this morning, it's not just the centers, it's people with disabilities.  There's less access to housing, there's less access to health that we've we had like years before.  So I don't think we need to achieve sustainability.  We need to achieve some improvement, here.  So we've got -- we really have to move forward.  And it's going to take all of us, frankly, working our asses off to make it happen.  
	Because the forces that are working against us are really strong, and it's going to take a collective scream out of all of us to make them listen.  So that's my thoughts.  
	>> Go ahead.
	>> Larry:  Thanks.  So sometimes it's hard to even think about the next 25 years and the funding situation, when I look at around my state where I'm at right now in Arizona, and see the funding situation and the part C situation and -- I mean, several areas of the state there are just no IL services, and I know we're not unique in that, and the need is so great.  Kelly hit the nail on the head, so far as I'm concerned.  We keep seeing these cuts, and they trickle down to the local community.  To where centers are stagnant with the part C funding they're getting, and there's not a lot of -- there's no additional funding on that front coming in.  So where do we go to get additional dollars.
	Agreeing with Ron, you have to have, when you start thinking about where to go to get those additional dollars and programs and initiatives that you might -- you might be giving your centers, I can't stress enough it's imperative to have that sound IL philosophy, and know what you believe and know what your organization is to stand for as a center for independent living, and you're really grounded in that.  Because sure, there's money out there and funding out there to be had from different places, but along with that pot of money comes certain responsibilities and expectations.  And I think it's important that as we go into the future, as centers and as an independent living network, that we just make sure that we stick to our philosophy, and don't compromise on that.  Because otherwise, as I just said, we just become another agency.
	>> Thank you, Larry.  This is Jim Sheehan, again.  I think that really sets it up beautifully.  I want to ask the panel now to consider a hypothetical here.  Let's say in some future alternative universe we were able to convince both our federal and state partners to invest in independent living.  At a level that we think is necessary to carry out the duties and responsibilities in federal law in a robust way, and reach every consumer who we need to.  And there's a big pile of money that they want to put into the independent living program: 
	Is the primary objective to fully fund the existing centers?  Or a competing objective, to fill out the large swaths of this country that don't have access to independent living services at all?  
	I see a future when our network is going to have to start making some of those decisions.  So I'd like everybody to respond to that.  What's more of a priority for the future going forward?  Having centers that cover every county in this United States of America?  Or fattening the budgets of the existing network?  
	>> Bob:  Yeah, that is Bob from Montana.  I love these kind of questions because they either exemplify how damn crazy I am or my experience tells me that sometimes ideas work.  To understand kind of my points of view, it is I use two major pieces to guide myself, one has to do with my example of the anatomy of leadership, which has 5 pieces.  And it's all about challenge the process, inspire a shared vision, enable others to act, model the way, encourage the heart, basically, celebrate.  
	The other piece I always carry with me is the three pieces in search, the three pieces that exist usually, in successful outcomes have to do with unconditional support within the context that you're talking about.  We're talking about independent living, and we're talking about the network and who we are, our community, our network, and what makes us up.  
	And then also expectation and access.  You take those pieces, those thoughts, and generally that's what I use to guide me.  Tim asked the question about where do we go, what do we do.  Do we come to an understanding about how much money it takes to run a center, do we try and broaden out, cast our net farther, as Bob said the other day, the 3200 counties, et cetera.  
	But usually they're simple answers, oftentimes I find simple answers.  But usually the model or the strategy that gets -- seems to be the politically more complicated one, but whether -- I think what has been said is we need to be very mindful of our -- we need to be very mindful of the finances and whatever strategy we use to get where we want to go.  Which is, you know, the shared vision.  
	And we need to be extremely mindful of our ideology and how do we move forward and keep those two in place.  
	So oftentimes I end up getting a little broad brushed, and sometimes some of the paint spills on people, but that kind of works out well.  
	Imagine, you know, just imagine this, for example, in terms of a shared vision.  Let's go back and revisit our independent living model, and that is, my point of view, is peer support.  
	I think if we remember our peer approach, in terms of our community, in terms of our network, and yes, in terms of us nationally, whether that be in Congress, whether that become in a federal administration, or whether that's NICL, APRIL, and how we work together and how we don't work together, I'm not trying to eliminate anybody, but accomplish that.  Imagine this, a simple one about let's all go together, provide peer support for each other in this network, and collaborate on a shared vision of not only being concerned about finances, but being concerned about our ideology.  
