Technical Assistance to Improve Postsecondary Transition Services

Use of joint discretionary grant funding from the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) and the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) in the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) to provide technical assistance (TA) to State Education Agencies (SEAs), Local Educational Agencies (LEAs), State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies (SVRAs), and Career and Technical Education (CTE)


U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos believes in the innate potential of every student and knows that access to high-quality services are an essential part of local, State, and Federal efforts to improve outcomes for all students and youth with disabilities. OSERS is seeking input from the public, particularly SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, parents and CTE educators, and other relevant stakeholders on how best to provide TA to States in order to improve postsecondary transition services to all students and youth with disabilities. Additionally, OSERS seeks input on how best to strengthen and expand coordination and collaboration with OSERS Parent Training and Information Centers and other relevant TA centers.

In September 2014, OSEP and RSA jointly made a 5-year award to establish and operate the National Technical Assistance Center on Improving Transition to Postsecondary Education and Employment for Students with Disabilities (NTACT/Center). The Center was funded under the TA and Dissemination Program as authorized under sections 663 and 681(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481(d), and section 303(b) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended by Title IV of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C 793(b). The current project period ends on December 31, 2019.

The grant was awarded to provide TA to SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, and other vocational rehabilitation (VR) service providers to implement evidence-based and promising practices and strategies to ensure that students with disabilities, including those with significant disabilities, exit high school ready for postsecondary success.

Specifically, the current Center has five primary goals that support State’s efforts to improve transition and postsecondary education and employment for students with disabilities:

  1. Youth and young adults with disabilities receive and participate in evidence-based and promising practices in secondary transition services and supports.
  2. SEAs and LEAs implement evidence-based and promising practices and strategies, including early warning and intervention systems to reduce dropout and increase graduation rates.
  3. Students with disabilities participate in career-related curricula so they are prepared for postsecondary employment and careers.
  4. Students with disabilities receive rigorous academic preparation so they are prepared for success in postsecondary education.
  5. SEAs, SVRAs, LEAs, and local VR offices use data-driven decision-making to develop their respective plans and reports.

As a matter of general practice, the Department regularly reviews its investments to ensure the most efficient and effective use of federal funds. Additionally, we consider feedback from the field, including feedback from TA recipients, and we want to hear directly from you what has worked well, what could be improved, and what changes should be considered as we recompete this grant. In particular, we are interested in exploring the provision of TA as it relates to future investments, and are seeking your input across four areas: 1) current challenges, 2) products (that should remain in use and new products needed to address critical needs), 3) strengthening TA, and 4) coordination and collaboration.

To help us in our review, we ask that you only address the following questions in the comment section below. To protect your privacy and the privacy of others, please do not include personally identifiable information, such as the name of a child or school personnel, a Social Security number, an address, a phone number or an email address in the body of your comment. Comments containing the aforementioned information, or that do not address the below questions, will not be allowed to remain on this site.

This blog will be open for comments through October 2, 2019.

  1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
  2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
  3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
  4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
  5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
  6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
  7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

Conclusion

OSERS appreciates your support and suggestions as we continue efforts to expand, strengthen, and improve TA to States in their work to provide high-quality transition services to all students and youth with disabilities and their families.

We look forward to receiving your comments on or before October 2, 2019.

168 Comments

  1. Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) Education Task Force
    Comments on Technical Assistance to Improve Postsecondary Transition Services
    October 2, 2019

    Thank you for offering the opportunity to provide input into technical assistance (TA) funded by the U.S. Department of Education related to improving postsecondary transition services.

    The Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) is the largest coalition of national organizations working together to advocate for federal public policy that ensures the self-determination, independence, empowerment, integration and inclusion of children and adults with disabilities in all aspects of society.

    We understand that the Department is particularly interested in exploring the provision of TA as it relates to future investments across four areas: 1) current challenges, 2) products (that should remain in use and new products needed to address critical needs), 3) strengthening TA, and 4) coordination and collaboration.

    The following are comments collected by leaders of the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities Education Task Force on the questions posed by the Department below.

    What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    There are three major areas where we face challenges in serving youth with disabilities: (1) in transition planning for all students with disabilities; (2) in coordination of transition services under vocational rehabilitation programs; and (3) in coordination of pre-employment transition services.
    1. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires transition planning for students with disabilities to begin before the student turns 16. The plan must be individualized, based on the student’s strengths and interests, and map out goals and activities that will help the student accomplish their vision for life after high school. However, students are increasingly less involved in their own transition planning and goal setting. Frequently, transition plans are set without being individualized to each student and do not set ambitious goals or provide pathways for students to achieve them. Across the board, increased resources and professional development must be devoted to helping LEAs more meaningfully engage in transition planning with students with disabilities.
    2. Transition services were added to the IDEA in 1990 and to Title I of the Rehabilitation Act (Rehab Act) in 1992. It is the responsibility of the vocational rehabilitation (VR) program to coordinate with the local schools in developing transition services as part of the IEP to provide transition services for students with disabilities. Unfortunately, we hear from our members in the field that all too often that this coordination is not happening at the state and local levels. Following is some of the feedback from our member organizations:
    ● Lack of individualization for transition services by school districts
    o Services are based on available programs rather than on students’ abilities, needs, preferences, and interests.
    o Students with disabilities have difficulty getting into school district regular vocational programs.
    ● Lack of meaningful student engagement in setting ambitious post-secondary goals and developing effective transition plans that will lead to student success in college or career
    ● Lack of coordination between the LEA and the VR agency
    o VR agencies do not get involved until late in a student’s schooling, postsecondary education, and career goals.
    o The VR agency is rarely at the table to help develop the IEP.
    o There is little collaboration about who is responsible for services that could be considered covered under either IDEA or the Rehab Act.
    o Assistive technology should be transferred with the student when they leave school or they should be assisted in receiving new technology for college and work.
    ● Lack of integrated employment experiences for students still in school, particularly after school or during the summer
    ● Teachers are not trained in employment services. There is little personnel preparation regarding the transition to postsecondary education and employment.
    ● VR counselors are not trained in understanding different disabilities. For example, they may not understand the different training and accommodations needed by job seekers with autism as compared to those with cerebral palsy.
    ● Shortage of trained VR counselors, especially in rural areas.

    3. Since the passage of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), State VR agencies must spend 15 percent of their budget on pre-employment transition services (Pre-ETS). Pre-ETS services include both providing services and participating with IEP Teams to assist in developing transition plans in IEPs for students. It may be too early to evaluate, but we believe will help with some of these problems. It is troubling to learn from a recent GAO report however,(https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/694378.pdf) that fewer than half the 74 agencies reported that they used at least 15 percent of their VR grant allotment each year. (Students With Disabilities: Additional Information from Education Could Help States Provide Pre-Employment Transition Services, GAO, September 2018)

    Technical assistance must be focused on improving the quality of and student engagement in transition planning as well as improving outcomes for students receiving transition services.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    We agree with the five primary goals. However, we propose that a sixth goal be added related to meaningful student engagement and participation in the transition planning and goal setting process. We believe student engagement in the transition process is critical to creating inclusive transition plans that build on a student’s strengths, skills, abilities, and needs.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    We are very pleased with the work of the WINTAC, NTAC and the RSA funded PTI programs and the work of RAISE in coordinating those programs. One member organization reported that the Pre-ETS Guidebook for community rehabilitation providers developed by WINTAC is very helpful.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    We propose using the results of OSEP monitoring to identify needs for TA to support transition work.
    The National Council on Disability provided, among other recommendations, that RSA and OSEP develop joint nationwide training on how to coordinate on the provision of pre-employment services (p. 5 of the report on implementation of Pre-Ets -https://ncd.gov/sites/default/files/FINAL_WIOA PETS Implementation Memorandum Report.pdf)

    Technical assistance materials specifically tailored to parents and people with intellectual and other disabilities would be valuable. Parents and people with disabilities need easy to read and step by step instructions. Existing tools from university centers and TA grantees should be shared with parents and people with disabilities.

    Information on how ABLE accounts can help with transition services and postsecondary education should be included.

    Since the mid-1990s the federal government has rightly been focused on assisting people with disabilities to transition into competitive integrated employment. We agree on this focus and believe increased technical assistance to states is needed to help students with disabilities be ready for work in the community. The TA Center could share models in states that have been successful in transitioning students with disabilities, including those with significant functional disabilities, to competitive integrated employment (CIE).

    We are interested in understanding the long-term employment outcomes and experiences of individuals with both low and high incidence disabilities, and believe there is value in linking these employment statistics to their transition plans to measure the effectiveness of their transition plans and how helpful they are to individuals as they prepare for college and the workforce. We propose a study of a cohort of young adults with low incidence disabilities ( visual impairment, hearing impairment, intellectual disability) and a cohort of young adults with high incidence disabilities—Specific Learning Disabilities, attention disorders (often under the Other Health Impairment category), Autism Spectrum Disorders, and more—for a period of time to track their educational progress, employment, and overall post-high school transitions as a way of understanding the value and quality of their transition plans and post-secondary success. We recommend building off of the foundational data collected by NLTS 2012 to provide explanatory information about student transition plans.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    The laws and policy guidance governing transition are clear and helpful. The biggest problem consistently reported by our members is that these laws are still not being implemented consistently. Students with disabilities need more assistance advocating for services to support their transition. We support any pilot program supporting legal advocacy for students.
    We believe technical assistance must be strengthened around ensuring effective transition services are provided early, at least by age 14, as part of a free and appropriate public education (FAPE), especially for those with the most significant disabilities.

    In addition, TA is needed in the area of communication needs of students with developmental disabilities who are transitioning to post-secondary education.

    Students with disabilities are often excluded from Career and Technical Education (CTE) programs. On July 31, 2018, President Trump signed the reauthorization of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act. Consistent with CCD’s priorities for updating the law are new provisions in the Act such as: including individuals with disabilities among the stakeholders that must be consulted in the development of the state plan; creating a new set-aside for the recruitment of individuals with disabilities to CTE programs that lead to high-wage in-demand careers; including provisions around public reporting on student subgroups and special population performance by program of study; and, expanding access and requirements for teacher professional development in Universal Design for Learning and other research-based teaching methods. We believe technical assistance must now be provided to help states implement the new requirements.

    CCD is also pleased the Department recently (September 17, 2019) developed and published new guidance for Increasing Postsecondary Opportunities for Students and Youth with Disabilities. This guidance clarifies important requirements related to the following.
    ● The opportunity for students with disabilities to enroll in postsecondary education programs while still in high school;
    ● The opportunity for students and youth with disabilities to enroll in a comprehensive transition and other postsecondary programs for individuals with disabilities after leaving high school;
    ● The coordination of transition-related services that students with disabilities may receive under the IDEA and under the VR program; and
    ● The financial aid available to students with disabilities enrolled in a comprehensive transition and postsecondary education programs for students with intellectual disabilities offered at Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) under the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA).
    The new guidance clarifies that vocational rehabilitation funding may be used to support students in a variety of ways. It is important that federally-funded TA Centers provide technical assistance to VR state agencies, vocational rehabilitation counselors, as well as students and families about the use of these funds. However, the guidance falls short in explaining the use of IDEA funds for dually enrolled students and students enrolled in Comprehensive Transition Programs. Federally-funded TA centers must be able to provide clarification and technical assistance to states, districts, students and families on the use of IDEA funds.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?”

    Greater focus is needed on supporting LEAs and educators to engage in meaningful transition planning with students. It is critical that students not be tracked into certain pathways based on their disability status or type of disability. TA Centers can help coordinate between SEAs, LEAs, parent support agencies and teacher preparation programs to provide increased supports and professional development to educators and properly support the student’s IEP team to develop comprehensive, individualized, and ambitious goals for life after high school.

    As suggested by state education agency officials interviewed for the September 2018 GAO report (https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/694378.pdf), VR and educational agencies should coordinate funding to make services available where they are needed and to complement each other’s transition efforts (p.24).

    Over half (41 of 74) of state VR agencies reported in the GAO survey that additional assistance on coordinating with state education agencies would be useful for them. Similarly, officials from all three state educational agencies interviewed said they would like additional assistance on interagency collaboration.

    RSA developed a very helpful checklist to analyze SEA and VR collaborative agreements. This could be used as a platform for more extended TA on these interagency agreements. It would also be helpful to develop model agreements.

