Posted by admin | December 22nd, 2009
- everyone claims VRS is a high priority for the government
- Sherrese Smith:
- must protect the integrity of the TRS fund
- public must have confidence in the system
- Jim Tobias, President, Inclusive Technologies:
- concentrate on the end user
- rapid changes in technology
- live video is spreading throughout the world
- Sheri Farinha, California Coalition of Agencies Serving the Deaf & Hard of Hearing (CCASDHH):
- we serve the community from the womb to the tomb
- fraud is widespread in government, not just VRS
- Sharon Hayes, Video Relay Services Consumer Association (VRSCA):
- sponsored by Sorenson but make our own decisions – we do not endorse Sorenson
- counter miscommunication by VRS providers
- need options – not a one provider monopoly
- many consumers new to VRS
- need to educate and empower our consumers
- we have not yet achieved functional
- Claude Stout, Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc. (TDI):
- FCC doing an amazing job with TRS
- cannot interfere with the advancement of technology
- do not forget hearing individuals
- Rosalind Crawford, National Association of the Deaf (NAD):
- reading from the ADA – “functionally equivalent” – equal access to telephone network
- support national certification of interpreters and RID Code of Professional Conduct
- support FCC certification for VRS providers
- supports current system of payments
- Karen Peltz Strauss, Coalition of Organizations for Accessible Technology (COAT):
- represents 270+ organizations
- formerly with FCC, has worked with a VRS provider, has consulted for NECA
- need for greater rate transparency – open process – know what is covered
- greater dialog between FCC and providers
- providers need to know what is allowed and not allowed
- certification process needs to be improved
- FCC needs more staff
- backlog of petitions
- does FCC have jurisdiction over providers who work for other providers
- systems now are inadequate and not functionally equivalent
- greater interoperability with mainstream technology
- cannot keep VRS isolated from progress
- Krishna Jayakar, Ph.D., Penn State University:
- Gregory R. Rosston, Ph.D., Stanford University:
- strategy project for Sorenson – views today are his own
- economics are relatively straightforward
- VRS expanded dramatically
- main cost is interpreter time – no economy of scale
- can use competitive bidding to hold down costs
- Moderator:
- talk about fraud and abuse first
- Sheri Farinha:
- what is the FCC doing to spot fraud earlier?
- use independent auditors to catch fraud
- we are guessing now
- consumers want a fraud and abuse hotline run by deaf individuals
- also a whistle blower hotline
- FCC contact info on all provider websites
- terminate white label programs
- provisional certification for new companies
- need clear NECA guidelines
- electronic monitoring of CAs
- all providers show their costs
- Claude Stout:
- only 3 or 4 staff members monitor TRS nationwide
- FCC needs to meet with industry on a more frequent basis
- Karen Peltz Strauss:
- need a whistleblower program
- fear of losing equipment prevents deaf from coming forward
- FCC needs to rule on what is appropriate
- improve the certification process – strict requirements
- remove the states from the certification process
- VRS is not mandated so the states could choose not to provide it
- need for VRS oversight board
- Dr. Jayakar:
- consumers don’t monitor VRS closely because they are not paying for it
- monitor minutes without invading privacy
- Rosalind Crawford:
- define what is a reimbursable call
- standard is still functionally equivalent
- cannot infringe on deaf making calls
- defining legitimate business practices
- cannot pay people to place calls
- conduct is impermissible, not the content of the call
- Greg Hlibok:
- how can we have an open dialog with providers?
- Claude Stout:
- DRO needs more staff
- set clear policy for the industry
- Dr. Rosston:
- look at the economics of crime
- if you increase the possibilities of getting caught, fraud will decrease
- Karen Peltz Strauss:
- FCC action – not disclosure – is the problem
- providers report on other providers
- not enough FCC feedback
- example: no automatic reporting of minutes
- FCC has not acted
- some providers using manual recording of minutes
- Michael Jacobs:
- can we elaborate
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.