	Let's take those 3200 counties, let's take and understand what we all agree is the adequate budget for the fundamentals of creating a CIL, how much money that is, ranging anywhere from -- you know, whatever the models say.  Let's take the methods of yeah, we need to work with the public, where a lot of us are 501(c)(3), we're supposed to work in the public interest.  Along with that comes all of its hurdles, its implications, its regulations.  So let's just take a -- let's take a model which would be a peer model and take care of ourselves.  
	Let's build a national endowment to support us as a service model.  You can slice and dice it any way you want, you can talk about a state, you can talk about counties.  Let's just take those 3200 counties or whatever they were.  Let's build an endowment, let's fund that, as an endowment does, let's keep the funds, let's use the revenue from that and treat all of our CILs as equals.  Equals meaning you divvy that interest up, that revenue, we take care of ourselves, we start funding centers to a certain level.  Get a center or a branch office, whatever model you want, and start taking care of ourselves.  
	So I think the solution lies within our model, in developing a shared vision, and that is really understand how to support ourselves.  Because quite frankly, money talks.  
	Ideologies thrive, and they'll crop up, but if we can be mindful of both of those, build a really expansive model that's simple, and then work together, we may come out of this looking a little better than we might think today.  
	>> Tim:  Kelly, any thoughts?  
	>> Kelly:  Well, I kind of hate these kind of questions where it's like one has to lose for another one.  I actually think we should be building both.  We should be funding centers and (inaudible) (Applause.) 
	>> I was going to say I agree.
	>> I thought you were going to pull a Donald Trump.  Wrong.
	>> Larry:  No, I guess I really don't have too much to say other than I agree with that, I would like to see some type of a process.
	We just, to some extent, went through this in our state because we don't get any state funding for our network.  And it's about darn time that we do.  And so we've gone through this discussion about, well, how are we going to approach these areas of the state that aren't -- presently just don't get IL services.  And we kind of went through that whole process about establish new centers, and boy, that costs more, potentially, than what -- we thought it would cost more than a model where we added satellites and looked at other types of models where we might have staff colocated in other agencies with other people, and some of these different types of models.
	But ultimately, my feeling is just that it's not either/or.  I agree with Kelly, that it's both.  That it may make sense in some places to give funds to an established existing center, to fill out the services that they have and expand those services to some additional areas, and in other cases it might make sense to establish a new center.  But it doesn't need to be an either/or type of situation.  
	>> Billy:  Exactly.  And this is Billy, too, I'm thinking -- I kept hearing as we talked about diversified funding that it corrupts us.  Well, if we were funding appropriately and we collaborated, let us do the corrupting for awhile, and change the philosophy and the mindset of other organizations, and how they view.  And I think we might -- when people say it's not about the money?  Oh, it's about the money.  So I think until we get to that point where we are secure in our foundation, we're going to get pushed around a little bit.  I think -- I'm ready for us to be bullies for awhile.  
	>> Ron:  Ron Garcia.  Again, I too agree.  I don't think you can say one size will fit all.  We have to again get -- be aware of our surroundings, and some of that has to do with geography.  I know it does in New Mexico.  We've got mountains and valleys, and believe it or not, not much in the way of rivers and lakes.  
	That was a little bit of humor, those of you who -- so it's important for us to take those things into consideration, as well as cultural diversity that we find.  And what you're hearing, and as I look at -- don't throw anything at me, but there are always a hierarchy of need.  And when I look at the IL movement, one of the key pieces is that our leaders are aging out.  
	Why do you think we invest so much in the youth.  So we really -- I really advocate for a collaboration that allows us, centers for independent living, ACL, and any other partners who are willing to come to the table, to say we need to do things together, to help ensure that we have leaders who can address the poverty model, who can address the regressive funding model that we're all so familiar with.  
	And we get those folks -- in my mind, some of us are looking at retirement, if not now, in the next 8 to 10 years.  There's a few of us who maybe it's 12 years, because we like what we do.  And we think we can do it for awhile.  
	But it's so critical.  My suggestion was let's look at those of us exiting to become interim executive directors, and have young people shadow us.  And get them, and have ACL maybe nod their head and say we might be able to help with that.  That sounds like a great idea.  
	And so I think part of the conversation has to be what are some things that need to happen first, what do we really need to pay attention to.  I worked with someone years ago who said stop trying to boil the ocean.  
	>> Sukie:  Hi, this is Sukie, and I don't know, I don't want to be seen as too young maybe and naive and might be missing something from history or something, but I wanted to agree with Kelly and Billy in saying that we needed both, it would be awesome, it would be ideal, but you know, the rule of the game was to choose one.  
	So I'm going to say that I think we need to expand, versus funding what is already existing.  Because while it is hard with the limited amount of funding, I think with the expansion it will bring in more diversity and it will bring the other programs, and we'll see newer faces, and that I think will naturally enhance the funding part.  