    Thank you again for the opportunity to provide input. If you have any questions, please contact any of the following co-chairs of the CCD Education Task Force:
    Annie Acosta
    The Arc

    Laura Kaloi
    Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates & The National Center for Special Education in Charter Schools

    Amanda Lowe
    National Disability Rights Network (NDRN))

    Kim Musheno
    Autism Society of America

    Meghan Casey Whittaker
    National Center for Learning Disabilities (NCLD)

  2. My name is Jonathan. I am an 8th grade student from Lomita, California. I am autistic and have an IEP. I also have a one-on-one aide on campus that supports me at school and in the classroom. Although I am currently in general education classes, I have experienced being in special education classes. I respectfully would like to make a recommendation regarding supporting my fellow students with disabilities.
    A challenge that is currently being experienced in servicing youth with disabilities is the lack of input being provided by the youth themselves when it comes to making decisions about their transition goals and services. Input from students with disabilities must be considered when making decisions. According to IDEA, the IEP team includes “whenever appropriate, the child with a disability”. Students with disabilities must be included as an equal member of the IEP team. They should help to make decisions about their education to the best of their ability. It is my recommendation that training and resources be provided to students with disabilities so that they can learn about IEPs and how this affects their education and future. Students with disabilities must be full equal members and need the training so that they can best help to make decisions about their transition and educational goals within their IEP. A transition plan must be created when a student turns 16 years of age (in my school district, the age of transition is 14). This transition plan states the assistance that a student will need for their future transition from middle school to high school and into college and beyond. I am currently planning for my transition meeting and am learning about how my IEP helps to support my needs in school. I have heard from my fellow students with IEPs that they do not understand what an IEP does or what it contains. They do not understand the affect that the IEP has on their education and their future. Students with disabilities must be able to make informed decisions about their educations and their futures and must be provided with the support and training that they need in order to do so. This is something that can be done to best support students with disabilities.
    Students with disabilities, like myself, depend on the supports and services in their IEPs to participate in class, to the best of their ability, and to be among their peers. This helps to develop our abilities and our potential and impacts our futures. Christopher Reeves said, “So many of our dreams at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we summon the will, they soon become inevitable.” We have a lot of work to do and a long road ahead, but I am hopeful that we will all do what is best for all my fellow students with disabilities. With the voices of students with disabilities being taken into account, a meaningful impact can be made on our education and our futures.
    Thank you.

  3. Please include safety and education of community in regards to advancing transition initiatives

  4. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    Children with disabilities and their families should be supported earlier and more consistently to identify potential paths after high school or college. Many families are not connected to or aware of appropriate resources and are left at graduation unsure of where to go. Students with disabilities should be supported to identify their strengths, challenges, and interests early on to establish goals and plan meaningful steps towards them. They should have opportunities to develop practical life skills and job skills, including being supported to use public transportation or identify strategies to access transportation. Area-specific employment opportunities and resources should be presented to families, as well as options for continuing education. Local resources outside of the school system should be identified so that even if direct collaboration is not possible, families can access additional resources as needed. Transition plans should be updated regularly as children develop and based on their current goals, interests, abilities, and challenges.

  5. Disability Rights California is a nonprofit agency. We are the largest disability rights group in the nation. Federal law established us to protect and advocate for the rights of people with disabilities in California. Our mission is to advocate, educate, investigate, and litigate to advance the rights, dignity, equal opportunities, and choices for all people with disabilities. Among other programs, DRC administers the Client Assistance Program (CAP). The CAP provides information, advice and advocacy to help protect the rights of people who receive or need services from the state vocational rehabilitation agency (Department of Rehabilitation), Independent Living Centers, or other Rehabilitation Act Funded partners.
    Our comments reflect the issues and concerns of our community and our experience in advocating on behalf of people with disabilities in California.

    Challenges we are currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school:

    Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) transition services to students with disabilities are part of providing a free and appropriate public education (FAPE).
    • There is no mandate that directs school districts to consider employment as the first and primary goal of transition planning. We find that many transition plans, particularly those for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) ,are not designed to prepare students for higher education and/or employment. Rather, they are a means of referral to day programs funded by the developmental disability system and activities or sheltered workshops by way of Adult Transition Programs.

    Under the Workforce Innovations and Opportunities Act, state vocational rehabilitation programs provide pre-employment transition services to students with disabilities.
    • In California, there has been inconsistency regarding the provision of Pre-Employment Transition Services (pre-ETS) to students who require vocational services in order access Pre-ETS. It is our understanding that students with disabilities may receive vocational services and Pre-ETS simultaneously if found eligible for vocational rehabilitation services. However, we have heard that persons with the most significant disabilities who require vocational rehabilitation services in order to access or participate in Pre-ETS are instead told they cannot participate in Pre-ETS if they need additional services to access or participate in them or that once they have been found eligible for vocational rehabilitation services, they can no longer receive pre-ETS.

    • Students who require vocational rehabilitation services are encouraged to wait until graduation/exit from special education before applying to DOR.

    Technical Assistance Needs and Tools
    • Policy Directives & Technical Assistance Circulars – The RSA has retired several Policy Directives Technical Assistance Circulars. These directives are a needed technical assistive tool for self-advocates, the Client Assistance Program (CAP) and the state vocational rehabilitation agency. Policy directives provide guidance regarding the implementation of the federal regulations to agency staff and are a needed tool for CAP Advocates in their efforts to resolve disputes at the lowest level.

    • Data and Reports – The OSERs provides data and reports via its website. However, there are few reports available, and the ones that are available are several years old.

    • Federal support/technical assistance for a VR case management system that links CCI&R participants, Pre-ETS and vocational rehabilitation services –VR agencies have specific requirements under section 511 of the WIOA regarding services that must be provided to youth with disabilities prior to a referral to sub-minimum wage employment. At present, it is difficult to ensure those requirements have been met because there is not a meaningful mechanism to track individuals who have received cross-program services. For example, there is no policy, process or case management tool wherein the vocational rehabilitation agency can track whether a person who has previously received Pre-ETS or CCI&R services goes on to apply for and receive vocational rehabilitation services .

  6. This process of acquiring feedback is a good one which I hope OSERS will continue. In fact, it would be useful to conduct such inquiries more often. The resulting work load for OSERS personnel would be considerable, but would provide one or two check-ins to determine if funds are being spent or are on track to meet the needs of TA consumers prior to a new funding cycle.
    Responses to the 7 questions follow.
    1. Sadly, many challenges remain or are presented anew with various state and federal educational reforms. Major challenges include
    • Lack of access to students during school day for career assessment and vocational evaluation purposes, for Pre-ETS, CTE, and targeted career development purposes; gate-keepers, including worried parents feel students shouldn’t miss their academic courses, even for one or two class periods a month.
    • Students still are sorted via their “potential” for future endeavors by adults such as guidance counselors, rehabilitation counselors, etc. In other words, some students are deemed not worthy of applying for CTE programs, college, etc. This age-old problem seems as bad today as always.
    • The meaning and content of work-based learning or work experiences are open to local and/or school interpretation, meaning there is no standard to meet or follow. There are huge differences between helping out in a school office versus following the work requirements of a job in the community. We need common and universally-accepted definitions.
    • Educators and rehabilitation counselors of Pre-ETS (purposes, eligibility, what can and cannot be included). It also seems that in many states, Pre-ETS is driving or has replaced other transition related programs and services. Pre-ETS was not intended to serve as rehab’s major or sole transition program, but that seems to be happening in some places.
    • Too many transition goals are NOT based on assessment results. This is partly due to the fact that assessments are inappropriate, are not given, are not interpreted accurately or consistently nor is the information triangulated. Rather, one or two assessment instruments may be used which may require self-report only. These are students’ opinions and if the instruments or activities are appropriate for the chronological AND cognitive ages of students, they still may not be interpreted at all—to students, their parents, or the transition team. Any TA center should address this problem as it is a major barrier to meeting the needs of transitioning students and youth.
    • Too often the same one or two assessment instruments or methods are given to all students with disabilities, regardless of their situations, disabilities, or ages to name a few factors. Inappropriate assessment drives inappropriate outcomes or results.
    • Transition teams still do not write measurable or appropriate goals and often they simply repeat the same goals year after year.
    • Transition teams still do not understand the differences between assessment and evaluation particularly pertaining to vocational, career, or transition assessment and “functional” vocational evaluation.
    • Finding professionals qualified to provide appropriate assessment and evaluation services are more than difficult to find, in many states they do not exist. This is due to the oversight (or change in policy priorities) by BOTH OSEP and RSA of not providing training funds for professionals who can access graduate education in assessment. If transition goals (IEP and IPE) are to be based on assessment results, many fall short, because assessment training has not been adequately addressed by OSERS, especially over the past few years. OSEP has funded few transition assessment focused grants or contracts. A couple which have been funded have not included the breadth and depth of assessment options; they have focused more on trying to fit within evidence-based practices” or norm-referenced assessment instruments. Assessment based on work, real or simulated, has proven (I know, only anecdotally) to make the most significant positive differences for students with disabilities. Please, please offer RFPs from both OSEP and RSA for career, vocational and transition assessment personnel preparation. Nothing will change, in fact it will worsen, if this doesn’t happen.
    • Schools nor vocational rehabilitation have sufficient numbers of trained or qualified transition personnel. When I asked a few years ago why the OSERS wasn’t offering any more transition personnel preparation RFPs, I was told twice by different people that they weren’t offering them because there were insufficient applications from universities that had this expertise. This is a huge problem. How can we prepare transition personnel if we have no one to train them? This sounds like a typical Catch 22 problem. Please, please offer more RFPs for transition personnel preparation.
    • Today I heard the same complaint from two practitioners that I’ve observed for the past 40 years: adult service providers in the areas of job and transition services are not qualified nor properly trained to assist students or youth with employment or transition services. Please figure out a way for these personnel to be included in any TA center’s work.
    6. The TA Center’s process of identifying potential intensive TA sites through applications helps make the workload more manageable and may seem to focus scant funds for those who seek them, but such a process
    • may leave out states that do not have the staff or inclination to apply for TA,
    • does help targeted states but the lessons learned within these states may not be distributed to other non-TA-assisted states,
    • nor may some of the lessons be generalized to all states.

    All states need targeted TA. Resources are limited, but the truth is a more inclusive system is needed. Also, the recent centralization of funding national TA centers misses so many state and local needs and practitioners’ edification or support. A more regionalized system of TA (not necessarily for transition) proved in the past more effective because TA providers learned to know in depth the problems, challenges, and potential of a few states and could share this information among them. State personnel were more comfortable calling or contacting regional TA staff about “real-world” issues rather than trying to fit within parameters of a wide-ranging system.

    If you switch to regional TA centers, you can use the application process now being used nationally, but the scope will be smaller so the TA center staff will be more familiar with their assigned states and can share or disseminate lessons learned with others in the region.

    7. Centers can best support states by OSERS grant or contract application requiring collaboration wit
    ALL potential partners in the states. It is an overwhelming job, but transition services often involve the juvenile justice system, mental health services, health services, and even adult corrections and, of course, local, state, or national businesses. Many of us appreciate the inclusion of CTE within the purview of TA partners, but from experiences on the ground, we do not see that this has been successful except in a few isolated pockets of excellence. Those of us who have worked within the former (the current still exists electronically, but is far less robust, productive or as exciting—yes, exciting, meaning fostering measurable, positive change) national Community of Practice (CoP) on Transition which was organized and facilitated by the IDEA Partnership or within some existing state CoPs on Transition work with a wide, diverse variety of collaborators (all the usual players, but also public libraries, occupational therapists, general education parent groups, foster care agencies and providers, homeless personnel, hospitals and hospital-based education programs, adult education personnel, etc.). I recommend conducting a number of case studies or personal community maps to identify potential collaborators or partners, even for students who are medically fragile or with low incidence disabilities to develop a menu of community players.

    I have run out of time, but have other suggestions. It is my fault that I didn’t see this announcement earlier. Thank you for considering what I and others have written, even though some may not specifically be focused on the TA center query.

  7. October 2, 2019

    Assistant Secretary Collett
    Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
    U.S. Department of Education

    Comment posted to blog: Technical Assistance to Improve Postsecondary Transition Services

    On behalf of the National Center Center for Learning Disabilities, I am writing to share comments on how the U.S. Department of Education can expand, strengthen, and improve TA to States as you seek to provide high-quality transition services to all students and youth with disabilities and their families.

    NCLD represents and works to improve the lives of the 1 in 5 individuals with learning and attention issues, which are brain-based difficulties that include challenges include trouble with reading, writing, math, organization, concentration, listening comprehension, social skills, motor skills or a combination of these. Students with learning and attention issues are just as smart as their peers. But when they don’t get the support they need, they can face challenges that last a lifetime. It is essential that additional attention and resources be devoted to transition planning, services, and support so that all students with disabilities can succeed.

    The following response includes our specific comments to the question posed in the blog:

    Question 1: What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires transition planning for students with disabilities to begin before the student turns 16. The plan must be individualized, based on the student’s strengths and interests, and map out goals and activities that will help the student accomplish their vision for life after high school. However, students are increasingly less involved in their own transition planning and goal setting. Frequently, transition plans are set without being individualized to each student and do not set ambitious goals or provide pathways for students to achieve them. Services are often based on the available programs or pathways, rather than on the student’s abilities, needs, preferences, and interests. Across the board, increased resources and professional development must be devoted to helping Local Education Agencies (LEAs) and educators more meaningfully engage in transition planning with students with disabilities. Technical assistance must be focused on improving the quality of and student engagement in transition planning as well as improving outcomes for students receiving transition services.

    Additionally, college enrollment and persistence remain huge barriers for students with learning disabilities. Young adults with learning disabilities attend four-year colleges at half the rate of the general population and those who do attend college are less likely to complete it. According to data from the National Longitudinal Transition Study, students who were identified in high school as having SLD accounted for the largest portion (67%) of the study’s participants who enrolled in some type of postsecondary education. However, only one-fourth of students with SLD informed their college that they have a disability. When students do not disclose their disability or are otherwise unable to receive accommodations (often due to their inability to meet the cumbersome and inconsistent documentation requirement at colleges across the country), they experience a higher risk of not graduating in 6 years and a lower GPA.

