Written Remarks of Martin Gould Submitted for the Record to the President's Commission on Excellence in Special Education, Transition Task Force Hearing

April 30, 2002

In the second half of the 20th Century, there had been a dramatic change in the value of a high school education and diploma. A high school diploma was considered a valued asset in the labor market during the 1950s. By the early 1970s, a high school diploma served as a gateway to many promising career opportunities. Because high school completion and a diploma have become a requirement for pursuing additional education, training, or the labor force, the consequences of leaving high school without a diploma are severe. On average, students who receive special education - like their general education peers - who do not attain diplomas and those who do not complete their high school education are: more likely to be unemployed; more likely to earn less money if, and when, they eventually secure work; and, more likely to receive public assistance than they would if they completed their education and work preparation programs, and attained a high school diploma.

Over the past 27 years federal legislation has been enacted to exact changes in how children and youth with disabilities were educated, engaged in postsecondary education experiences, and prepared for and involved in meaningful employment. Such legislation includes the following: the Education of All Handicapped Children Act (P.L. 94-142), the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Amendments of 1984 (P.L. 98-524) and Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-392), the Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988, as amended in 1994 (P.L. 100-407 and P.L. 103-218) (Tech Act), the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-336), the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Amendments of 1992 (P.L.101-476) and 1997 (P.L. 105-17), the School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994 (P.L.103-239), the Higher Education Act of 1998 (P.L.105-244) including a new program for Higher Education Access for Students with Disabilities (Part D of Title VII), the 1998 Rehabilitation Act Amendments (P.L. 105-166), the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-220), and the 1999 Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act (P.L. 106-170). The Rehabilitation Act amendments also focused attention on the Congressional intent regarding national level leadership that is needed for coordination across programs, initiatives, and services. It established special responsibilities for the Secretary of Education to coordinate all activities with respect to individuals with disabilities across programs administered by the Federal Government. Neither the extent, effectiveness of carrying out this requirement, nor its impact on the way students with disabilities exit high school is clear at this time.

Chief among these various pieces of federal legislation is IDEA, its transition services requirements, and related provisions of the 1997 IDEA amendments. School districts are required to assess each student's ability to meet post-graduation goals and to consider individual transition services needs, not relying upon general services and/or supports the school may already have in place. The 1997 IDEA amendments require an individualized education program (IEP) team to formulate a statement of each student's transition service needs focusing on which courses will be necessary to help the student achieve long-term vocational goals by the time a student turns 14 years old. By age 16 (or younger, if the IEP team determines that it is appropriate), the specific transition services necessary to accomplish those vocational goals must be addressed through IEP team transition service planning. Transition services are defined as a coordinated set of activities "designed within an outcome oriented process" and aimed at promoting each student's movement from school to post-school activities. These activities may include: Post-secondary education, vocational training, integrated employment, adult education, independent living and community participation.

Although IDEA may be considered the chief entitlement law for children and youth with disabilities, it is not their only federal civil rights protection. However, youth and their families are not sufficiently aware that children, youth, and adults with disabilities are also protected against discrimination and that youth and adults are provided access to rehabilitation services, if needed for employment, under the Rehabilitation Act. While this law has been on the books more than a quarter of a century, administration of its multiple sections is the responsibility of different federal entities. Who administers what is unclear to some stakeholders and becomes important information when laws are not always fully and effectively carried out by state and local entities. The Rehabilitation Act incorporates provisions for determining individual need for vocational rehabilitation training to assist with reaching a desired employment outcome.

How well has America met the education and employment needs of youth through its education and disability policy, legislative provisions and initiatives geared to prepare youth for success in the digital economy, to decrease drop out rates, and to increase graduation rates? In terms of preparing youth with disabilities for the digital economy, according to a nationally representative survey conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES, 2000) of 1,000 school administrators about the use of telecommunications in their school:

• 65% of public schools had internet access;
• 73% of these school indicated that students had access to the internet either through e-mail, newsgroups or the web;
• 47% of schools indicated that the major barrier to student use of telecommunications was that special education teachers were not being sufficiently trained in the technology;
• 34% of schools cited not having enough computers available to students with disabilities;
• 38% of schools reported not having enough computers with alternative input/output devices for students with disabilities; and
• 39% of schools indicated that there were inadequate evaluation and support services to meet the special technology needs of students with disabilities.