	Does that make sense?  And then -- and I don't think we will lose our purpose.  Because we are saying, you know, everyone.  Disability reaches out -- or doesn't discriminate against any community.  So that means we should be inclusive of all communities, by expanding.  Versus just pouring into what is already in existence.  
	>> Tim:  Another piece of this puzzle that I have spent a lot of time thinking about, and that is the challenge of bringing in younger voices, more diverse voices, into our world and into our centers.  And inculcating them with the bedrock of the values of independent living, right?  
	To those of us who grew up in this, sitting on this stage, and certainly Lex via electronic communication, the independent living philosophy isn't something that hangs on a board room wall.  It's our lived life, right?  The independent living values are my own personal values.  I view the world through those values.  It's a natural thing, I don't have to stop and think if this is culturally within the independent living movement proper or not, because it's a natural extension of my own personal core set of values.
	And so as we look to be better, more inclusive, younger, because we need it, as we pass the torch to Sukie and Whitney and all the other folks who have been at APRIL conferences over the years, now many of whom have evolved into national leaders as young adults, how do we make sure we're not handing over a process, or an agency, or a budget, and that we're fully handing over the torch of justice?  An integrated United States of America is my dream of the future.  In which in all aspects of life, public life, private life, in movement, and employment, housing and transportation, that the integration of people with disabilities is natural and holistic.  We are not a distinct set of citizens, we are simply citizens.
	It is a long way to go to get there, and it's going to be the younger generation that's going to take us there.  But if independent living is going to have a role, we have got to make sure that we have infected them with our values.  Like a zika virus.  So that when they take over, they also don't have to ask and say, is this the right move for a center?  So I would like folks to talk about that, and if they think about those sort of things as we get older and look to --
	>> Larry:  Great.  So this is a great question, and I've thought about this.  You know, I realized that this Thursday will be 19 years that I've worked in this business, in this field of IL.  And I had the most fortunate day of my life, you know, aside from the day I married my wife, obviously, but was walking into a center and encountering other folks who had disabilities and be able to have a conversation with them and say, you know, I'm really dealing with some stuff in terms of discrimination in the workplace because of my disability, and you have a crummy public transportation system in our city.  And that center, you know, we do a lot of advocacy, I ended up working there.  And so I say all that to say that outreach and inclusion of youth and young people is just hugely important.
	And while it's still one of my paramount concerns, I'm starting to feel pretty confident about what that looks like in the future.  Because I see this conference, for example, and its emphasis on youth and all the effort that goes into that.  In our state we have a youth leadership forum now and we have these in other states, and if you've been involved in one of those, you know the impact it has on those folks who attend.  
	But it can't end there.  That we have to actively, beyond youth leadership forums and beyond these -- this conference, as we go back into our communities, be incorporating young people into our daily activities as SILCs or as centers, empowering them to take charge of certain aspects of programs, or certain things within the center.  Giving them leadership roles.  
	We're not going to get there unless -- to where we need to be unless we really step up what we're doing as far as mentoring, peer support, and empowering youth and giving them leadership responsibilities within the centers.  And so I know we have this new fifth core service, and I know there's a whole lot of concern around that in terms of funding and what's -- you know, how are we going to carry out this new core service, and there's no additional funding.  But I'm here to tell you think -- I mean, everything we do is important, but I -- you know, I just feel that this youth effort is probably one of the most important things we can be about.  Because I've been at this awhile and I know there's a lot of us, some more than others, that are graying and moving on.  So it's important.  
	>> Bob:  So in what way can ACL better support youth development, as well as leadership development generally?  
	>> Can I go?
	>> Whitney go, we're waiting on you.
	>> Whitney:  So I'll be honest, I'm a little bit green to IL, so the first two questions I didn't have a lot of very hard hitting opinions on.  But this one I definitely do, and I kind of have a two fold answer.  The first is I feel like it was very soon, the instant I got pulled into this movement, meaning I didn't really grow up in a school system that was very inclusive, I wasn't really engaged in any level until I actually ended up at a youth leadership forum, the summer before my senior year of high school.  And then it just hit me like a ton of bricks that this was awesome and I had to be a part of it.  But I think we need to be more intentional about how we're actually pulling people in earlier, and I think that has a lot to do with education of disability history into the school system, spreading awareness into the school system.  And I know CILs do a great job of doing disability sensitivity training, but I think that's something that needs to be taught on an earlier level.  Because next fall's kindergartners are the people that are graduating high school in the year 2030.  And the year 2030 I'm going to be 40, so I'm not going to be thinking about -- I hope I'm thinking about the future then, but gosh, 40.