    Ultimately, only 46% of young people with LD are employed. This is directly affected by the transition planning and college access issues they face.

    Question 2: Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    We agree with the five primary goals. However, we propose that a sixth goal be added related to meaningful student engagement and participation in the transition planning and goal setting process. We believe student engagement in the transition process is critical to creating inclusive transition plans that build on a student’s strengths, skills, abilities, and needs.

    Question 3: What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    The National Longitudinal Transition Services 2012 data set and explanatory reports have been particularly helpful for us to understand the transition experiences of those students involved in the study. We believe that there is room to expand upon this study to provide more explanatory information about how these students used their transition plans to help them achieve post-secondary academic and career goals.

    Question 4: What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    We are interested in understanding the long-term employment outcomes and experiences of individuals with high incidence disabilities. NCLD believes there is value in linking these employment statistics to their transition plans to measure the effectiveness of their transition plans and how helpful they are to individuals as they prepare for college and the workforce. We propose a study of a cohort of young adults with high incidence disabilities—Specific Learning Disabilities, attention disorders (often under the Other Health Impairment category), Autism Spectrum Disorders, and more—for a period of time to track their educational progress, employment, and overall post-high school transitions as a way of understanding the value and quality of their transition plans and post-secondary success. We recommend building off of the foundational data collected by the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 to provide explanatory information about student transition plans.

    Question 5: Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    First, while the laws and policy guidance governing transition are clear and helpful, the biggest problem consistently reported is that these laws are still not being implemented consistently. We believe technical assistance must be strengthened around ensuring effective transition services are provided early, at least by age 14, as part of a free and appropriate public education (FAPE), and that educators are adequately prepared to participate in and meaningful engage with students on these plans.

    Further, there is a lack of research on specific transition strategies for students with learning disabilities. NCLD recently reviewed existing research on transition strategies and programs for students with disabilities. Notably missing from the research was research into unique strategies that are effective for students with learning disabilities — the largest category of students with disabilities. While we know what types of transition strategies are evidence-based, we do not know which are most effective for students with learning disabilities compared to students with other types of disabilities. Because students with learning disabilities face unique challenges in the transition to college or career, it is important that USED acknowledge this and designate resources to support post-secondary transition research or identification of best practices that will allow for more responsive policies and supports for students with learning disabilities.

    Additionally, with the recent reauthorization of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act –which included a new set-aside for the recruitment of individuals with disabilities to CTE programs that lead to high-wage in-demand careers among other provisions that would more fully integrate students with disabilities into these programs — technical assistance must now be provided to help states implement the new requirements.

    Lastly, the Department’s recently (September 17, 2019) developed and published new guidance for Increasing Postsecondary Opportunities for Students and Youth with Disabilities clarifies important requirements related to enrollment in postsecondary education programs while still in high school. However, the guidance falls short in explaining the use of IDEA funds for dually enrolled students and students enrolled in Comprehensive Transition Programs. Federally-funded TA centers must be able to provide clarification and technical assistance to states, districts, students and families on the use of IDEA funds.

    Question 7: How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    Greater focus is needed on supporting LEAs and educators to engage in meaningful transition planning with students. It is critical that students not be tracked into certain pathways based on their disability status or type of disability. TA Centers can help coordinate between SEAs, LEAs, parent support agencies and teacher preparation programs to provide increased supports and professional development to educators and properly support the student’s IEP team to develop comprehensive, individualized, and ambitious goals for life after high school.

    As an organization that works on behalf of students with disabilities and their families, we appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback and we urge you to continue to invest in this critical area. Greater investment in the areas outlined here is critical to improving outcomes for and the lives of all students with disabilities. If you have any questions or would like to discuss these matters further, please don’t hesitate to reach out.

    Sincerely,

    Meghan Whittaker
    Director of Policy & Advocacy
    National Center for Learning Disabilities

  8. Michigan Protection & Advocacy Service, Inc. (MPAS) is the designated protection and advocacy agency serving people with disabilities in Michigan. MPAS is pleased to share some of our thoughts about transition, keeping in mind that we only hear about problems in the process.

    Fragmentation – responsibility for transition services in Michigan may lie with schools, intermediate school districts, state education agencies, Michigan Rehabilitation Services, Bureau of Services for Blind Persons, Michigan’s workforce development agency, community mental health agencies, prepaid inpatient health plans, and the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. Some of these programs have changed departments. There are multiple definitions and reporting requirements. There are multiple collaboration plans and technical assistance initiatives run by different agencies that often conflict with each other, adding to the complexity. Our “combined plan” under WIOA is largely an accumulation of individual agency plans. The USED programs at least should have common definitions, reporting, and outcome expectations, including expectations that they participate in collaboratives run by other agencies.

    Money – the system is driven by a scarcity mentality and includes incentives that discourage innovation and the desired outcomes. For example, schools may only receive foundation funds if they provide credentialed teacher services, limiting the options available to students.

    Geography – there is a wide disparity between urban and rural communities and the resources available.

    MOUs – there are currently three statewide MOUs in Michigan, some signed by the same parties. Relying on these to coordinate services is problematic as they can become internally focused and oriented toward compliance.

    Customization – most services are one size fits all. Despite the fact that transition age-student are greatly varied in their abilities and challenges, services for students are often limited to one or two “programs” and are not individualized. The standard programs offered are frequently geared toward students with intellectual disabilities, but schools fail to provide appropriate, individualized programs for students with average cognitive abilities whose disabilities impact them in other significant ways.

    Graduation – we have an informal “certificate of completion track” for students not pursuing diplomas. Services on this “track” (which is not recognized in state law) do not always support postsecondary employment and careers, let alone postsecondary education.

    Staffing – we have been plagued with turnover, multiple rounds of early retirements, and shortage of qualified staff in all sectors of transition services. These shortages extend to both evaluators and support providers and are especially acute among staff who work with people with low-incidence disabilities. New staff and contractors come from teaching, corrections, child protective services, and centers for independent living, without any clear grounding in employment support and with a concurrent impact on the culture of support services. Staffing instability affects the system’s ability to engage in evidence-based practices or data-driven decision-making.

    Expectations – the service system is not quite to a culture that views competitive integrated employment as the primary outcome. Staffing issues complicate the ability to make culture change. There is wide disparity in the expectations of staff, including school transition coordinators.

    Accountability – the general lack of outcome accountability in the special education system also extends to transition services. The failure of the State agency to ensure IEP content is meaningful and connected to the student-specific data results in IEPs that are cookie cutter, and do not result in better life outcomes for students as reported in the State Performance Plan. For example, one of OSERS’ five questions relates to early warning systems for dropouts, a system that has been available statewide in Michigan since at least 2017, but the state will be issuing a report later this year recommending that the state provide technical assistance on early warning. Until OSERS requires the SEA to enforce the standards of the IDEA regarding transition, both the SEAs and LEAs will continue to disregard any technical assistance provided. Making suggestions for new or different technical assistance are ineffective, absent the will to enforce compliance.

    Thank you for the opportunity to make these comments.

  9. The National Center for Special Education in Charter Schools (the Center) is dedicated to ensuring that students with disabilities have equal access to charter schools and that public charter schools are designed and operated to enable all students to succeed. The Center believes that the nearly 7,000 charter schools serving over 300,000 students with disabilities across 43 states and the District of Columbia, can create effective, inclusive learning environments and can be exemplars of educational equity, quality, and innovation.

    As a leader and partner with state charter authorizers, charter networks, and charter schools across the U.S. and the leading national voice regarding educating students with disabilities in the charter sector, we offer input in response to OSERS’s comment request: how best to provide technical assistance (TA) to States in order to improve postsecondary transition services to all students and youth with disabilities; and how best to strengthen and expand coordination and collaboration with OSERS Parent Training and Information Centers and other relevant TA centers. Our comments will focus on how charter schools interact with technical assistance initiatives concerning postsecondary transition services and respond to questions related to the National Technical Assistance Center on Improving Transition to Postsecondary Education and Employment for Students with Disabilities (NTACT/Center).

    Comments are provided by each question asked:

    What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    Students with disabilities continue to lag far behind their peers on substantive outcomes that we know predict future success.
    Only 1% of students with disabilities are in gifted and talented education programs, compared to 7% of general education students. (Civil Rights Data Collection 2013)
    Only 2% of students enrolled in Advanced Placement courses nationwide are students with disabilities. (Civil Rights Data Collection 2013)

    Only 67.1% of students with disabilities graduate from high school with a regular diploma as compared to 82.7% of students without disabilities (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019)

    Only 15% of young adults with disabilities have ever been enrolled in a 4-year college as compared to 37% of the general population.* (Institute for Education Sciences, 2011)

    Only 19.1% of people with disabilities are participating in the U.S. Labor force as compared to 68.2% of people without disabilities.( U.S. Department of Labor, 2019.)

    At work, young adults with disabilities earned nearly $4 an hour less than former general education students. (Institute for Education Sciences, 2011).

    These education data hold true across traditional public and charter schools.

    In general, students with disabilities are suspended – and thus lose instructional time – approximately twice as often as their peers without disabilities across all schools. Charter schools, however, suspend and expel a greater percentage of all students than do traditional public schools. (Civil Rights Data Collection 2015-2016, reported by the National Center for Special Education in Charter Schools, date pending). In most states, expulsion from a district school means removal for one school year; in charter schools, expulsion nearly always means a permanent removal.

    Due to their generally smaller size, charter schools can lack the economies of scale to deploy some best practices in transition services that are effective in larger school districts. This is especially apparent in the areas of coordination and collaboration. Multiple best practice guides on transition services point to the value of structured coordination between agencies providing services (such as the SEA, VR agencies, WIBs, LEAs, and colleges or postsecondary providers). This could include through formal interagency agreements, statewide or regional working groups, or other collaborative settings that help school systems connect the dots between agencies to provide appropriate transition counseling and bridge services for youth. However, charter schools and these other agencies generally lack the staff capacity to pursue such formal collaboration with eachother; it is simply more efficient for an agency to reach an agreement with a traditional school district serving 10,000 students instead of a charter school serving 500 students. In rural areas agencies may be used to operating with multiple small LEAs at such a scale (for example, the Idaho SEA often references its work with the states small districts and charter schools), but regional groups accustomed to working with a handful of large traditional school districts (such as urban or suburban WIBs, VR agencies, and colleges) may not make the same effort to reach charters in their area.

    Charter schools lack easy access to traditional TA structures that could otherwise assist with improving transition services. As discussed in the NCSECS Equity Coalition Issue Brief on Infrastructures, “Charter schools fall outside of the traditional school model and therefore often struggle to access the system of support and training that traditional public schools enjoy (NCSECS Equity Coalition Issue Brief- Infrastructures)”. While all charter schools have a formal link to the SEA and LEA infrastructure, the structure of this infrastructure is not specifically geared towards the needs of charter schools and, as a result, charter schools can experience barriers to accessing technical assistance through traditional methods. This plays out in the field in three ways. First, charter schools that are their own LEAs often do not have the staff capacity to take advantage of Technical Assistance structures that are geared towards multi-school traditional school districts. These charter schools operate as single-school districts and, similar to many small, rural schools, do not generally have dedicated divisions that can take time away from the classroom to participate in traditional TA workshops or webinars open to LEAs. This is especially true if the content of the TA is geared more towards the higher number of traditional LEAs, that often have the personnel and economy of scale to deploy different system-level transition service practices. Second, charter schools that are part of a traditional LEA often rely on that traditional school district to make their school-level TA resources available to the charter school or, in some cases, to actually provide the transition services to youth with disabilities. The traditional school district may have little incentive to adapt such TA or the transition services to the charter school model or structure, which can create a disconnect between the TA or services and the educational model of the school. Third, charter schools may be alerted to the availability of TA from local, state, or national TA providers (such as NTACT, SEA, or a regional provider) for a combination of the reasons above– the solution being offered may only be appropriate for larger models; a traditional LEA may decide not make their TA available to local charter schools; the charter school may have so few students that the TA provider doesn’t believe it is worth significant outreach; or the TA provider may just erroneously assume that charter schools don’t provide transition services or are not interested in participating in TA.

    There are no apparent TA communities or dedicated TA resources at the NTACT concerning transition services targeted to charter schools. Charter schools face a unique environment in providing quality transition services to students with disabilities, which can present distinct challenges in need of appropriate TA. For example, charter schools are more likely to educate more of their students with disabilities in general education classrooms (Civil Rights Data Collection 2013-2014, reported by the National Center for Special Education in Charter Schools, 2018) creating a need for more TA geared toward general education instructor and/or inclusive environments. Charter schools are also less likely to have multiple campuses, impacting their ability to deploy strategies that rely on economies of scale or a dedicated transition service specialist or offices. Individual charter schools are also less likely to have an extensive network of regional partnerships developed (such as with WIBs, area college systems, CTE consortiums, etc), which impacts their ability to easily leverage the work or resources of these other agencies to assist with transition planning. Charter schools also present unique opportunities to innovate and try new models geared towards specific target populations or educational models– some of which are highlighted in resources available at the National Technical Assistance Center on Transitions (ie, “Reentry Programs for Out-of-School Youth with Disabilities”, “Engaging Parents through Better Communication Systems”, and National Community Of Practices webinars highlighting OSSE work-based learning experiences).

