[associates] Re: associates Digest V2 #2

  • From: "Paquin, Gregory J" <GPaquin@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <associates@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 08:18:52 -0800

Hi Glen,
We have a similiar approch as Jurgen, but like with so much of this, the devil 
is in the details.
We establish a procedure where the modifier and the client and the evaluation 
program have to work together.
The fitting begins with the modifier informing the eval program that they have 
completed the adaptions as specified in the equipment list that they bid. All 
parties get together to insure the client understands and can safely use all 
features of the vehicle. When the eval program is "satified" with the clients 
use if the equipment, the paying entity is informed and they schedule an 
inspection by a third party. The inspector does his thing and if all is OK, 
they stamp and sign the vendor's invoice so the vendor can be paid. Then the 
vendor delivers the vehicle to the client( this is to insure the client does 
not drive the vehicle home before they get all the training that may be 
Let me know if you need any more.
Gregory J Paquin
Rehabilitation Engineer
California Department of Rehabilitation
Mobility Evaluation Program
9720 S. Norwalk Blvd.
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Ph:562-941-8295 c:562-818-2951

-----Original Message-----
From: johnanschutz@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:johnanschutz@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 10:08 PM
To: associates digest users
Subject: associates Digest V2 #1

associates Digest       Wed, 06 Jan 2010        Volume: 02  Issue: 001

In This Issue:
                [associates] FW: Natll Rehab Hospital re final fitting for v


From: "Jurgen Babirad" <jbabira1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [associates] FW: Natll Rehab Hospital re final fitting for vehicle mod
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:51:17 -0500

-----Original Message-----
From: John_Anschutz@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:John_Anschutz@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:11 AM
To: Jurgen Babirad
Subject: RE: [associates] Natll Rehab Hospital re final fitting for vehicle

Hi Jurgen,
What a great response!!!   Would you care to send it to the list:
The list however, won't accept any attachments.
I hope things are going well and happy  new year.
             "Jurgen Babirad"                                              
             r.com>                                                     To 
             01/06/2010 09:31                                           cc 
             AM                        "John Anschutz - Rehabilitation     
                                       Engineer - Shepherd"                
                                       RE: [associates] Natll Rehab        
                                       Hospital re final fitting for       
                                       vehicle modifications               

Good morning Glenn.

Completing the final review is done in several different ways.  Much of it
depends on the funding or referral source.  If the referral source has this
particular service (Vehicle modification inspection/aftercheck/followup) as
part of their offering, it is usually no problem at all. Common referral
sources are physicians, VA, VR, Medicaid Waiver, MDA and other foundations.
I think you have to focus on the referral source to come up with a uniform
program.  So all physician referrals in a hospital based program could have
a final review by the CDRS, but a payment source would be difficult.

Providing the service is not difficult or challenging for an industry
veteran.  Getting paid for the service is another story.  There are many
models to look at and I would be  Several state VR agencies are using
centralized vehicle inspections with a single contractor.(Indiana,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York among others).  A good way for evaluators to
insure that they have this covered in the VR programs is to build it into
their service and pricing.  In other words average in the cost of your
driver training or evaluation and never ask for an authorization for a
service that is not defined by the funding agency.  Let the industry (CDRS)
define the category and then build it into their internal costs.  Going the
other way is a long an arduous road as you have to "sell" the program to
administrator. If it is a public payer, the process is political and the
"sell" would need to come from an organized effort by mutual stakeholders.
We have been through this process with several states.

I would be happy to discuss further, but the question is an interesting and
timely issue.

Jurgen Babirad, MSA, ATP, CDRS
ORSC Vehicle Modification Specialist
NYSED - VESID Vehicle Modification Consultant

P.O. Box 540
Kinderhook, NY 12106

(800) 987-2753
(518) 758-7887
(518) 758-8505 FAX


-----Original Message-----
From: Gail Babirad [mailto:gbabira1@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 9:07 AM
To: 'Jurgen Babirad'
Subject: FW: [associates] Natll Rehab Hospital re final fitting for vehicle

-----Original Message-----
From: associates-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:associates-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 5:39 PM
To: associates@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [associates] Natll Rehab Hospital re final fitting for vehicle

