by requirements for the degree of (Education) - NCRTM

Rehabilitated
Closures--Not
XIX-XXVII)
(Tables
Of the total number of closures (974), 156 (16%) were closed not .re-
habilitated, of whom 144 (92%) were closed prior to acceptance (status 08)
and 12 (eight per cent) were closed after acceptance (status 28 or 30) but
prior to completion of the vocational plan (Table XXI). The statewide per-
centages of people closed not rehabilitated as compared with rehabilitated
were quite consistent from one year to the next. The fact that the majority
of DVR closures were rehabilitated closures is one measure of the success
of the agency's involvement with the population studied. However, there is
need for more comprehensive information concerning the quality of these
closures in terms of permanency and whether or not the type of work, earn-
ings and opportunities for bettering oneself are commensurate with the
individual's abilities and interests.
Examining the 144 clients not accepted for services, status 08, it
is noted that 72% (103) were identified as mildly retarded, six per cent
(8) as moderately retarded and one per cent (i) as severely retarded; for
32 clients (21%) the exact level of retardation was not known at the time
of closure (Table XXIV). These figures seem to indicate that there was
not a disproportionate number of moderately and severely retarded among
the people declared not eligible for services. The following is a break-
down of the reasons given for not accepting these people for services:
a) 56% (80) of the people refused services, b) 13% (19) were unable to
be contacted, moved, or died, c) seven per cent (i0) had no vocational
handicap, d) five per cent (7) had no disabling condition, e) for three
per cent (5) the handicap was too severe, and f) 16% (23) were closed for
other reasons. It would be particularly interesting to do a follow-up
54