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    We do not believe a large number or proportion of charter schools, and the charter school sector at large, are aware of or employing the Technical Assistance provided by NTACT. We recommend the addition of two goals:

    A dissemination and engagement goal with charter schools and charter school stakeholders, including resources created with charter schools in mind.

    While we appreciate that some NTACT resources include select charter schools among examples of promising practices, we do not believe this is sufficient to reach charter school stakeholders. In the Center’s experience the traditional SEA to LEA structure fails to reach charter stakeholders for reasons mentioned above. We recommend a revision to Goals 2 and 5 to acknowledge dissemination of effective practices and deployment in a range of public schools, including charter schools and charter school stakeholders (such as charter schools, CMOs, charter school authorizers, and organizations who provide TA and support to those actors).

    Simply put, charter schools will not access or benefit TA they are unaware of. The Center recommends that NTACT keep three things in mind when developing a dissemination strategy to reach charter schools: (1) charter schools are independent of each other and will not all participate in coordinated stakeholder groups; (2) charter schools generally have fewer administrative staff, meaning some leads for special education and transition services will also have teaching responsibility, making them short on time and not as easy to identify; (3) as a result, those wishing to reach charter schools should use multiple channels to reach charter schools and the lead staff member(s) for this issue.

    A goal or focus area addressing school climate and student discipline.

    As stated above, similar to traditional public schools, students with disabilities at charter schools experience higher rates of student disciplinary action (e.g. suspension and expulsion). This creates a heightened risk that a student with a disability will fall behind due to loss of instructional time or be at risk of dropping out. Therefore, the Center believes the current priorities too narrowly focus on student drop out (See current priority #2) and must be updated to include earlier engagement strategies. In doing so, NTACT can support the important and evidence-based connection of providing a comprehensive set of resources targeting school climate and school discipline more broadly and to help promote the multiple NTACT resources available to states and districts. Topics NTACT currently makes available that can be enhanced and further disseminated are resources to: examine discipline data for such disproportionate impact; employ restorative justice practices, as appropriate, as an alternative to exclusionary discipline practices; provide multiple models and case studies of programs designed to re-engage youth with disabilities who may have dropped out or be at risk of dropping out as well as providing multiple models and case studies of programs designed to re-engage students.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    As stated above, we do not believe that a large number or proportion charter schools currently use resources developed and disseminated by NTACT in their work.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    And

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    We encourage NTACT to first focus on disseminating existing resources and TA to charter school stakeholders. As discussed previously, we do not believe charter schools are using the NTACT resources, or the related federal, state, or local TA, in a meaningful way. The Center finds that charter school leadership and other stakeholders respond to materials, tools, and resources disseminated through charter-sector channels, such as: national and state charter school support organizations, charter school authorizing office, the charter school point of contact at SEA, and the charter school point of contact at traditional LEAs. Existing TA or resources that charter school stakeholders may find especially relevant, given common charter school models, include:

    Transition service coordination and planning in collaboration with general education teachers.

    Models for transition services and support, including partnership developments and flexible staffing solutions, for small schools.

    Professional development for school leadership and educators engaged in transition planning.

    Best practices in developing self-advocacy skills for youth.

    We also recommend that NTACT collaborate with other federal departments and technical resource centers who engage regularly with charter schools, such as the Charter School Program (CSP) in OESE and the National Charter School Resource Center (NCSRC). NCSRC and the CSP office provide extensive technical assistance to entities in 33 states (and counting) who have active discretionary Charter School Program State Entity grants. Each of the 33 grantees has a role in building high quality charter schools in their state, which includes specific responsibilities to ensure high quality outcomes for students with disabilities served by charter schools. NTACT could collaborate with NSCRC or the CSP office to provide meaningful TA to the CSP grantees on best practices in transition services and, by extension, reach thousands of charter schools.

    We also encourage NTACT to modify existing resources or develop new resources for charters schools in areas where there are known challenges for charter environments– such as how charters can: access available federal, state, and local TA; participate in existing state or regional services; or build interagency collaboration for transition service, including in emerging areas resulting from recent changes to CTE, VRA, and WOIA structures. A set of such resources could also be developed to showcase charter schools that are excelling in transition services, as well as exploring how charters schools are using some of the flexibilities they have to innovate and develop effective new transition service models.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    The Center believes that identifying intensive TA sites has merit. We encourage ED to ensure charter schools are incorporated, in some manner, into the selection process to ensure charter schools can access intensive support if needed. For example, the selection process could ask applicants to describe how charter schools in their region would benefit from and robustly participate in the TA they are seeking. The selection process could also establish a demonstration or pilot site that engaged with a cooperative of charter schools and traditional districts in a certain region to determine the most effective way to adapt and pursue joint best practices in transition services in a community with both charters and traditional public schools.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    To summarize the prior recommendations, the traditional education infrastructure can be ill suited to fostering collaboration and coordination with charter schools in the areas of transition services, and systematic TA generally. The Center encourages NTACT to:

    Address the needs of stakeholders from the charter school community when developing, disseminating, and engaging in technical assistance activities. Charter schools serve an estimated 300,000 students with disabilities and targeted TA support for the institutions that serve them can help improve their postsecondary transition.

    Go beyond traditional listed institutional stakeholders and include specific contacts and organizations who work with charter schools to foster effective collaboration and coordination. Encourage SEAs and LEAs to include representatives from charter schools and their charter oversight divisions; create models that make it easier to collaborate in multi-LEA systems common in areas with charter schools; require traditional regional umbrella stakeholders (like LEAs, SEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers) to address supporting charter schools in their TA plans.

    In addition, the Center has two other ideas that could improve collaboration and coordination:

    Include Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) as necessary stakeholders and end users for transition services TA. To improve transition services one must improve teacher preparation programs, which are run by IHEs. Both general education teachers and special education teachers at the middle and high school level should receive robust training in transition services before they are credentialed and placed in schools. Many students with disabilities also have higher education as part of their postsecondary goals. Coordinated programs for transition services at the institution and systems level can make it easier for that student to successfully make the leap to higher education.

    Engage in joint activities and campaigns with industry and labor stakeholders, such as the DOL Office of Disability Employment Policy, the US Chamber of Commerce, and/or industry trade groups. Coordination among federal offices multiplies resources and can create more consistent opportunities for students. For example, NTACT could work with DOL on resources to help students with disabilities plan for and access apprenticeships as part of their broader apprenticeship campaign and grants with community colleges and trade associations.

    Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. The Center looks forward to working with NTACT to improve transition services for all students with disabilities, including those being served by charter schools.

  10. PACER Center, a National Parent Center headquartered in Minneapolis, Minnesota that focuses on improving outcomes for children, youth, and young adults with disabilities is pleased to provide comments responding to the questions in this blog post. In addition, we would be remiss to not highlight the importance of OSEP- and RSA-funded parent training grants focused on providing assistance to families and the difference they make for youth in postsecondary transition. PACER has been working on transition for more than 20 years. We have developed a comprehensive website related to transition, the National Parent Center on Transition and Employment: pacer.org/transition, that helps parents and students navigate the transition from the K-12 school system to postsecondary education, employment, and independent living.

    1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    Through our work, PACER has identified the following challenges:
    • A lack of inclusive, age-appropriate postsecondary options at the local level in the areas of employment training, post-secondary education, and supported community living.
    • Ineffective (or non-existent) coordination between state agencies and service providers at an individual implementation level. Parents most often will be the real “case managers” and do not receive the information and training and support they need to effectively support their young adult. Parents have confusion regarding programs and supports as youth leave IDEA.
    • Limited opportunities for inclusion of students with intellectual and developmental disabilities and other “significant disabilities” in high school courses and segregated 18-21 school “transition programs.”
    • Implementation challenges – There is a lot of agreement around policy language and “best practices,” but many challenges when it comes to individual students or youth receiving individually appropriate, effective, and well-coordinated services and supports. (For example, there is often confusion about Pre-ETS vs Transition Services—is the VR counselor, a contracted Pre-Employment Transition Services (Pre-ETS) provider, or a school staff person going to initiate and or provide the service?)
    • We are seeing the negative effects of more frequent turnover within VR and county services staff, as well as with direct support staff, which requires a continual need for “entry-level” training and tools.
    • A positive change, but one that comes with challenges to the systems, is higher expectations of youth with disabilities and their families for employment, post-secondary education, and community living options.
    • The difficulty in obtaining real work-based learning and community employment experiences.
    • Parents continue to need individual assistance and trainings provided by parent training projects.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    • We believe that the terms “families” and “parents” are missing from the five goals, and research indicates a focus on these populations is an essential component of post-school success for youth with disabilities.
    • PACER would recommend that Goal #3 include “and work experiences”
    • We would recommend that Goal #5 address strategies for more effective interagency coordination (VR, LEA and DHS)-especially at the local implementation level, including the use of shared, family-friendly language.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    PACER has found the NTTAC Predictors of Success useful in our work.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    • Information for states on effectively supporting families from diverse cultures during secondary transition
    • Training for professionals on collaborating effectively in partnership with families, person-centered planning, and working with youth with significant disabilities.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    PACER would recommend considering the following:
    • Comprehensive Transition and Postsecondary Education programs, including dual-enrollment programs
    • Supported decision making and other alternatives to Guardianship
    • Evidence-based practices and standards for 18+ school “transition programs” and secondary transition services beyond grade 12.
    • Serving youth with disabilities through American Job Centers – the work that has been done has focused on workforce development professionals not transition professionals

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    PACER would consider the following:
    • Model and encourage high expectations for youth with all disabilities.
    • Model and provide assistance with the use of easy-to-understand and accessible materials.
    • The TA Center could facilitate effective collaboration among agency partners.

  11. OSERS is asking for feedback relevant to these questions:

    What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    Aligning systems to support students in having early meaningful employment experiences is critical. Educational environments need ways to collaborate with Vocational Rehabilitation and Title 1 to ensure access to supported internships, apprenticeships, and dual-enrollment programs for students with IEPs.

    The current Center has five primary goals that support State’s efforts to improve transition and postsecondary education and employment for students with disabilities:
    1. Youth and young adults with disabilities receive and participate in evidence-based and promising practices in secondary transition services and supports.
    2. SEAs and LEAs implement evidence-based and promising practices and strategies, including early warning and intervention systems to reduce dropout and increase graduation rates.
    3. Students with disabilities participate in career-related curricula so they are prepared for postsecondary employment and careers.
    4. Students with disabilities receive rigorous academic preparation so they are prepared for success in postsecondary education.
    5. SEAs, SVRAs, LEAs, and local VR offices use data-driven decision-making to develop their respective plans and reports.

    Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and technical assistance (TA) needs and support your state’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    A strong collaboration among Special Ed and VR must occur in order to implement the stated goals. This collaboration needs to start at the federal level with policies and guidance provided to the VR agencies, the SEA’s, and LEA’s. Adding focus on families to ensure full access to the array of supports and services that are available. Consideration of employment and career preparation including summer work will be pivotal. Alternatives to Guardianship such as supported decision-making will also ensure student success after high-school.

    What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    Targeted training Topics that have been pushed out and Toolkits that NTACT website provides have been invaluable.

    What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your state’s work in this area?
    GCDD expects family and parent training would be helpful for our community. Have a one STOP center that Includes transition service for VR and ED including Pre-employment transition.

    Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or re-positioned to better meet your needs?
    There is a need for OSERS to promote collaboration and partnership between VR and the LEA’s. Ultimately, amending IDEA to align with WIOA. TA needs to be provided around access and accommodations for students with disabilities to participate in school-based Career Pathways and Apprenticeship programs offered to the student population at large. Students with disabilities are often denied access to these critical training programs because teachers are not trained to provide necessary accommodations. These programs lead students on a path to better paying jobs and more successful careers. We are also interested in ways drop-out data can be collected of students who have IEPs. Last, but not least GCDD is very concerned about the school-to-prison pipeline for students with disabilities and think a dedicated TA center on restorative justice practices in schools would be helpful.

    Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    We are comfortable with the process as-is.

    How can a center on transition best support states in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among State Education Agencies (SEA), Local Educational Agencies (LEA), State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies (SVRA), Career and Technical Education (CTE), Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    Centers on transition should work to involve school district transition specialists and parent groups at LEAs to disseminate and consolidate updated information. Additionally, institutes of higher learning should be consistently offering courses and curriculum on transition so that new teachers come into their positions armed with the knowledge to guide students during those years. Vocational Rehabilitation should have a more hands-on role/presence in schools as an accessible resource to students – and this information should be made clear and available much earlier than a student’s last year in high school. Centers on transition should work to bring together knowledge and resources from across different factors of life (health/medical, educational, vocational, social) and government agencies to make easy-to-digest guidelines for parents and their children through each stage of life. Working with medical professionals to have guides available would also be helpful, as parents often trust the guidance and information given to them by their primary care physicians. Centers on transition should also make sure graduating teachers, and teachers earning continuing education, are informed of and knowledgeable about the burgeoning field of inclusive post-secondary education, and how it can be an option for some of their students.