	>> You will be.
	>> So I think it's about being intentional, I think it's about setting up systems where people don't just end up in the movement and end up being leaders or advocates, but they're pulled in because it's a part of just everyday life, everyone understands the independent living moving whether you're in it or not.
	So I think that would be my first suggestion.  And my second is, you know, what's gotten us this far isn't going to get us to the next chunk of time.  That's the next 20 or 30 or 40 years.  And I say that because let's be honest, my generation, the millennials, we're getting a bad rap, okay?  We're getting told we're lazy, we're getting told we don't stay in jobs very long.  And sometimes people don't understand how to foster this generation.  And I only say that because in Florida I've been brought in to meet with legislators and said look, I have a youth in the room.  But then never given the opportunity to speak.  Or I've been brought to other situations where it's like ooo, she's disabled but, you know, she doesn't have an opinion right now.
	And so I blame that a little bit on my age, but I also blame it on the older mentors, because it's a different system.  When I walk into a room, I expect to speak, I expect to be the one that's saying this is how I feel about a topic, instead of having someone say well, this is how the youth feels about it.
	So I think it's changing -- changing the dynamic.  Remembering that, you know, each new generation is going to be wanted to be treated differently, and needs to be treated differently, in order to foster them and to create those leaders.  
	And so I say that because I think -- I think millennials seem to be our own little ship out in the water, and I'm sure every generation says this, don't have experience with other generations, but I think it's something that we need to keep in mind if we want to keep people engaged and keep people in this movement and advocating and keeping it going.
	>> Sukie:  Apparently it's my turn.  Thank you.  So this is Sukie again.  And I'm actually glad that Whitney went first because I feel like she said what I was thinking but in a more professional manner.  So if it sounds a little repetitive, I do apologize.  
	I actually did not grow up -- I mean I did not have the opportunity to be a delegate of a youth leadership forum, but I did have an opportunity to participate in one as a facilitator, which was kind of cool, and I kind of got the purpose of it through that, and I wish I had participated in one as a delegate.
	But having programs like that, and then programs beyond, and still maintaining the connection with the community resources I think are a way to continue this development for youth in the leadership.
	But not just the same programs.  I think because the eligibility is the same, I would think, for some, and maybe there are some folks that are being kind of left behind.  So a little bit more of a creativity.  
	Because I guess some folks just need that extra step.  So maybe giving another opportunity.  Again, I'm not 100 percent sure on all the rules, but another thing is to -- we talked about mentorship, and I'd like to add avoiding tokenization.  So I know you are a person with a disability, you should totally come to my school or something and speak.  Well, doesn't mean that I know history or that I can actually reeducate very well.  So I think like Whitney was saying, having that history in education in the earlier stage in our lives for everyone is definitely going to help out 12 percenters.  Again, more creativity in our programs and longer term programs.  
	>> Kelly:  So I just would like to comment a little bit, but I wanted to hear from the youth first.  I don't really -- I don't worry about whether or not the youth will carry on.  In fact, one of the things that has been the most exciting for me the last few years about the future of the independent living movement are the youth.  NICL has learned a lot from APRIL's activities doing youth.  And being around some young leaders recently, I think what I've learned from them is I just need to listen to what they have to say.
	I'm not worried about whether or not they'll carry on the tradition of independent living.  In fact, what I think they'll do is carry it on, and improve upon it.  So I'm very -- the youth actually -- and I don't feel the way that -- that way about millennials.  In fact, I feel differently, I feel exactly the opposite about millennials.  I see so much energy, and so much of the '60s and 70s in the millennials that it really kind of excites me, there's that kind of energy in the youth now.  
	>> Ron:  I agree with Kelly.  It's wonderful to hear from the youth, and I think both the youth and whatever age we are, we have to learn how to ask the right answers, and listen.  And pay attention.
	Having said that, I don't -- I really don't believe we stop learning through approximation.  Somehow I think when we hit school we think we no longer have to learn through approximation, but we all do.  It's part of the process.
	And I would say that of leadership.  It's not quite like mold, it doesn't just grow on you.  I think another little joke.  Come on, gang.  
	>> We got it on this end of the table.
	>> So I think it's important that we plan for the future.  And planning is just like putting that $10 a month toward your infant child's future college education.  We've got to invest in our youth.
	And so what I would love to see, and you're probably already doing it at ACL, is have some conversations with the Christopher Reeves Foundation and other foundations that provide supports to people with disabilities of any age.  And ask each other, well, what can we do.  What can we do to help bring forward young people into leadership roles of their choice.