These data present a picture that leaves much to be done in the area of telecommunications access and personnel training.

In school year 1996, there were 441,812 students reported to have exited special education in the United States and outlying areas. In 1997, that number increased to 463,025 students. In school year 1998, that number increased to 486,625 students. The following statistics provide information on the 'Basis of Exit' data reported over the last 3 years by the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education Programs.

Basis of Exit for Students Who Receive Special Education In the United States During the 1996 to 1998 School Years

Note: Data derived from Tables AD1 of the 19th, 20th, and 21st Annual Reports to the U.S. Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The diploma rates were basically static at 27% for school years 1996, 1997 and 1998. Drop out rates remained static during that three-year period. The percentage of students who left the system and were reported as "not known to continue" remained static. Out-of-school youth (i.e., 'drop outs' and those 'not known to continue') comprise almost one-third of all secondary-aged students who exit the system. We, as a nation, do not really know what happens to those 150,000 or so former students. It is not clear how many go on to jobs, to college, or how many wind up on welfare rolls. Unfortunately, it is difficult to say with any degree of certainty from year to year. But each year now for the next 10 years we may witness a steady increase in the overall numbers of youth and young adults who disappear from our 'radar screens' because they have dropped out and/or exited for unknown reasons.

When state-by-state data (from the 21st Annual Report on IDEA) for 'Basis of Exit-Exiting with Diploma" are viewed geographically, the following observations can be made:

• Graduation with diploma rates range from a low of 7% for the state of Mississippi to a high of 81% for the state of Texas;
• The southeastern most portion of the United States has the largest cluster of states (i.e., Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, and North Carolina) with the lowest graduation by diploma rates that range from 7% to 20%; and
• One cluster of four states (i.e., Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey) has some of the highest graduation by diploma rates, ranging from 37% to 47%.

An increasing number of youth with disabilities apply for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) or Social Security Disability Income (SSDI) each year. According to the Social Security Administration in 1999, approximately 75,000 individuals between 18 and 24 years of age were awarded SSI or SSDI benefits, and as of June 2000 about 355,000 persons aged 18-24 were receiving SSI or SSDI benefits. Of these about 36,000 were getting benefits from both programs. (Annual Statistical Supplement to the Social Security Bulletin, 1999). Recent reports about the work patterns of disability insurance beneficiaries showed mixed information. For example, that among SSDI recipients, less than one percent of recipients who continue to meet SSA's definition of disability ever leave the program to return to work (Ross, 1996), only 12% of the beneficiaries who were not previously working start jobs while receiving benefits (Hennessey, 1996), 43.8% of people with disabilities ages 18 to 34 tend to stop working (Hennessey, 1997). On the other hand, when compared to untrained people, youth with vocational or job training were less likely to stop work and return to SSDI rolls than were older disability insurance beneficiaries (Dykacz, 1998).

A report entitled The Summary of Data on Young People with Disabilities (NIDRR & SSA 1999) drew on data from sources such as the National Health Interview Survey, the National Center for Education Statistics, the Current Population Survey, and the Survey of Income and Program Participation. Statistics included in the Summary Data Highlights indicated that:

• Among the 25.1 million people 15 to 21 years of age, 12.1 percent have a disability, and 3.2 percent have a severe disability.
• The head of household's educational attainment was significantly lower for youth with disabilities. Parents or guardians who had not completed high school were heads of household for 41 percent of youth with disabilities. By comparison, the heads of households who had not completed high school for youth ages 12 to 17 in the general population was 22 percent.
• Typical household income in families with youth with disabilities was considerably lower than for youth in the general population. For 35 percent of the youth with disabilities, household income was less than $12,500, compared with the general population of youth age 12 to 17, where 18 percent of the households had incomes of less than $12,500. For households including youth with disabilities, 68 percent of the households had incomes of less than $25,000, while in the general population households with youth, only 18 percent had incomes of less than $25,000.