  12. 1. Often times there are obstacles to advocacy which create barriers for youth to receive a free appropriate public education. This further complicates the likelihood of youth continuing their education in a post-secondary program. Obstacles may include inaccurate information, lack of accountability and overall school culture. Professional development focusing specifically on special education policy, IDEA and ADA would help improve the inaccurate information that is conveyed in IEP meetings. Additionally, accurate information about how children learn, what modifications and accommodations can be made available to increase learning as well as raising expectations for achievement of students with disabilities would greatly help. Teachers, paraprofessionals, administrators and other IEP team members themselves are obstacles. Parents and guardians experience resistance to their efforts to advocate on behalf of their children’s’ best interests. Students as self-advocates also experience a culture that denies access to the least restrictive environment. Information as common as school events, extracurricular activities, clubs and sport tryouts is not shared or made accessible to students with disabilities. School culture acts as an invisible wall that prevents parents and school staff from working collaboratively. Myths, bias, perceptions and beliefs affect decisions school staff take. Their beliefs may not always be expressed verbally but they influence how students without disabilities model the culture and perpetuate discrimination and segregation.
    2. As parents advocate for their children and students begin to advocate for themselves, they are often dismissed because school personnel believe they are the experts. Additional goals need to be considered that focus on parent engagement and parent training. Schools have clear lines of authority. In most districts, power flows from the school board to the superintendent and administrative staff, then to principals and teachers. Teachers are at the bottom of the power. Parents are often forgotten, disregarded as “too emotional”, “dysfunctional” or “not available”. Parents and families should be empowered to advocate without retaliation and be considered part of the IEP team. Each member of the team should be regarded as an equal part of the team and valued for the role that each represents.
    3. Access to websites such as Protection and Advocacy Agencies, Parent Training and Information Agencies and other Advocacy Organizations that can provide accurate information about Disability Rights Legislation, Acts, Policy and State regulations.
    4. Advocates that can assist parents in an IEP meeting without cost. Online as well as print materials for families who have a child with a disability and materials those are accessible for students with disabilities to foster self-advocacy skills.
    5. More training and information on employment and post-secondary options for students who are currently identified as alternate assessment/modified diploma or 1%. Students with the most significant disabilities are not being considered candidates for transition into competitive employment and post-secondary education. Therefore IEP goals are not created to help support this level of the student population.
    6. no comment
    7. All of these agencies, centers, and organizations need to stay focused on providing the best possible outcome for each student with a disability. The staff of each of these agencies needs to rely on the expertise of each agency while working collaboratively towards the end goal for our youth. State Education Agencies need to be less motivated by money and more motivated by student success.

  13. The Arc of New Jersey thanks you for engaging with stakeholders on this important issue. We are New Jersey’s largest statewide advocacy organization for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their families. We frequently encounter families who struggle with the transition from school to adult life and we operate a Planning for Adult Life program to assist students as they prepare to leave the education system and enter the adult world. More information can be found here: https://planningforadultlife.org/

    1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    Transition services have been required by law for decades. In response to poor implementation of these services, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) of 2015 included a requirement for State VR agencies to spend 15% of their budget on pre-employment transition services. However, despite this welcome incentive, students with disabilities – particularly those with more significant cognitive disabilities – continue to experience problems in receiving appropriate transition services for the reasons outlined below:
    a) Lack of Individualization. Job placement options are often based on available programs rather than on students’ individual needs, preferences and interests.
    b) Accountability. There is little agreement about which agency is responsible for services that could be covered under either IDEA or the Rehab Act and there are no requirements for student outcomes.
    c) Coordination. VR agencies don’t get involved until late in a student’s schooling (such as when the student is a senior in high school) and often do not participate in IEP development.
    d) Type and degree of disability. Transition programs are not well prepared to serve students with more significant disabilities or more than one type of disability.
    e) Accessibility of vocational programs. Students with cognitive disabilities are frequently denied admission to district vocation programs.
    f) Capacity. Few programs have dedicated transition staff, leaving this responsibility to teachers who may have received little relevant training. This problem is due, in part, to the lack of transition education in teacher preparation programs.
    g) Transportation. Transition programs are not meeting the needs for transportation to and from a student’s job, including travel training or covering the costs of travel.
    h) Parent information. Parents have trouble finding practical information on transition options for their children, such as service providers and employers in their communities in addition to the effects that their child’s earned wages could have on his/her eligibility for public programs.
    i) “Soft skills.” Many parents report that life skills needed for further education and employment are lacking in transition services, such as social communication, time management, and money management.

    2. Do the five primary goals described below accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    We support retaining the five goals while recognizing that there continue to be many challenges in meeting them. For instance, school systems frequently require students to fail before intervening; career related curricula is often lacking and exploration is limited to a very small list of options, such a food preparation and product assembly; and students with intellectual disability in particular, continue to face very low expectations and are not taught to grade level standards.
    I) Youth and young adults with disabilities receive and participate in evidence-based and promising practices in secondary transition services and supports.
    II) SEAs and LEAs implement evidence-based and promising practices and strategies, including early warning and intervention systems to reduce dropout and increase graduation rates.
    III) Students with disabilities participate in career-related curricula so they are prepared for postsecondary employment and careers.
    IV) Students with disabilities receive rigorous academic preparation so they are prepared for success in postsecondary education.
    V) SEAs, SVRAs, LEAs, and local VR offices use data-driven decision-making to develop their respective plans and reports.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    Videos and catalogues showcasing a range of successful employment and post-secondary education outcomes. Transition providers, parents, and students with disabilities could benefit by seeing the variety of jobs and higher education experiences of students with disabilities. For instance, an employment example could include descriptions of the transition planning involved in securing the job, the basic elements of the job, remuneration (hours per week and hourly wages), lessons learned, etc. We believe the OSERS should seek nominations for successful case descriptions from across the country to highlight.
    Sample partnership agreements for LEAs, VR, and community businesses. The TA Center should provide model documents outlining shared goals, benefits, and responsibilities of these key partners for successful transition.
    Information for parents on ABLE Act programs. Parents of transition aged students should be provided with information on ABLE accounts to help pay for transition related services in addition to helping to preserve this program for all persons with disabilities. ABLE accounts are similar to 529 savings accounts and allow eligible people with disabilities to save money for education, employment, and other costs without losing important federal benefits. Since the passage of the ABLE Act in 2014, over 34,000 ABLE accounts have been opened nationwide. However, the National Association of State Treasurers reports that enrollment in ABLE accounts is too low to maintain self-sustainability and continue to offer a robust choice of ABLE plans with low fees.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    As noted above, we believe that the Department of Education should develop and expand resources on transition success stories.
    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    We believe that a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on Transition should modify its process for identifying potential intensive TA sites. Unfortunately, sites that are faring poorly often do not seek out assistance through a grant application. We believe OSERS should also provide opportunities for students with disabilities, their families, advocates, and others to nominate sites for potential intensive TA.

  14. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    A major issue I have experienced while working with this age group is their seemingly lack of a basic education. This may be a result of the socioeconomic demographic I was working with, although I imagine this happens elsewhere. For example, as high schoolers in a self contained classroom, most of my students could not do basic, single-digit addition. Despite the students’ learning disabilities, they should have at least known 1+2. It appeared as though the middle school had babied the students, in addition to a lack of parental involvement. It is incredibly difficult to prepare a student for transition when they do not have any previous preparation.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    Yes, especially goal #4 in regard to the previously mentioned issues. Academic education should be taken seriously, regardless of disability or not. However, it appears that when a student is disabled, academics are not always prioritized. In my experience this has been more true for students with physical disabilities (ie in a wheelchair, or having Down Syndrome)

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    I am not familiar with TA. I have not been in a position yet to use it.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    Again, I am not familiar with what TA resources currently being used, but I would imagine that anything which increases parental involvement or teacher competency would be beneficial.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    No response

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    I am not familiar with this.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    I am not familiar on all of this. However, I do believe that IEPs and transition planning are often viewed by the team as a burden. This attitude needs to change, as a successful transition is essentially the purpose of our jobs as educators.

  15. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    In school, I have experienced a big challenge in educating this age group. It may have been due to the socioeconomic demographic of the school I was working in. Regardless, most of the high schoolers in our ESE program could not do single digit addition. Yes, they had learning disabilities. However, by high school at least some should have had an understanding. It seemed that the middle schools babied the students, especially those with physical or observable disabilities (such as in a wheel chair or with Down Syndrome), so they were not at all prepared for high school. It is significantly more challenging to prepare a student for transition without any prior preparation.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals?If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    Yes, specifically goal number 4 in regard to my answer in #1. Academic preparation needs to be taken seriously for all students, but I believe it is often not made a priority for students with disabilities.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    I do not have experience with TA

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    I am not familiar with TA, but I would imagine anything that promotes parental involvement or teacher competency would be beneficial.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    No response

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    No response

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    I think many people view transition planning and IEPs as a burden. This attitude needs to be worked on, as a successful transition is kind of the whole point of our jobs as educators.

  16. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    I do not currently work with youth ages 14-24 with disabilities. However, I would say that parent/family involvement is a big challenge, as well as promoting student’s self-determination and self-advocacy. Both are imperative in improving postsecondary transition services. For them to be as individualized, parent and student’s involvement is the driving force behind a successful postsecondary transition.
    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    The first goal discussed the youth participating in evidence-based and promising practices in secondary transition services which I feel is one of the most important challenges. However, the challenge of parental involvement was not addressed. I do agree that the other four goals are well thought out goals that can be worked towards, but I also believe having parent involvement is important and should be a part of the goals.
    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    Again, working at the elementary level, these are not relevant to my work. Although, I think that checklists and assessments are useful resources for transition planning. Maybe, having more professional development opportunities for transition planning could benefit all teachers.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    After a little research, it seems that there is a want/need for an online form of the transition process that students would be able to work through themselves and check of goals as they are accomplished. This would also assist with a student’s self-advocacy. I also feel that parents should have a set of resources to help them through their child’s transition process and following the transition. We should be providing parents/families with as much knowledge as possible for them to continue to meet all needs of the student following the postsecondary transition.
    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    I think that real life experiences are essential for students to experience, and we should continue to focus on teaching the students to be as independent as possible. As I stated in the previous answer, there should be a program for parents to learn how to assist with all postsecondary needs, so that the student can be as successful as possible in all areas of their life.
    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    I am not familiar with this process. However, I would say to continue the process, and that this should be available to all.
    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    I believe that providing training on how to effectively improve the collaboration would be useful. Maybe a specific outline of how to foster better coordination would be beneficial to especially new teachers who are not sure of the best way to do this. We could look to schools that have successful coordination and collaboration for methods that can be shared.

  17. Comments on the U.S. Department of Education on TA to Improve Post-Secondary Transition Services
    The PEAL Center is the OSEP-funded Parent Training and Information Center for PA. We submit these comments based upon our knowledge and expertise regarding effective strategies to engage diverse families of children of all ages to help improve services to, and outcomes for, their children and youth, as well as our experience as family-led organization.