	And actually, part of that process is how do I make -- you know, I don't know, I was young once, I remember, how do you make a decision about something?  It's that basic sometimes.  
	>> Tim:  Yeah, Bob, this is Tim again.  I want to build on what Ron said because I want to -- you ask how ACL could be supportive of this whole concept going forward.  And two strains of thought around that.
	One, I think I would encourage ILA and ACL in the department-wide meetings to be the advocate, to push for how can we better collaborate with all of the programs within HHS that touch on youth and youth with disabilities.  And independent living.  Are there areas of cross collaboration.  I know Aaron Bishop is going around the country right now, and having conversations, and Billy has been part of those conversations, about how can we cooperatively cross-pollinate.  And one of the goals of that ought to be not only to expose, to reach out to and grab ahold of and get the attention of youth, but to expose them to a dynamic of a way of life, as well as a possible career path, and a way to change the world, right?
	And so ACL could have a role there, facilitating that discussion within that giant thing called HHS.  
	The other thing you could do is when you put your budget proposal to Congress together for next year, you could put some money in there for exactly this kind of programming.  More independent living centers, and SILCs, and other collaboratives to work together on this.  Not only for our fifth core service, but to better everyone in the future.  So those are two things ACL could do to support what we're trying to accomplish.
	>> We do.  
	>> Tim:  We did want to leave time to open it up, and we're going to take these wireless mics and run them out in the audience.  We have about 27 minutes left.  So does anyone have any one last comments before we open it up, or Bob, do you want to open it up?  
	>> Mary:  Lex, did you have anything to add?
	>> Lex: Yes, one thing I haven't heard in this conversation is strategic alliances.  And you all mentioned some outstanding points, but I think we really need to look for strategic alliances and go some of that at the local level.  And if we don't, then other service agencies that are considered to be locally based, and some of them considered to be more viable than ours, unfortunately, will begin to absorb resources that we need.
	So I think it's important that in each community, particularly in rural areas, we look for strategic alliances with aging programs, with other social service programs, with political leadership.  And I don't think we should look strictly at what Washington, ACL, ILA, I don't think we should depend strictly on funding through WIOA.  I think we need to build out locally -- some of you have already found this, there are models for this.  And we need to expand that and empower people in areas particularly -- and somebody mentioned already, are we going expand to areas in our state where we're not now reaching people with disabilities.  Of course we are, it's not mutually exclusive.  And what we need to do is empower people, and send people to those areas to help empower people who live there, to build their own alliances with local organizations.  And I just think strategic alliance needs to be a part of the conversation.  
	>> Tim:  Thank you, Lex, and that is an absolutely important point.  We're going to take questions, so if you could, when you get the microphone if you would identify yourself, please, and where you're from.
	>> I'm Gary Maddox, I'm a SCIL a in Springfield, Missouri, and guys, you really opened up a can of worms with that last comment.  Well, two really quick things.  I wanted to speak a little bit to one of the comments of one of the individuals up there about the funding.  Because serving on the SILC, and been around a little while, this question just keeps -- you know, keeps rolling in like a wave on the ocean.
	And as centers have evolved over the last 20 years, one of the words -- things that I always hear is underserved, and unserved.  And so to me, that really means underfunded.
	And I won't get in all the business dynamics of that, but in Missouri we have 22 centers for independent living.  And we only have five, I think, federally funded centers.  And four, I believe, get part B.  But I'm old, and those numbers could be reversed.  So the rest of them are just getting -- you know, some state appropriations.
	So you know, I don't want to point fingers anywhere, but I think states, as my colleagues said up here, they need to step up.  At the same time, if you're going to actually serve unserved and underserved areas, the Feds need to step up, too.  So that's my 25 cents worth on that.
	And so I would be in favor of a progressive approach of additional funding for underfunded centers, along with some really good strategic planning for expansion.  And that would just include carving the state up a little bit more.  And in relationship to the state plan for independent living.
	Secondly, centers for independent living are mandated to do collaboration, and networking.  And so I've been doing collaboration and networking for a long time in the rural areas that are unserved and underserved.  And the collaboration and networking, especially strategic collaboration, that is the only way you get things done.  It's the only way.
	Because, you know, everybody -- there's a big pie out there, so you can't be the whole pie, so you're just going to be the one slice that you're going to align yourself with another organization.  However, you still come up against the same wall.  And that same wall is funding.  So I don't care how much we talk about providing services.  You can't deliver 6 gallons of services if you've only got a 5 gallon bucket.
	>> I'm up?  
	>> You're up.
