After returning from the trip to Nashville, I was anxious to continue my work on a new project. The plant manager from a furniture manufacturing company in Galax had contacted me about our Radford facility producing components for bedroom furniture. Drawer sides and backs for dressers, chest of drawers, and armories would be manufactured and delivered to factories in Galax. I had several things to consider, i.e., material suppliers, purchasing two new machines, costing, pricing, and quoting. I drew out the machine line needed for producing the various types required and decided to design a special sanding machine for the production line. The special sanding machine was produced by Patrick Enterprises in Giles County. It had several features to accommodate individual operators with limited skills for a fast-moving production. One of the major features was a bass boat seat (with seat belt) mounted to a swivel post so the operator could, while seated move back and forth as needed to reach the incoming material, the operating controls, and a grab bar.

I had a chance to observe a young man with uncontrollable shakes along with other limitations operate the sander. The professional rehabilitation staff had requested we give this young man a chance to operate the sanding machine. I was skeptical but agreed and he was assisted onto the operator’s seat and was able to keep pace with the fast-moving line. I observed him from a distance and was amazed that he could keep up and not shake. The referring agency transferred him to another program after a few weeks, but I was proud that the machine design was effective.

We later purchased finishing line equipment that sprayed various finishing materials onto the drawer stock before the cut-off step. The finishing line cleaned, painted and dried the stock. The drying process was in an ultraviolet cabinet with infeed and outfeed conveyors. This processing equipment allowed the employment of four additional individuals enrolled in our programs.

The next month was our state association’s annual conference, and our region was responsible for the conference venue, programs, presentations, guests, menus, and entertainment for the evenings. After a couple of conference planning meetings, the members of the planning committee agreed to my idea for the three-day conference. The theme was “Navigating the Rehab Waters”. The sessions for day one and day two were classroom settings with each session facilitated by one of our regional leaders. Each session developed an instruction on the “How To” for several essential functions common to each participating organization. The meal for the first evening was seafood and a sailboat filled with ice was the buffet line. Mike Trobridge provided the boat. The evening of the second day the instructions were, approved, typed, copied, and placed in manuals and distributed to the attendees on the final day of the conference.

As planned the session facilitators were presented with awards for the most outstanding instruction sessions. The presentations were made at the closing luncheon and three awards were presented. One of our shops made the 1^st, 2^nd, and 3^rd place trophies which I designed. I made the presentations and I told the audience that three retired Navy Petty Officers on the last evening had read the manual and selected the three most informative and usable instructions and rated them one, two, and three. The third place was a rope placed on a beautiful wooden base with brass plate. I announced that the rope was found in the Bermuda Triangle and identified as off a Norwegian Freighter. Second place trophy was pipe with valve off the “African Queen” and on a wooden base. First place trophy was a plimsoll mark cut from the hull of a shipwreck. Great Conference and Renee Fisher, CEO from the Bedford Facility, won the First Place Trophy.

In October 1982, several Virginia Association of Rehabilitation Facilities (Va ARF) members attended a national conference in Nashville, Tennessee. I had met many of my colleagues and was anxious to meet representatives from other states. I drove to Bristol and joined Welthy Soni and two of her staff to make the balance of the trip with them. We stopped near Rogersville TN and picked up John Theobald. John operated programs in East Tennessee and in Southwest Virginia. I do not recall any specifics of the session’s topics except the one on the last day. It was a general session. Most of Virginia’s attendees had already left. Welthy, her staff and John were still in the Hotel. I sat in the last session for a brief time and realized the panel making the presentations included Virginia’s George Pugh and I thought someone from Virginia Commonwealth University. George was the director whose section in Virginia’s Department of Rehabilitative Services contracting with Rehabilitation Facilities. The subject being presented sounded like “WORKSHOPS WITHOUT WALLS”. I was not sure but it sounded threatening. I did not see anyone in the audience from Virginia so I hurriedly left to find a CEO from Virginia. I found Ellen Walker from Danville and one of Welthy’s staff and they followed me back to the session. I was correct about the subject and was troubled about the suggested changes in service delivery and about the new training and employment concept being presented. Although today this model does not trouble me but, its implementation and utilization did then and does to this day.

Each working day I was always an early starter and if there was a staff meeting that morning, the first thing out of my mouth was, “As I was shaving this morning, it occurred to me we have something new to consider.” It was always an idea, a new project, a solution to a problem I had slept on or an improvement we should make. I usually would hear someone whisper, “I wish he would grow a beard. However, we always enjoyed our staff meetings as they were informative, productive, did not last long, and would give us a fresh start for the challenges of the day.