    1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    Educating, engaging, and supporting the active participation of the parents of and youth/young adults with disabilities is essential to improve transition for youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school. Sadly, too often, schools encourage youth/young adults with disabilities to leave school, or fail to comply with the law’s requirements that parent and youth input be an important part of the process. (Goal 1) Lack of high quality, evidence-based supports and services is the most pressing challenge. Although school districts are required to have a “transition coordinator” in place, in many school districts, there is a person who is given the title of “transition coordinator” but who does not have dedicated time to perform this function. Every school district needs one or more professionals who have a deep knowledge of effective transition practices for community based employment and inclusion at school and in the community. These professionals also must have dedicated time to survey the local community, identify effective transition resources, and provide individualized, person-centered transition planning for each student in special education.
    We frequently see transition IEPs that reveal low expectations, leave transition-related activities to the family, and include insufficient services and supports to have any real potential to lead to effective transition. This is particularly true for low-income families, immigrant and LEP families, families of color, families in remote rural communities, families with limited education or where parents themselves have disabilities, families in the territories, and other families from traditionally underserved communities and backgrounds.
    Both schools and community agencies need to demonstrate a commitment to educating families, and teens/young adults to better understand the school-age transition process and the options and opportunities available to support individualized transition planning. Families and teens/young adults should expect that competitive, integrated employment should be the FIRST consideration for every individual, before considering more restrictive employment option. Families do not come into the special education system, the transition process or any system knowing what to do. Families and students need information from informed sources who can help them take a pay that leads to initial consideration by every team of competitive, integrated employment. The expertise of other families and youth who have been through the transition process is also an under-utilized resource. (Goal 2) In Pennsylvania, we need to improve authentic coordination between government entities whose job it is to provide coordinated, person-centered services to students. While a Memorandum of Understanding is useful, each responsible agency (i.e., Department of Human Services, Department of Labor, Department of Health, Department of Education) need to pull their own weight and commit adequate resources to providing services for students and families. Since Education is an entitlement whereas other agencies have eligibility criteria, the expectation by other agencies is often that the schools should bear much of the responsibility for developing and implementing individualized transition plans. Schools need to do a better job of building collaborative relationships with agencies and organizations outside of the school system and bring in those resources to IEP and community teams. Authentic engagement needs to occur at the IEP team and student level, not just checking a box that there was attendance by a representative from an agency, but real engagement by the agency, the school and the student.
    Part of successful planning should include the first steps in registration for community services to ensure that needed services are in place to support the young person in adulthood.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    (Goals 1-5) There is nothing in any of the five goals about the voice and role of families, including parents and youth/young adults with disabilities themselves, at the individual or systems level. We strongly recommends a goal specifically aimed at ensuring that family voice and decision-making, including in particular OSERS-funded Parent Centers, is an integral part of the process. All of the primary goals need to include parents/families. As the child’s first teacher, as the person who knows that child best and as the person who is the fiercest advocate for that child, families must be included in these goals. While our focus is on positive outcomes for every youth and young adult, family engagement and support is a critical component leading to success. While we recognize that OSERS funds some training, not all areas of need are covered. If all K-12 educational placements provide a designated transition coordinator, this person could educate the families, young person and team. Families need the knowledge to support and guide decisions being made by the young adult, including the potential consequences and the advantages of each option in order to help make it clear to the young adult.
    It is more than a little frustrating that in 2019, 44 years after the passing of IDEA we must still remind government officials and other professionals that families must be included in decision-making for their child with a disability.
    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    (Goals 1, 2 and 4) The Parent Center Hub has been invaluable in easily finding the information and resources we need as a Parent Training and Information Center and then getting that information into the hands of the parents who need that information. RAISE, the National Transition TA Center, and the National Center for Parent Information and Resources, has served as a disseminator of many tools, resources and materials that have been developed specifically for families and youth. While OSEP-funded Parent Centers were required in the last Parent Center competitions 4 and 5 years ago to specifically include activities aimed at serving youth and young adults with disabilities in the transition process, no additional funding was provided to achieve this objective. Additional funding to Parent Centers specific to the development of TA tools, resources and materials to support youth and young adults in the transition process would be beneficial.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    (Goal 4) To ensure that students are receiving appropriately challenging and rigorous academic preparation, TA tools and resources are needed to support schools in rethinking the concept of “Life Skills” support for students of transition age – so that instead of focusing on activities that students can learn at home, students receive inclusive academic instruction, modified curriculum, as well as building a resume. Resources and materials that demonstrate how students with complex needs can have meaningful access to the general education curriculum, including career and college readiness are needed. All TA tools and resources must start with the premise of presuming competence for all students. Schools must be held accountable for providing meaningful access to the grade level general education curriculum for all students and preparing all students for transition to adulthood.
    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    (Goal 4) From PA, NTACT should consider the Planning for the Future checklist. https://www.pattan.net/Publications/Planning-for-the-Future-Checklist This checklist is helpful to IEP teams by keeping track of what transition activities should be completed by an IEP team at each transition age of the student—on an individual basis.
    NTACT should also consider the PA Supplemental Aids and Services Toolkit–to help ensure that all students are getting appropriate support in their general education classes and have access to the general education curriculum. Ensuring appropriate supports beginning in pre-K and elementary school, lays a strong foundation for inclusive education that helps lead students, IEP teams and families to competitive, integrated employment.
    In addition, given the changing cultural, racial and linguistic “face” of the US population, any ED-funded TA Center on Transition must include information on how to address these diverse cultural and racial issues, and make this information available in multiple languages.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    (Goals 1-5) The application process allows all entities who have ideas, resources and tools needed to carry out this important work apply for funding to do that work. It is fair and helps ensure that the best applicant can do the job.
    If there is an application process, it should require sign-off and participation of the Parent Center(s) in the applying state/territory. Further, if there is an application process for intensive TA, the needs of the state as demonstrated by data should also be a part of the application and decision-making process.

    We also recommend redefining the “state” as a recipient of TA to include representatives of other OSERS-funded entities including Parent Centers as members of a “state team” who could be provided TA. As noted by staff of the current National Transition TA Center, when state teams include representatives of parent centers, the state teams’ work is more effective. Parent Centers have significant knowledge of the root causes of systemic transition issues, expertise and experience in working with families and youth from diverse communities to address transition issues at the individual level, and recommendations on how to resolve transition problems at the school, district, and systems levels.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    (Goal 5) Encourage collaboration by all parties. While one agency may be very willing to participate in a collaborative relationship, there are often reasons why other agencies may not be as willing. If the system put in place one overarching agency/organization responsible for convening all parties, this would help ensure collaboration by all parties. Systemic use of the “Leading by Convening” format may be helpful in having agencies work together towards state goals in transition activities that will benefit students and families.
    Parent Centers are the OSEP investment in family engagement, including in the area of transition to adult life, in the states and territories and thus should routinely be included as participants in transition TA. While transition-aged children and youth with disabilities and their families are only one audience for the IDEA Parent Centers, it is an increasingly important audience, particularly given the recent Parent Center focus on directly serving youth and young adults.

  18. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the priorities of the National Technical Assistance Center on Improving Transition to Postsecondary Education and Employment for Students with Disabilities (NTACT/Center) and make recommendations for updates to future priorities. As you know, CAST is an award-winning nonprofit education organization that discovers innovative ways to expand learning opportunities for people of all ages. Founded in 1984 as the Center for Applied Special Technology, CAST has earned international recognition for creating Universal Design for Learning (UDL), a framework to improve teaching and learning. We also operate the National Center on Accessible Educational Materials and want to encourage and promote high leverage and effective collaboration among and between the Department’s technical assistance centers to ensure the success of students with disabilities.

    Critical to updating the NTACT priorities is ensuring they reflect bipartisan updates by Congress made to the career and technical education (CTE) law (known as Perkins V) that intentionally align with the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), the Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEA, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)) and the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). Together, these laws share policy goals, definitions, data reporting and other complementary provisions support and promote transition from high school for students with disabilities including providing that UDL was included as a recommended and allowable use of state and local funds. These federal laws, most recently Perkins V also promote UDL as a recommended component of teacher and instructor training for personnel working with individuals with disabilities. The use and definition of UDL exists in each of these federal laws because its practices are effectively used in traditional classrooms and in digital and work-based learning settings across the U.S.

    We therefore offer the following responses to your key questions:

    1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    CAST Response: CAST is well aware of the multiple challenges students with disabilities (SWD) ages 14 to 24 face in accessing the supports needed to transition into post secondary education. Only about one-third of SWD enrolling in 4-year colleges or universities graduate with a degree; the graduation rate from two-year schools is only marginally better at 41%. These educational barriers faced by students with disabilities have dire impacts on the employability of individuals with disabilities. While there are more than 20 million people with disabilities between the ages of 18 and 64 who are theoretically ready to enter the workforce, only 7.5 million have been able to do so. Data shows the serious gaps that remain between people with disabilities and their non-disabled peers: 37% of U.S. civilians with disabilities had a job, compared to 77.2% for people without disabilities. The Center must continue to support States in their efforts to improve all of these outcomes.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    CAST Response: CAST encourages the U.S. Department of Education to expand (current priorities # 3, 4) or include a new priority that specifically focuses on ensuring that all curricula and educational materials (print and digital) are fully accessible and that their teachers are trained in ensuring such accessibility (e.g. through UDL). Opportunities and obligations within special education and civil rights statutes support young adults with disabilities to help ensure they have the skills and opportunities necessary for competitive integrated employment. As these students move towards postsecondary employment or education they leave behind the affirmative oversight – skills remediation; preferential placement, etc. – provided to them under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and merge into a much broader environment where disability accommodations are provided, upon request and qualifications, under civil rights laws (Section 504. The ADA). For many students, understanding and activating self-advocacy adds another layer of complexity to the transition process. The Accessible Educational Materials Center at CAST provides technical assistance resources to higher education institutions and workforce development agencies to help them establish learning environments based on the principles of UDL, specifically the provision of learning environments that are accessible to the widest range of students. Postsecondary settings that offer a UDL approach to instructional materials and practices can help address the needs of uncertain students proactively by offering inclusive and responsive learning opportunities. These settings – and the students they serve – can benefit from a clear delineation of policies and practices designed to affect this outcome

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    CAST Response: Provide resources that outline the intentional alignment of key provisions of all federal education and employment laws so that States understand how to access, braid and utilize all available federal funding/resources. For example, Perkins V includes new set aside funding for special populations that can support the training of teachers in Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and other evidence-based practices, consistent with IDEA and the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA).

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    CAST Response: The accessibility of print and digital educational materials, whether they are commercial or open sourced should be given attention by the TA Center. A recent survey found less than half of American Job Center programmatic services met the accessibility requirements of Section 188 of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Final Rule (U.S. Department of Labor, 2017). Additional accessibility challenges unique to workforce includes the diversity of agencies involved: K-12 transition programs, CTE, Voc Rehab (VR) as well as Local Workforce Investment Boards (LWIB) which oversee the American Job Centers. Further, in a recent survey, executive directors of LWIBs estimate that 18% of all youth served have a disability that remains undisclosed. In the same survey, a percentage of respondents identified two barriers to meeting the needs of those who have disclosed a disability: obtaining the necessary assistive technologies or specialized technology (15%); and, fulfilling program accessibility requirements (11%).

    Working in coordination with the Accessible Educational Materials TA Center, states and districts can be provided new and innovative ways to ensure all students with disabilities have timely access to the curricula and other materials they need to successfully navigate middle and high school so they can go to college or receive career training.

    NTACT is also encouraged to engage in joint activities and dissemination campaigns with industry and labor stakeholders, such as the U.S. Department of Labor Office of Disability Employment Policy, business and/or industry trade groups.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    CAST Response: The intra-project leveraging suggested in response to Question 5 could help support the existing state TA commitments and networks established by other federally-funded programs (in this case, The AEM Center) with the intent of harnessing existing and trusted relationships and initiatives, effectively multiplying their impact in the most economic way possible. If not already established, the Center on Transition should seek out additional, effective TA efforts that have a national footprint (NCSI, for example) to explore joint TA synergies.

    Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments.

    Sincerely,

    Sherri Wilcauskas
    Director of Federal Relations, CAST

  19. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    As a national advocacy organization focused on employment, APSE has a strong sense of the issues regarding youth with disabilities across the United States. We see on an ongoing basis the impact that lack of an effective transition process has on students while in school, and more importantly once they leave school in terms of limited if any employment prospects.
    • Research has clearly shown that work experience while in school is one of the primary predictors of employment success once a young person leaves school. However, many students, particularly those with more significant disabilities, are leaving school with little, if any work experience. Even if they have work experience, too often it is not reflective of best practices in terms of work based learning and typical teenage and youth work experiences (i.e., experiences are often limited in scope and setting, and often are “special” experiences exclusively for students with disabilities).
    • Lack of access to a high school diploma is often a barrier to maximizing employment success. Students with intellectual disabilities sometimes do not have the ability to complete the academic requirements, including high stakes tests. In some states, students with intellectual disabilities are “tracked” towards a certificate of attendance upon completion of their high school tenure.
    • Schools often lack the resources and expertise in terms of supporting students in career planning and work experience. There is often confusion over the appropriate role of schools in this regard versus other entities (e.g., vocational rehabilitation). For example, what are the limits of school responsibilities in terms of supporting a student to gain work experience, including providing job site supervision?
    • Support of families, which is so critical, remains a challenge. Families are too often ambivalent about supporting employment and career goals of their child, often citing the impact of employment on public benefits as a concern.
    • Lack of access to reliable transportation and the inability of youth to self-manage their transportation needs is problematic.
    • Transition planning and services that are not reflective and responsive to a diversity of cultures is an ongoing issue, with services too often designed around “one size fits all” with white, middle-class as the norm.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    There are two areas that may be within these primary goals, but which are not explicitly stated, and are worthy of noting:
    a) Development of strong partnership structures at the state, regional, and local level, not only among vocational rehabilitation and educational agencies, but also inclusive of state intellectual and developmental disability agencies, mental health agencies, workforce development, and other entities;
    b) With families playing such a primary and critical role, the ability to effectively engage families in the transition process, including families from a wide range of cultures, is a critical area of need.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    New York State, via the Administration on Community Living’s Projects of National Significance – Partnerships in Employment project, developed a web-based tool to guide transition-aged youth through the many decision points along the path from school to work. This tool was developed in partnership with the key state agencies (vocational rehabilitation, developmental disabilities and education agencies) to ensure the pathway options presented were relevant within existing state regulations. See: http://www.MyPathNY.org

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    Tools like MyPathNY.org, adapted to meet state-specific regulatory requirements, would be helpful in demystifying the process.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    • Effective implementation of Pre-Employment Transition services is a critical need to address a number of issues: a) Best practices in the five core areas of Pre-ETS; b) Ensuring that Pre-ETS is benefiting students who need and can benefit most from Pre-ETS, particularly those with more significant disabilities; c) Effective measurement of Pre-ETS in terms of long-term impact.
    • There is a need for technical assistance on use of technology in transition, particularly in terms of students with significant disabilities using technology to support and enhance their independence.
    • There is a critical needed for TA that supports working with families and individuals from diverse cultures and varied socio-economic backgrounds.
    • There is a need for TA regarding supporting individuals with more significant disabilities in Career and Technical Education, industry-based credential programs, apprenticeships, etc.
    • Given that transportation is regularly identified as a barrier to employment, this is an area that needs to be addressed in terms of strategies and resources, possibly in conjunction with existing efforts out of the Administration on Community Living, the Department of Transportation, etc.
    • Given the concerns over impact of employment on public benefits expressed by many individuals and families, incorporation of benefits planning within transition planning should be more fully addressed.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    The challenge is that those sites that are most in need may not necessarily be applying for technical assistance. At the same time, those sites who have major needs, but do not initiate interest may not be receptive to technical assistance. It is suggested that data that supports the need for TA be a factor in identifying and outreaching to sites. In addition, a closer look at demographic data is needed to ensure that TA is being provided to a diversity of sites in terms of socio-economics, geographic setting, etc.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    A starting point for such an effort is to identify and create clear mutual understanding regarding entities that can be partnered with, and specifically what are the benefits of partnering with each entity (resources, expertise, etc.). This should also include the underlying policy context for partnering (what partnerships are mandated under federal policy, etc.). There is clearly a need to create better understanding of the details of how and why partnerships are successful, and this should include identification of structures and models being used by states that can be effective in this regard. Specifically this would include:
    a) How are partnerships structured and what are the mechanisms for bringing entities together and collaborating on a state, regional, and local level?
    b) What entities are involved in partnerships, and are they inclusive of state intellectual and developmental disability agencies, mental health agencies, workforce development, benefits planning, and others?
    c) What activities do these entities collaborate and partner on?
    d) What drives the partnership? Individual student needs? System needs? Both?
    e) What outcomes are partnerships achieving and how are these measured?
    In terms of addressing these areas, documenting and sharing best practices from states in terms of partnership can be of assistance, along with technical guides that address the items above. In addition, technical assistance to states, including mentoring by other states, to guide and support development of partnerships can be of great assistance.