	>> Oh, okay.  Well, I was saying, too, one of the things we didn't talk about here, about sustainability.  We're talking about quantity, and we kind of skipped over quality.  Because we all know there are bad centers and there are weak centers.  And they're a minority, there are not that many of them.  But man, that's what you hear about.  That's what you hear about.
	And I was talking with Bob earlier about some of the different tools that are used.  I've been on a federal review team, I'm a quills facilitator, which is a best practice thing not a compliance deal, and I've been a APRIL peer-to-peer mentor as well.  
	The federal review was the worst tool.  It didn't really help anything.  And I was saying to Bob, we can make a new tool.  But get ready for the saying you can fool the fans, but not the players.
	So we don't need people from colleges showing us how to do it.  We don't need bureaucrats showing us how to do it.  We need people that work and thrive in centers, going around and doing it.  And then it's compliance, man.  Be a compliance officer so we know people to speak to the player.  Because tokenism is a bad form of discrimination.
	Strategic alliances.  Yeah, you thought I was done, didn't you, Tim.  You know better than that.  Strategic alliances with the youth.  Part of what we've done so well is made opportunities for youth to leave centers and not work at centers and work at other places, which is great.  But beyond centers, I think we need to be able to get to these kids when they're in school.  I mean, I think that's the easiest way to get to all kids with disabilities, and have these youth kind of things like we have here, ingrained in the schools.  So they have self-advocacy in their hearts wherever they go.
	>> Hi, my name is Ben luskin and I'm from Eugene, Oregon, I'm the vice chair of the Oregon SILC, I'm also a professional life coach.  And I wrote down a few things, because this has just been an amazing experience for me and I want to make sure that I hit everything that I want to.
	But so this is my first IL conference, and I'm just really humbled to be surrounded by such amazing and driven and effective individuals.  You know, that like a lot of people talk about changes they want to make, but in this room and in this conference are people that talk, and then make those changes.  And it's just so astounding to me, every single person has so much to give, so much intelligence, people are well spoken, knowledgeable.  The youth -- I mean, I see people -- I'm not -- well, it's relative whether I'm old or young.  But I see youth thinking oh, well yeah, they're just taking their first steps.  And here they are, I've done this I've done that, I've grown up doing this, and it's just -- it's really blowing my mind.
	And all of that said, you know, there's all these things that we can do better, and we talk and we talk, and of course because with the IL movement we do and we do.  But I really have full confidence that the IL movement, seeing history, will just continue, and pardon my French here, but will continue to kick ass in ways that we may not be able to imagine right now.  But just being honest, I have full confidence that we will do what we need to do, to get where we need to go.
	(Applause.) 
	>> Hi, my name is Jesus Sanchez, I'm with the independent center in Colorado Springs.  I'm new to the movement, I've been here working at the center since June, and I'm an outreach independent living specialist.  Going back to the theme about whether it's quality or that we want, I believe it's more of a progression.  Since I started in June, I was able to get a satellite office in September.  I'm working to get in a second satellite office, I'm just waiting on the paperwork.
	We have an additional couple offices around the area.  So our center is focused on the individual.  And I think if you have the funding but you don't know how to use that funding, then it's a waste.  However, if you have the satellite offices, you see the needs from every community, you start to develop a strategic plan for everyone.  One by one.  I think that then we can ask for more funding.  
	And about strategic planning, I found that in working with other agencies, those two satellite offices, I managed to have available for us through networking, talking with other agencies in the community.  And we don't have to pay a cent, they were able to provide a space for us for free.
	>> Hi, this is Cathy Cooper, I'm the executive director for the Kansas SILC.  I have two things.  The first thing is for the panel.  I hope that you guys will open these panels up to different people throughout the discussions, good, because the youth have a lot of burden in continuing the future, but don't forget us the gen Xers.  Because I'm willing and ready to step up and be a leader and really kind of make my mark on this and do more and more for it, and I'm trying.  But you know, just remember us for that.
	And then for ACL, what can you do to help us, I would say that there are times where we come up with innovative things, and new programs, and we meet resistance from our states, from our RSDs.  And please continue to back us up on that, because you are our only watchdog that we have on that.  And if we can't count on you, it's going to be too big of a struggle.  So you've done it, you're doing a great job, we appreciate that, but please continue to back us up.  Thank you.
	>> I'll be quick.  I just wanted to echo what Cathy said, I'm a gen Xer as well.  I may look old, but I'm not.  I agree we've gone from -- it's funny, we went from the boomers are kind of the folks in leadership and we focus all the way down to the millennials in some ways.  And absolutely I just want to echo what Cathy said and agree with her that there are folks in the middle who want to step up as well, and it's just a collective movement so we're all -- I think there's many -- I think the point is there are many of us who are around board to be leaders in the movement.  