In addition to the discouraging reports on prevalence, NCD indicated in 2000, in a report entitled Back to School on Civil Rights, the following data about noncompliance with the IDEA:

• The largest areas of noncompliance were general supervision, where 90 percent, or 45 states, failed to ensure compliance, and transition, where 88 percent, or 44 states, failed to ensure compliance (p. 89); and
• Specific transition requirements and the percentage of states in noncompliance were listed as - meeting participants (76% or 38 states), notice (70% or 35 states), and statement of needed services (68% or 34 states).

After reviewing all of the data described above, it should be no surprise that transition and post-school outcomes for youth are poor.

NCD urges the President and the Congress to ensure that the tools necessary for obtaining education and employment goals are provided to today's youth who will shape our nation's future. In the spirit of hope and with the expectation that many segments of American society have a stake in ensuring successful transitions for youth and young adults, NCD makes a number of recommendations for action at the local, state, and national level. Overall, NCD's recommendations for action at the state, local, and community level underscore the need to remove administrative disincentives for collaboration and coordination of efforts, document and share information about what works, including integration of preparation for transition into daily school life and greater involvement of community resources at all levels, and innovation in ways of reaching diverse cultures, underserved and unserved populations. More specifically, NCD's recommendations to the President and the U.S. Congress include the need to:

1. Establish a timeline for reports to Congress and the public on the review, revision and/or refinement of all relevant federal agencies' compliance and enforcement of programs that involve youth and young adults with disabilities. Include that each agency must provide clear and distinct incentives for compliance and enforcement, and specific and immediate sanctions for noncompliance and lack of enforcement, whenever necessary.
2. Require that all federal agencies redesign and/or redirect regional grants, contracts and/or cooperative agreements that are not producing results for youth and young adults with disabilities in secondary education, career training and employment preparation, and post-secondary education areas. Establish a timeline for carrying out the work and reporting the revisions.
3. Direct the Department of Education and the Social Security Administration to work together to: (a) set forth clear guidelines on the interpretation of the definitions of common terms in the federal laws impacting youth transitioning from high school; and (b) jointly fund and commission a national study for review and analysis of the SSI program purposes and the IDEA program purposes in relation to transitioning youth and young adults. One outcome of that study could be the design of a combined program with links to work incentive programs and other efforts that can lead to greater self-sufficiency for youth and young people with disabilities.
4. Ensure that the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, Interior, and Labor, the Small Business Administration, Health Care Financing Administration, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and Social Security Administration develop and implement actions needed to build and reinforce data - and information-sharing crosswalks within and across executive, legislative, and judicial branch agencies regarding the implementation of programs that involve youth and young adults with disabilities.
5. Ensure that the interagency coordination among the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, Interior, and Labor, the Small Business Administration, Health Care Financing Administration, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and Social Security Administration promote the infusion of knowledge about what works regarding transition and post-school services and supports for youth and young adults within and across all areas of federal, state, and local governments, public-private partnerships focusing on school and workplace improvements, and among all of America's citizens. Collect and disseminate timely and useful data and information about successful and unsuccessful strategies for youth and young adults with disabilities. Information needs to be meaningful to youth with disabilities, their families and the general public. Designate the President's Task Force on the Employment of Adults with Disabilities Subcommittee on Expanding the Employment of Youth with Disabilities for the leadership of this effort.
6. Ensure that all Department of Education and Department of Labor youth initiative grants, programs, and initiatives include dollars and resources for individuals with disabilities. A first step should authorize the Department of Education to implement a post-secondary education initiative that incorporates targeted scholarships and/or loans for youth and young adults with disabilities. Require that the initiative will provide effective outreach recruitment, relevant follow-along supports, and reasonable financial terms for repayment, when necessary.

HOME | FAQs | NEWSROOM | SITE MAP | FEDERAL AGENCIES | RESOURCES

Last Updated: April 29, 2002