  20. 1) SWD should be working alongside typical peers as well as peers with disabilities, in small groups/advisories, when planning for transition, with BOTH special education department & guidance department. It shouldn’t be an isolated subset of students, and the conversation should be broadened with students supporting students.

    2) Families should be involved:
    * Interested and/or recruited families of both young children and children nearing graduation should be involved in designing systems and structures for districts to use.
    * There has to be more information – in small, but increasing doses – provided to families with younger children.

    3) Districts will need to develop close and reliable relationships with community organizations and businesses who can support transition and provide opportunities for students exiting the school system.

    4) This reminds me of the importance of developing a strengths- and interest-based IEP and goals, to both provide deepening levels of competence and understanding of careers in fields of interest AND to prevent dropouts by maintaining interest in school and learning.

    5) Developed curricula should maintain/balance attention to rigorous academic content to improve social and cultural capital of SWD who will need to navigate widening circles of interaction.

  21. In general, the 5 primary goals do accurately describe current challenges and TA needs in the area of transition. When reviewing the questions offered in this blog, my thoughts continuously go to the importance of transition services and student involvement in education beginning at the day of diagnosis. From the time a child is 3 years old or younger we should be working with the family on how to talk to their child about their disability, including the importance of self-determination and self-advocacy, with a focus on building self-confidence. Far too often, transition conversations begin far too late. Consistent research identified for many years shows the correlation between early self-determination and improved postsecondary outcomes. To sum it up, in my opinion, the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) should reconsider looking at guidelines where the transition conversations begin at a much earlier age.

  22. My comments relate to the above goals.

    The blog assumes that there is respect for and high expectations for youth with disabilities’ competency no matter what disability s/he has – high expectations by family members, educators, VR, and other service providers. In my experience, youth/yound adults with significant support needs or with high behavior support needs are left out of these services or are given generic services that are not person-centered.

    The blog also assumes that the outcomes of the above goals are that employment supports and services one receives, the workplace climate, and one’s employment readiness directly contributes to the person-job fit. Again, that is not the experience my daughter with disabilities had nor is it the one shared by 95 people I talked to last year in listening sessions around my state.

  23. I know there is a wealth of knowledge on the site, but my experience is that very few professionals from districts are actually using it. To some extent I think it is due to the format of the site, I think in some cases you really have to dig to find what you are looking for. When we would pull a piece out and present that piece to a group of school personnel they were open to the information, but I do not think they are looking (or finding) it for themselves. For example – The Taxonomy is a great resource – but not easy to find on the site

    I think some of the challenges schools are trying to figure out are how to implement activities into the school day which provide students with opportunities to learn self-determination skills, soft skills, self and career exploration skills and WBL

    I would love to see an expansion of the Predictors of Post School Success, with one pagers or tip sheets on how to build, support and implement each predictor.

    I think our schools are struggling with changing their current framework in which transition happens in their school so that it can support evidence based practices and the predictors as well as changing individual perspectives on best teaching practices. Anything that they can easily print out to support a proposed change in “the way they have always done things” is needed for those who are trying to push change forward.

  24. The National Center for Parent Leadership, Advocacy, and Community Empowerment (National PLACE) thanks you for the opportunity to comment on the US Department of Education’s (ED) request for input on how best to provide Technical Assistance (TA) to states to improve post-secondary transition services to all students and youth with disabilities, and how best to strengthen and expand coordination and collaboration with OSERS Parent Centers and other relevant TA centers.

    National PLACE is a national organization that works to strengthen the voice of families and family-led organizations at decision-making tables that affect our nation’s children, youth, and families. Our 60 local, state and national members represent Parent Training and Information and Community Parent Resource Centers, Family to Family Health Information Centers, Parent to Parent USA affiliates, National Federation of Families for Children’s Mental Health chapters, Family Empowerment Centers, Early Start Family Resource Centers, and other family-led, family-run organizations committed to ensuring the highest quality and most effective services and supports for children and families, including those with disabilities. Our comments are based on our knowledge and expertise regarding effective strategies to engage diverse families of children of all ages to help improve services to, and outcomes for, their children and youth, as well as our experience as family-led organizations many of whom are funded by the US Department of Education and other federal agencies.

    Post-Secondary Transition TA to “States”

    National PLACE strongly recommends that, “to align and coordinate all OSERS-funded training and technical assistance services focused on transition-aged children and youth with disabilities and their families,” the RFP for the National TA Center on Improving Transition to Postsecondary Education and Employment for Students with Disabilities cooperative agreement must require the Center to engage with the OSEP- and, if they continue to exist, RSA-funded parent center(s) in the state or territory with which they are working as a matter of course, and must require a representative from the parent center(s) to be invited to, and meaningfully involved in the planning, conduct, and follow up of, any site/TA visits or as members of any teams receiving TA from the National TA Center with needed financial support for travel, etc. This important decision should not be left to state lead agencies who may have inappropriate reasons to exclude representatives of their parent center(s). Parent Centers are the OSEP investment in family engagement, including in the area of transition to adult life, in the states and territories and thus should routinely be included as participants in transition TA. While transition-aged children and youth with disabilities and their families are only one audience for the IDEA Parent Centers, it is an increasingly important audience, particularly given the recent Parent Center focus on directly serving youth and young adults.

    Taking this action would help to “allow OSERS to align and coordinate, and improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of, direct training and technical assistance services focused on transition-age children and youth with disabilities and their families.” It will also help to meet ED’s interest in “approaches for improving coordination among programs that provide these services to more efficiently and effectively meet the needs of States.” (Note that National PLACE would add “and of the children, youth and families who are the intended beneficiaries of IDEA” to this statement).

    National PLACE also recommends an important conceptual change when considering what it means to provide TA to “states.” Currently the understanding of that term is limited to representatives of state lead agencies, such as the state special education agency. National PLACE would redefine this term to include representatives of other OSERS-funded entities including Parent Centers as members of a “state team” who could be provided TA. As noted by staff of the current National Transition TA Center, when state teams include representatives of parent centers, the state teams’ work is more effective. Parent Centers have significant knowledge of the root causes of systemic transition issues, expertise and experience in working with families and youth from diverse communities to address transition issues at the individual level, and recommendations on how to resolve transition problems at the school, district, and systems levels.

    Enhancing the Capacity of Parent Centers to Partner in Transition-Related Efforts

    National PLACE would first like to indicate appreciation for the intent clearly identified in their recent decision extending funding for the RSA-funded Parent Centers and National RSA Parent Center TA Center for RSA to continue to provide additional funding, in some format, for parent centers to assist youth, young adults, their families, and professionals, to support effective transition to meaningful adult lives, and self-determination in the transition process, and for a national TA center to provide TA to parent centers around transition. National PLACE strongly agrees with the statement in the Federal Register notice that “it would not be in the public interest to have a lapse in the critically needed resources currently provided by these programs. Allowing funding to lapse before the Department establishes a new, coordinated strategy for training and TA services would leave youth and families without access to critical services and assistance that ensure that students with disabilities, including those with significant disabilities, transition from K-12 prepared for postsecondary success.”

    Currently there is only dedicated transition funding for 7 RSA Parent Centers and the National RSA Parent Center Transition TA Center. While OSEP-funded Parent Centers were required in the last Parent Center competitions 4 and 5 years ago to specifically include activities aimed at serving youth and young adults with disabilities in the transition process, no additional funding was provided to achieve this objective. Particularly since many Parent Centers experienced a reduction in funding at the same time, this has posed a challenge to Parent Centers who have been left with limited resources to serve this population.

    In our comments on the Federal Register notice, National PLACE noted that options moving forward include continuing to fund individual competitive state or regional grants, funding individual competitive regional grants (or adding regional RSA funding to the IDEA Regional Parent TA Centers), or dividing the RSA individual state/regional parent center funding among all of the parent centers. National PLACE did not take a position on any of these options but recommended – and continues to recommend – that both IDEA and RSA parent centers be part of the discussion as ED makes this critical decision. We do note that providing dedicated funding to the OSEP-funded Parent Centers, even if a relatively small amount, would help address the concerns we note in the paragraph above. National PLACE also strongly supports continued funding for national TA to Parent Centers, either via a competitive national grant application, or by increasing funds for the current ED-funded National Center for Parent Information and Resources.

    Response to Specific Questions

    Because National PLACE’s focus is squarely on enhancing family and family organization voice and impact on decisions that affect children, youth and families, our responses to the specific questions posed on the OSERS blog will be from that perspective.

    1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    National PLACE believes that educating, engaging, and supporting the active participation of the parents of and youth/young adults with disabilities is essential to improve transition for youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school. Sadly, too often, schools encourage youth/young adults with disabilities to leave school, or fail to comply with the law’s requirements that parent and youth input be an important part of the process. Our members frequently see transition IEPs that reveal low expectations, leave transition-related activities to the family, and include insufficient services and supports to have any real potential to lead to effective transition. This is particularly true for low-income families, immigrant and LEP families, families of color, families in remote rural communities, families with limited education or where parents themselves have disabilities, families in the territories, and other families from traditionally underserved communities and backgrounds. Providing additional support to Parent Centers and more intensely monitoring transition processes and results, including by race, ethnicity, language, socio-economic status, etc., is critical to address this problem. This is all the more reason why Parent Centers must be involved meaningfully in site visits and TA from transition-related TA Centers as these may not be perspectives that a national TA Center would readily understand.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    While the five primary goals are necessary to address in order to improve transition services and outcomes, they are not sufficient. There is nothing in any of the five goals about the voice and role of families, including parents and youth/young adults with disabilities themselves, at the individual or systems level. National PLACE strongly recommends a goal specifically aimed at ensuring that family voice and decision-making, including in particular OSERS-funded Parent Centers, is an integral part of the process. Again, incorporating a focus on the youth/young adults facing the greatest challenges and with the greatest disparities, and their families, is essential.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    National PLACE is composed of family-led organizations at the local, state, and national levels, many of whom have created useful and relevant TA tools, resources and materials for families and youth. Because these materials have been developed to be understandable to and useable by families and youth from a wide range of backgrounds, they are also often used by educators and other service providers. RAISE, the National Transition TA Center, and the National Center for Parent Information and Resources, has served as a disseminator of many of these tools, resources and materials. Some states have partnered with their Parent Centers to ensure that their transition resources are useful to families and youth/young adults. National PLACE recommends that the upcoming competition for the National TA Center on Improving Transition to Postsecondary Education and Employment for Students with Disabilities include language requiring them to partner with RAISE, or its successor, and the CPIR, in developing materials that are useful to families and educators/providers. If the new TA Center also works intensively with a subset of individual states, it should be required to partner with the Parent Center(s) in those states/territories in tool, resource and material development.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    National PLACE supports tools, resources and materials, including those targeting Parent Centers and other family-led organizations, families and youth/young adults, that address (a) legal requirements, (b) evidence-based or informed best practices, and (c) effective implementation strategies including strategies for family-professional partnerships. We recommend that the evidence-base behind the importance of family high expectations and family engagement be more strongly and deeply referenced and embedded in all transition tools, resources, and materials.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    Given the changing cultural, racial and linguistic “face” of the US population, any ED-funded TA Center on Transition must include information on how to address these diverse cultural and racial issues, and make this information available in multiple languages.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    National PLACE does not take a position on whether the ED-funded Transition TA Center should continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process. However, if there is an application process, it should require sign-off and participation of the Parent Center(s) in the applying state/territory. Further, if there is an application process for intensive TA, the needs of the state as demonstrated by data should also be a part of the application and decision-making process.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    See our comments above.