	>> Ron:  I think I can speak for some of the folks up here.  I consider younger anybody younger than I am, or youth-er younger than I am.  And let me tell you, 50 and 40 look pretty good from this point of view.
	>> Go ahead.
	>> Over here?  All right.  You brought up collaborating with the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Resource Center.  Conveniently, I'm Shannon O'Conner from the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Resource Center.  And I have some comments about where the SILC network and our foundation can start collaborating and finally coming together, what we can do and that meets the design of this conference and the spaces that are being truly authentically created, thank you to Sukie for that language.  Everything I'm about to say is borrowing your words and summarizing all the ideas that have come out in the past few days.
	I think as we talk about getting the funding that's needed to bring the rights to the disability community, doing that expansion in a targeted, strategic way is where we can collaborate.  The people who aren't being served by CILs are going somewhere.  They're coming to us, and we know that they call us and tell us CIL is two hours away.  I'm thinking about the importance of expanding to new areas, whether that means funding new CILs or going into the places that don't have them, and build them, and asking myself how we can be better partners, as the foundation that gets those calls.  And how can we help perhaps the CILs to target the four corners of the service areas where we know there's someone, because they're asking us for the direct services that we can't provide from our office in New Jersey.  
	And I think that needs to be done in a very strategic way so that when our contacts at the northwestern CIL moves on to bigger and better things, that the program keeps going.  And what I'd love to see from ACL is that I think this is really the time to have a summit, where we bring all these leaders from our networks together and we have facilitated conversations about our strengths and the gaps and how we can help each other fill them, and finding a system to make sure that continues on into the next decade is and into the future.
	(Applause.) 
	>> Tim:  Yeah, that deserves a round of applause.  I just -- before we take another question, I just want to share a personal insight that happened to me this week while I was here, at the youth conference, and talked about a lot.  One of the things that we did, that I think many of you heard about this year that we're going to institutionalize and do over and over and over again, is we ended up with a contact with the Reno area school district, and through that a couple of high school classes of youth with disabilities asked if they could come and spend a day at the youth conference.  And we logistically talked about it and said sure.  And, you know, you can come and experience it and we'll feed you, we'll give you lunch.  
	So I was sitting out in the main hallway that first day, and the signs weren't up yet, registration wasn't open, and there was free breakfast for the youth, I was out there directing people, so they knew where to go and all that sort of stuff.  And as I was sitting there I saw the group of young people walking two by two down the hallway, with a couple of adults with them who were their teachers.  And I commented to somebody who was nearby, I said I could tell they're in school.  And so they disappeared around the corner, and went into the youth conference.  And I just happened to catch them as they were rushing back to grab public transit to get back to their schools to get transported back home.  They were coming across the lobby up there, the big lobby and they were no longer two by two.  They were like a roving, rumbling mob.  Their hands were moving, their faces were lit up.  And as the teacher was walking by with a young man, I didn't hear the question that the young man asked, but the teacher was animated and he said, "Well, it's important because that's the law. They have to do it."  And the kid was just -- just you could just tell he was animated, through and through.  
	That was worth two hours of exposure to youth or a leadership track.  Imagine the impact that we could do if we could replicate that all across this country day in and day out.  Through strategic alliances and collaborations, we would change the world for the next three generations.
	(Applause.) 
	>> Deb Conner from Washington, D.C., and I just want to echo what John Nousaine mentioned, policing and monitoring your own.  I mentioned in the past I've worked with membership organizations in the past that have raised revenue from accreditation and also approved their network.  I would encourage the membership organization here to consider that.  In terms of the part C funding, saying either or, the law basically resolves that.  The first priority is cost of living -- I mean the same level of funding as last year.  Second priority is cost of living increase.  And the third priority is new centers for independent living.  Unfortunately, nowhere in the law does it use the word satellite or branch office, but I've seen centers that operate that way that are very effective.  Thanks.  
	>> My name is Joel Peter, I'm from the great state of Montana, I work for Montana Independent Living Project.  I guess this is kind of a challenge to Kelly and to Billy.  It kind of comes back to the gen X generation and building leaders.  We kind of touched about it, right?  It's as simple about learning how to make decisions and what goes on in the room when those happen.  And in my experience, and how you learn that, right, is you walk into that room thinking that here's all these great people with all these great ideas, and the first time you sit in that room, and hear how decisions are made, you're like -- that's it?  Right?  I could do that.  Right?  
	And it's almost like rock, paper, scissors at the end.  And then the leaders come walking out of the room and share the vision, and it's like whoa, great leaders.  And they didn't know they were playing rock, paper, scissors behind the doors.  