 A group of therapists and vehicle modifiers in Maryland who work =
are looking at ways to thoroughly and consistently follow up with = our
clients after their vehicles are modified to assure the modifications w=
safely for them=2E  This is in part due to the ADED best practices=
guidelines which recommends such=2E  Does anyone have info re how the= y
doing this, how they are documenting it when it happens and what they= are
doing when clients do not return after the modifications are made even=
though requested to do so?  Any suggestions re how to do this well wo= uld
beappreciated=2E  Thanks,  Glenn Digman, OTR/L, CDRS Nationa= l Rehab
Hospital, Washington, D=2EC=2E
-----= johnanschutz@comcast=2Enet wrote: -----
To: associates digest users <ecartis@fr= eelists=2Eorg>
From: johnanschutz@comcast=2Enet
Date: 12/29/2009 0= 1:07AM
Subject: associates Digest V1 #15

associates Digest&nbs= p;   Mon, 28 Dec 2009    Volume: 01  Issue: 015

In This Issue:
 &nbsp= ;      [associates] NMEDA= 2010 Board of Directors Elections
    =     [associates] Nathalie Maertens/CR_CLET= HB/Reg06/SSSS est abse

---------------------------------------------= -------------------------

Subject: [associates] NMEDA 2010 Board of = Directors Elections
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:11:05 -0500
From: John_= Anschutz@shepherd=2Eorg

Associate NMEDA members,

I would = like to wish everyone the best new year=2E
Also, the NMEDA elections are= winding down=2E   You have until the end of
year to vote for y= our 2010 NMEDA Board of Directors=2E
If you are an associate or other me= mber of NMEDA I want you to vote=2E
are an important part of t= his organization=2E

This is what you have to do=2E   You have t= o be able to log onto the
website=2E   If you do not have you= r user name and password then the only
to get that is to call the NM= EDA office and they will gladly help you=2E
Then go to the website=2E &n= bsp; Click on the "For our Members" tab and
"elections"=2E  =  You can download the candidate list with their
even w= ithout being logged in but you must log in to vote=2E  It really
iseasy=2E   Better yet with your user name and password there are many =
on the website that can help you=2E

The online voting is= a way to make voting available to all members and is
cost effective=2E =   Do it=2E Vote=2E

Thank you all in advance and wish you the be= st in the new year=2E

John Anschutz, Associate Rep=2E
Shepherd Ce= nter
2020 Peachtree Rd=2E NW
Atlanta, GA  30309

-----= -------------------------------------
This message and accompanying docu= ments are covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act,  18= U=2ES=2EC=2E 2510-2521, and contain
intended for the specif= ied individual(s) only=2E This information  is
Confidential, Protec= ted by the Ga Peer Review Code and may be
If you are not t= he intended  recipient or an agent responsible for
delivering it to= the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you
have received = this document in error and that any review, dissemination,
copying, or t= he taking of any  action based on the contents of this
information = is strictly prohibited=2E If you have received this
communication in err= or, please notify us immediately by returning this
email to the sender a= t shepherd=2Eorg  and then delete the original
and attachme= nts=2E This email has been scanned and found to be virus
I= f this message contains a virus please contact


Subject: [associates] Nat= halie Maertens/CR_CLETHB/Reg06/SSSS est
From: nmaertens@sss= s=2Egouv=2Eqc=2Eca
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:25:45 -0500

Je s= erai absent(e) =E0 partir du  2009-12-24 de retour le  2010-01-04=


End of associates Dige= st V1 #15

=0D=0ACONFIDENTIAL: The information contained in this communication=
,=0Aincluding its attachments may contain confidential information
intended only for the individual (s) or entity (ies) to whom it=0Ais addre=
ssed =2E The information contained in this communication may=0Aalso be
ected by legal privilege , federal law or other=0Aapplicable law=2E If you
are not the intended recipient of this=0Acommunication , you are hereby
ified that any distribution,=0Adissemination or duplication of this
cation is strictly=0Aprohibited=2E If you have received this communication
in error please=0Aimmediately delete and destroy all copies of this
and=0Aplease immediately notify us of the error by separate communication=
=0A=2E Thank you=2E

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.126/2602 - Release Date: 01/05/10

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 4748 (20100106) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.


__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 4748 (20100106) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.


[attachment "Jurgen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" deleted by John Anschutz/Shepherd]
[attachment "Vehicle Modification and Equipment Recommendations - Good
Copy.pdf" deleted by John Anschutz/Shepherd] [attachment "Receipt
Performance Assessment Report.pdf" deleted by John Anschutz/Shepherd]
[attachment "Used Vehicle Inspection - Mechanic Statement.pdf" deleted by
John Anschutz/Shepherd]

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 4748 (20100106) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.



End of associates Digest V2 #1

Other related posts:

  • » [associates] Re: associates Digest V2 #2 - Paquin, Gregory J