I thoroughly enjoyed the production side of the business and often got involved in the details, as manufacturing processes intrigued me. On an occasion to assist a colleague with a large order for assembling a small product, we received several containers of parts. The items to be assembled were closet savers. Each assembly was made up of three pieces, two hooks and a connecting arm containing five holes for clothes hangers. The assembling steps required the operator, using a rubber mallet, to attach accurately one plastic hook to one end of the arm by striking the arm with the mallet with enough force to join the two pieces and repeat the step for the other end. The connection was a ball and socket fit and some of our client workers were unable to easily make the connection in one, two, or more strikes. It was also discouraging for some workers to get the ball and socket properly aligned before the mallet strike.

I was blessed with a God given talent to almost always find better, faster, or simpler methods to accomplish manufacturing tasks. It was late in the week when the containers arrived, and we were anxious to get started assembling the closet savers. We had a few workers and supervisors trying to make the two connecting steps using a rubber mallet as instructed. Some of those trying were not successful enough to be assigned to the project. I was not satisfied that some of our workers were not able to work on this project. So off I go for the weekend with a few of the parts. I was back on Monday morning with an assembling device. It worked so well, anyone could easily operate the device, and we made another one. Finished the order in surely record time. Even now, years later, I am thrilled to remember some of the success our client workers had on this project.

After passage of the Study Resolution by the Legislature, committee assignments were made, and meetings scheduled. The committee consisted of seven members and three of those were executive directors of rehabilitation facilities, Renee Fisher, Woody Van Valkenburgh and Alex Karris. Their first meeting was held in one of the meeting rooms in the General Assembly building in Richmond. I was happy to see Wand Teel on the committee. Mike Trobridge, Gus Fagan, and I made the first presentations in the meeting. Due to the work of this committee and to the efforts of individual organizations and their stakeholders, the General Assembly included in the state budget $1,700,000 for supporting individuals benefiting from our programs and services. Leaders in our industry were interested in which state agency would be responsible for administrating the funds. After consideration, we agreed on the Department of Rehabilitative Services (DRS). The Department of Social Services (DSS) had at that time the responsibility for setting vendor service rates. That department had a well-established Vendor Application Package and the staff to service applications. But DSS was contracting with only a few Community Rehabilitation Facilities. The Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation (DMHMR) was the agency that regulated and funded the local Community Services Board system which in some cases was no longer contracting with our industry. So, logically the DRS became our recommendation, and that agency was selected to administer the new funding.

An allocation formula was needed to ensure the $1,700,000 fund was equitably utilized. A committee was formed to develop the formula and the members were: Carol Singer-Metz DMHMR, Peggy Smith DSS, George Pugh DRS, Woody Van Valkenburgh and Bob Huff from the vendors. In our first meeting, Carol proposed that the productive level for clients utilizing the new funds should be set at 75%. I remember saying, “Well, Carol what will your agency do with all the people in your group homes with low productivity rates attending our programs as we will not be able to serve them under your plan”. The idea was immediately dropped. Further discussion was had with no significant outcomes. George chaired the committee and asked that we all come to the next meeting with allocation formula recommendations. It was several weeks before we met again, and no one had developed a formula except me, and I had two. My first formula, which considered population percentages, service area sizes, number of clients and service area overlaps was accepted. It was also agreed that only organizations losing Title XX funds were eligible for accessing the new state funds. The new funds were labeled Extended Sheltered Employment (ESE). George was never pleased with this designation so several years later I came up with Extended Employment Services (EES). George liked it and it stuck.

With the first year behind me, our group home Elmtree was fully occupied, well-staffed, and off to a great start. Construction for the apartment complex would begin in a few weeks and there remained an unresolved issue, i.e., how to finance furnishing the thirteen units. I suggested organizing a new corporation, Parkview of Radford, Inc., surveying off a portion of our facility property, selling it to the new corporation, and using the proceeds to buy furniture. The Board approved, the sale completed, and the project funded by the HUD construction loan.

A groundbreaking ceremony for the apartments was held with great attendance; elected officials, the press, a speaker, and a pastor to offer a prayer for good success. Attending were three members of Virginia’s House of Delegates, Ward Teel, Jerry Geisler, and Jeff Stafford. At the reception I asked the three members to meet with me and our state association executive director Flo Armstrong to discuss the program funding issues. These legislators had attended some of our evening meetings on this issue. Leaders in our industry realized for many months that we all faced financial challenges. The meeting with the delegates after the reception resulted with the introduction of a Resolution in the next state legislative session to study the funding issues being experienced by the service providers (Community Rehabilitation Facilities). The Resolution passed and a joint committee was established to study this issue and I became one of three presenters to the committee.