	What I would challenge you guys to do is you have the two national organizations to come up with some type of 18 to 24 month -- 20 month -- well, 24 month bond certification class or whatever it is that is a combination of online and in person, that centers identify those leaders that are going to be the next directors or assistant directors or, you know, program managers.  Doesn't have to be executive directors, right?  Program managers, that we can enroll at a reasonable price to teach those leadership skills.
	And I think that's where it's up to you guys as the two leaders of our national organizations, to say hey, you know, we're going to make this priority, and we're going to come up with something like this.  And let's make it happen.  And at some point we stop talking and start doing.  That's my challenge to you guys.  
	>> Tim:  Stay tuned to a computer screen near you.
	And I know Kelly agrees with this, too, that this was a strategic planning year for APRIL and we ensconced ourselves behind closed doors back in May out in Spokane, Washington, and came up with a really, really, really strong strategic plan that's tightly focused.  And a big piece of it is how can we foster quality best practice across our network, especially for emerging leaders.  And how can we help centers in their succession planning, as executive directors like me are exiting, right?  And so we're looking at a whole series of what I will call products for the simple understanding to be able to offer our members across the country.  And it's very much, Joel, along the lines of what you're talking.  And so we have a group working on that, and I'm confident, based on the presentation that they made to us in line with our strategic plan at our board meeting before the conference started, that we're going to have something to share with the nation about that in the near future.
	So stay tuned.
	Melody, do you have somebody?
	>> I do.
	>> I do.
	>> Okay, Becky.
	>> Keith (inaudible) from North Country Independent Living in Wisconsin.  First time here.  Exciting, I share your feelings.  
	Invitations to involvements are set up in many ways, youth being encouraged.  I took until late 80 then I ran for county supervisor.  One of the places decisions are made are in the political process.  So the more we can be Johnny Appleseeds planting the seeds of young people, and people planting the seeds, participate also at that part of the table.  And just encourage that.  
	>> Tim:  All right, we have one question in the audience, then we have about two minutes or three minutes left, so let's be prepared, and Bob to close it out.  So go ahead.  
	>> I'll be quick.  My name is Andy (inaudible) I'm SILC director for Tennessee and I just want to thank all of you first, and shout out I learned a lot from my mentors, (indiscernible), and Sam, it's finally great to see new person.  Our SPIL just was our first -- my first SPIL event and we decided as a majority of the CILs to put the money into existing CILs with our first priority to expand.
	Probably not satellites.  And we've already decided, as a group, not to depend on federal dollars.  So we're moving forward with incredible collaboration, in the triple ADs.  So a lot of our conversations are like that.  Our associate director has a background in grant writing, and we see ourselves as a SILC, I don't know, let me know if this is naive, as the PR firm for the network.
	And so we do have a legislative agenda to educate our legislators on the network, they don't even know it's there.  I agree with you, Lex, good to hear you.  You know me from United Spinal working with Paul Tobin.  And I agree with you that there's other agencies that could take over what we do.  And we're constantly doing the S.W.A.T. analysis, that's something I'm always thinking about, to not rise above the static in our culture, but through it.  In one way, everything all said, is that it's consumer driven.  And nobody can -- nobody has stories like the CILs have.  So we're working with our CILs about how to tell the story, that's a better story teller than any nonprofit out there.  Thank you.
	>> Lex: I just wanted to thank everybody for the great comments.  (Inaudible) we need to continue with WIA and the national (inaudible) the independent living programs, (inaudible) demonstrated a commitment.
	Incorporating the new ideas, new approaches to operating (inaudible) our future.  I think the kind of thing you hear today is also planning into our future.  But more viable is the action, the steps it will take to benefit from -- that you keep the dialogue going, keep the emails going, and let's continue to find ways to move forward into the next decade of independent living.
	>> Bill:  Nothing we talk of here is impossible or a bridge too far.  The key to making things happen of course is hard work and building a solid case, as well as marketing it.  And with justice and others with ADA we can and must do the same.
	Thank you.  
	>> Tim:  Thank you, let's have a round of applause for Bob.  Thank you Bob and Lex, and the members of the panel up here.
	It's great that we can begin this conversation here at APRIL.  I look forward to it continuing throughout the year, certainly at ICL in July in D.C., hope to see many of you there.  So stay tuned, folks.  See you later.
***
			This text is being provided in a rough
			draft format.  Communication Access Realtime
			Translation (CART) is provided in order to
			facilitate communication accessibility and may
			not be a totally verbatim record of the
			proceedings.
 ***