In October, the contractor that did an excellent job with our group home started construction on the thirteen-unit apartments. Also, in October the organization received its second accreditation survey by the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF). Again, a three-year certificate was awarded.

Before continuing with the outcome of the legislative resolution I will mention the industrial side of our operations. This side not only allowed people with disabilities to be employed, but also provided the income from industrial and manufacturing activities to financially help support service provision. Our operations manager Coy Rakes and his staff continued to produce quality products at competitive prices. Our organization produced a wide variety of products for most every company in the district. Had Coy and his and staff been inefficient and failed to meet customer’s requirements, I would not have had time to learn the many layers of the rehabilitation side of our operations. I became an industry leader in the following years and was successful in statewide development of new funding of services and improvements in employment opportunities. However, some of the things I immediately contributed to the industrial segment of our operations were extensive experience in costing and pricing, process analyses, job set-ups, time studies, new product lines, marketing, and quality and safety programs. One of the most important things that management staff contributed to my industry wide involvement, was that I never experienced any apprehension about leaving on a business trip, rehabilitation program or product because the management team would successfully manage whatever came in their assigned areas.

I officially took on the executive director’s responsibilities on the first day of July 1980. Every day of the twenty years of my employment with this not-for-profit organization was an opportunity and a challenge.

The organization was experiencing a weak financial situation and funding streams were changing. I was learning as fast as possible how to get the organization on solid financial grounds. However, being an eternal optimist, I was moving ahead with some bigger plans. These plans brought in a couple of new people and before I could fully actuate the plan, months passed and reality had sat in. We had no control over client funding streams. In those days, the individuals we served were labeled as clients. The primary programs we offered were common across the state with about fifty organizations providing the same type services and several included in their names “sheltered workshops” or “workshops”. The federal and state governments identified our organizations as Community Rehabilitation Facilities. District Community Service Boards provided grants or fees for service funds for their clients attending our programs. Vocational rehabilitation counselors purchased services for their clients enrolled in our programs. Several Local Social Services Departments also purchased services for their clients. These services included elements of training, employment, and transportation. Commercial products produced and sold and/or commercial services contracts provided revenue for material, wages, overhead and administrative costs. Each client had an individualized service plan and our professional staff managed the specified service plan objectives. The organization served four counties and one city. There were six United Ways in the District and these organizations supported our programs.

As I studied and evaluated the organization’s revenue vs expenses, I realized that we needed to reorganize our resources before moving further with new plans. We had twenty-five individuals in one program who were receiving support and employment services, including transportation, and they were unfunded. Unfortunately, these individuals and their training and support staff had to be laid off. I revised our financial reporting system and went from cash to accrual accounting. The fiscal year was ending and no net income was projected that could be placed in a reserved account. Construction of our twelve-bedroom group home and planning for the approved thirteen-unit apartment building were on schedule and not affected by program funding issues. Under my management the first year resulted in a loss on the bottom line. It was the first and last in my tenure, but expectations were high and the second year would provide a new beginning.

It had been a long workday and I was on a thirty-minute drive to the city in our district. As the president of a small manufacturing company, it was my practice to arrive at our plant before the first shift started at 7:00 AM. It was now 6:25 PM and my appointment was in just 35 minutes. I had picked up a soft drink and crackers from a vending machine in our lunchroom at the factory before leaving.

While driving along the familiar roads, I thought about my twenty years of working in heavy industry and about the seven years managing a small manufacturing company. We had sold our business and the new owners asked me to stay on as the company president. It had been almost a year since the sale and for several reasons I had given the new owners my sixty days’ notice to leave the company. I was on the board of directors of a not-for-profit organization serving people with disabilities. The central office was in the city and our executive director was retiring and I had applied for the position. The  directors had approved my leave of absence from the board while they were seeking applications and interviewing.

I arrived on time for my interview and a member of the interview panel came out of the boardroom and asked me to wait in the executive director’s office as they were still interviewing another candidate. The office did not smell particularly good to me as the executive director was a heavy smoker. I was tired from the day’s work and fell asleep. I had to be awakened for the interview. I knew the board members well and had to endure some teasing as they were made aware of my falling asleep. The interview was my first ever at the age of 45 years. The interview went well, and I got the job which led to “DISCOVERING MY PASSION”.

Bob Huff believes freedom to choose matters for people with limited abilities and skill levels to be competitively employed in certain types of industry, e.g. manufacturing or construction. When program developers focused on a single model for the employment of these individuals, many were left behind. Where do we find these individuals now? In small groups riding off to the park, to the grocery store or to a community event, etc. BUT NOT TO WORK. Bob shares his twenty-five years’ experience developing choices for people with limited skills for competitive employment while also DISCOVERING HIS PASSION.