    Conclusion

    In conclusion, National PLACE strongly believes that postsecondary transition will only be effective if family voice – including parents and youth/young adults – and family organization voice – particularly but not limited to Parent Centers – is strengthened, and states, districts and schools are required to deeply and meaningful engage families and family-organizations, as well as other stakeholders, in the improvement process. We look forward to working with ED and the parent centers “to align and coordinate, and improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of, direct training and technical assistance services focused on transition-age children and youth with disabilities and their families.”

    National PLACE Members – National
    Advocacy Institute
    National Federation of Families for Children’s Mental Health
    Parent to Parent USA
    National PLACE Members – State & Local
    Advocates for Children of NYC (PTI)
    AFCAMP (Hartford, CT) (CPRC)
    Arkansas Waiver Association (CPRC)
    ASK Resource Center (Iowa) (PTI)
    Association for Children’s Mental Health (Michigan)
    Association for Special Children and Families (NW New Jersey) (CPRC)
    Bayada (New Jersey)
    Community Inclusion and Development Alliance (NYC) (CPRC)
    Connecticut Parent Advocacy Center (Connecticut) (PTI)
    Exceptional Children’s Assistance Center (North Carolina) (PTI)
    FACT Oregon (Oregon) (PTI)
    Families Together (Kansas) (PTI)
    Family Connection of South Carolina (PTI)
    Family Matters PTI (Illinois) (PTI)
    Family Network on Disabilities (Florida) (3 PTIs)
    Family Resource Center on Disabilities (Chicago Metro Area, Illinois) (PTI)
    Family Soup (California)
    Family Voices of California
    Family Voices of New Jersey
    Family Voices of Wisconsin
    Federation for Children with Special Needs (Massachusetts) (PTI)
    FIRST Parent Center (North Carolina) (CPRC)
    Formed Families Forward (Virginia) (CPRC)
    INCLUDEnyc (New York City) (PTI & CPRC)
    Long Island Advocacy Center (Long Island, New York) (PTI)
    Louisiana PTI (PTI)
    Maryland Coalition of Families
    Matrix Parents (California) (PTI)
    Mission Empower (Erie, PA) (CPRC)
    Mississippi Coalition for Citizens with Disabilities (PTI)
    Open Doors for Multicultural Families (Washington) (CPRC)
    Parent Connection (S. Dakota) (PTI)
    Parents CAN – Napa Valley Child Advocacy Network (California)
    Parent Education Advocacy Training Center (PEATC) (Virginia) (PTI)
    Parent Education and Advocacy Leadership (PEAL Center) (Pennsylvania) (PTI)
    Parents Helping Parents (San Jose, California) (PTI)
    Parent Information Center (Delaware) (PTI)
    Parent Network of Western NY (Buffalo) (CPRC)
    Parents Let’s Unite for Kids (Montana) (PTI)
    Parents Place of Maryland (PTI)
    Parents Reaching Out (New Mexico) (PTI)
    Parent to Parent of Georgia (Georgia) (PTI)
    Parent to Parent of NJ (New Jersey)
    Parent to Parent of VA (Virginia)
    Partners Resource Network (Texas) (3 PTIs)
    PEAK Parent Center (Colorado) (PTI)
    Pyramid Parent Center (New Orleans) (CPRC)
    Rhode Island Parent Information Network (PTI)
    Rowell Family Empowerment (California)
    SPAN (New Jersey) (PTI)
    Starbridge (New York State) (PTI)
    STEP-Support and Training for Exceptional Parents (Tennessee) (PTI)
    Support for Families (San Francisco, California) (PTI, CPRC)
    Washington PAVE (PTI)
    West Virginia Parent Training & Information (PTI)
    Wisconsin FACETS (PTI)
    Wyoming Parent Information Center (PTI)

  25. EBP#1 Assignment: OSERS/NTACT Blog Post

    1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    In my experience I’ve found that teaching self-regulation to be very challenging. It can also take a long time to teach certain skills like this one. My job allows me to target specific behaviors for change over extensive periods of time. Without that time to practice repeatedly, it be unlikely for the student to acquire that skill.
    I’ve also found lack of appropriate support to be a challenge for a student I work with currently. It’s unfortunate that the options are to employ someone who is physically unable to perform the job or to let that position go unfulfilled. Many supportive roles in the classroom are filled by retired older individuals who sometimes don’t have experience with individuals with disabilities or they are not receptive to learning new practices.
    Individualization, increasing family participation, and making caregivers aware of possible resources are potential areas of concern as well. It also concerns me that the ages of focus are 14-24. Many young adults older than 24 will need assistance and adequate services.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    I believe the five primary goals described do meet a majority of the current challenges and goals. The goals are quite broad and inclusive. Implementing evidence-based practices, rigorous preparation, and providing career-related curricula could refer to a variety of different approaches and strategies. I did not notice much on community involvement. I think including hands-on work experience would be beneficial to any youth.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    I currently don’t use many TA tools but I’m hoping to become more familiar with such resources and incorporate their use in the future. I haven’t received an opportunity to implement any career-related tools as my clients are not receiving transition services. Once my clients are older, I believe interest and preference assessment tools will be very helpful.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    I think the most useful materials would be those created for parents. Many caregivers are simply not aware of the available resources. In my experience, students have missed out on beneficial resources because parents just did not know that they were available to begin with. Many caregivers also don’t understand the legislation and legal aspects of IEP meetings and services. A resource that breaks all the information down and describes options to parents would be a great addition.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    Community involvement, hands-on job experience, and early education regarding self-determination and self-advocacy skills are areas that I believe need more focus and attention. As a young adult it was very difficult to select career options for myself despite the numerous tools I had available to assist me. It took exposure and hands-on experience for me to ultimately decide on a career. This cold correlate nicely with community involvement and building rapport between agencies. Self-determination and self-advocacy are some of the most important skills we can instill in students with disabilities to increase their changes of living successful adult lives. But this process should begin early enough to get students involved in planning for their futures and participating in their IEP meetings as much as possible.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    I believe the identification of potential intensive TA sites can remain as is and continue using the established application process.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    Establishing guidelines, establishing common goals, training procedures to improve collaborative efforts could improve efficiency. Agencies and organizations could also share what strategies have been successful for them.

  26. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    In providing technical assistance, research, and training support across multiple systems, the ICI is observing multiple challenges that youth with disabilities aged 14 to 24 and their families are experiencing. Multiple research studies, model demonstrations, and federal policy reports prioritize work-based learning (such as paid internships) during high school as the best emerging evidence based practice. Yet, recent data from the National Longitudinal Transition Study suggests that fewer students are participating in work based learning than in the past. We suggest technical assistance that addresses these challenges is needed:

    • Systems Issues: Multiple systems are attempting to partner in local communities with high schools and to emphasize work experience as a key service. However, many of these entities are state systems with local offices that are patching together teams that may have sporadic connection with high schools. For example, one state vocational rehabilitation counselor may have to cover the high schools across a wide geography. School personnel are not clear on whether or not they are responsible for interacting with employers outside of school. Each system has services, capacities, options, financial requirements, and eligibility requirements that tangle at the local level. State VR agencies are serving an increasing percentage of youth age 14 to 24 on their caseload due to WIOA requirements and are in the midst of becoming both a youth system and an adult system. Schools often lack the resources and expertise in terms of supporting students in career planning and work experiences, and there is often confusion over the appropriate role of schools in this regard vs. other entities (e.g., vocational rehabilitation). Who can create or facilitate work experiences for which students at what ages and with what supports is not always clear across high schools. What supports do high schools get to expand their capacity or partnerships to create work experience opportunities for students with disabilities?

    • Access to Work Experiences while in School: Many students, particularly those with the most significant disabilities, leave school with little, if any work experience. Even if they have work experience, too often it is not reflective of best practices in terms of work based learning and typical teenage and youth work experiences (i.e., experiences are often limited in scope and setting, and often are “special” experiences for students with disabilities). Other students who have disabilities emerging late in high school (e.g., clinical depression and other mental health conditions) or who may not identify themselves as a student with a disability (e.g., students with chronic health conditions such as sickle cell anemia), may not pursue work experiences through disability programs while in high school. Another population of concern is students with disabilities in communities with limited economic resources. Limited research on 504 suggests that students in high schools in low-income communities are less likely to get a 504 plan than in more economically resourced communities. One significant need for TA is to determine which populations of students with disabilities are being excluded, have limited access, or are unaware of the services that may benefit them for the limited time they are in high school and then what to do about inequities at the local and state level. The current transition services models are not likely to engage youth with disabilities who have left school prematurely. Workforce systems serving out of school youth are partnering with WIOA systems including VR but more work needs to be done to look at how all public systems are partnering on behalf of all youth ages 14 to 24 who may or may not be in school.

    • Definitions of Work Based Learning Experiences are inconsistent: What defines a work based learning experience, how it is different from a part-time job, whether or not work experiences in non-integrated settings count, and whether or not other services (such as job coaching and assistive technology) are available at a sufficient quality and capacity is inconsistent across communities. Are students filling programmatic slots for work experiences or are work experiences tailored to their career interests and goals? More technical assistance on what defines a work experience and how that work experience is fully supported so that students gain the maximum opportunity to benefit is a critical area of need.

    • The Role of Family, Guardians and Others as Decision Makers: Adult and youth systems are partnering to provide transition services to students with disabilities yet these partnerships appear to have inconsistent formal processes for including family and household members as decision-makers. Some systems are adult systems that are expanding to serve younger populations. VR field services personnel have described the consent process as cumbersome, confusing to families and a barrier for early career development services such as Pre-ETS. Students may miss a semester or summer opportunities due to delays in getting parental consent. VR is primarily an adult system moving to a system more focused on youth and this may require additional support as to how to engage family members in a system built upon the individual choice of a person with a disability. Families and others may have different visions for when a student should work than the systems that are measured by outcomes. Pre-ETS services are offered at the same time that families and students may be concerned about redetermination for social security benefits. Parents may have more interest in summer work experiences so that students are not distracted from academic participation. Yet, at least one major partner has very limited capacity during summer. In many states, community rehabilitation providers (CRPs) deliver transition services through contracts with one or more public agencies. Capacity issues limit student and family choice of CRP and there is limited knowledge about the quality of transition services delivered by CRPs. Worthwhile TA efforts include strategies for ensuring statewide capacity, quality assurance, and client/customer/family/individual choice.

    • Sporadic involvement of local businesses: Most of the focus in transition services appears to be “supply side” or service system strategies for identifying work experiences. There is very limited knowledge about how public systems can translate the demand side, business relations approach to transition services and students with disabilities. To what extent are transition teams using adult systems models of engaging businesses beyond just placements. WIOA emphasized businesses as customers and requiring performance metrics to ascertain the success of workforce agencies including youth services to measure outcomes for businesses. How can state systems partner with local communities to engage small businesses in offering work experiences for local high school students? This area is a critical need area for technical assistance, training and research. What is the business case for participating in early career development and work experiences for students and youth with disabilities?

    • Financial and benefit disincentives: Decisions about work are directly tied to decisions about disability benefits and services. Multiple systems are working at cross-purposes and the capacity of organizations providing benefits counseling are severely limited. Students and families may be concerned about how work will affect SSI and Medicaid and ultimately how those decisions affect the availability of long-term supports such as those offered by mental health and developmental disability systems. Youth with chronic health conditions or other disabilities with medical concerns such as lupus, spina bifida, cerebral palsy are concerned about access to health insurance benefits and are making another transition from a pediatric health care system to an adult health care system. Decisions about Medicaid made by health care professionals are often very disconnected from career related transitions. Financial and benefits counseling services are often short term in nature, poorly timed (at placement only) and are at very low capacity. Household financial decisions and access to health care may drive transition outcomes more than types of early career development services offered in high school.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    There are three areas that may be within these primary goals, but which are not explicitly stated, and are worthy of noting: a) Development of strong partnership structures at the state, regional, and local level, not only among vocational rehabilitation and educational agencies, but also inclusive of state intellectual and developmental disability agencies, mental health agencies, workforce development, and other entities; b) With families playing such a primary and critical role, the ability to effectively engage families in the transition process, including families from a wide range of cultures, is a critical area of need; and c) the ability to engage and support local businesses in work experiences of local high school students beyond simply a “placement approach”.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    The ability to work across TA centers to coordinate support within states and communities has been very useful and relevant. While the individual TA centers are funded with specific mandates and outcomes as appropriate; on the ground, states and localities often require multiple TA centers to tackle an issue that spans across topical areas as funded. An example might be how to look at early career development services for both in school and out of school youth and develop the required statewide WIOA performance outcome measures and data collection systems.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    We respond to this question as a TA provider. In addition to the highly valuable tools being produced by incumbent TA centers, our experience suggests that creating peer networks (such as cross state Learning Collaboratives) across states is a sought after TA approach. These peer networks are beyond short duration less intensive community of practice approaches and are focused on the uptake of practices and remedy of operational and procedural snafus. State representatives appear to benefit greatly from learning from other locations, getting answers to tricky operations issues, and “seeing” what is possible beyond their own locations.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    Effective implementation of Pre-Employment Transition services is a critical need in terms of a number of issues: a) Best practices in the five core areas of Pre-ETS; b) Ensuring that Pre-ETS is benefiting students who most need and can benefit from Pre-ETS, particularly those with more significant disabilities, students who may not considered themselves a person with a disability, students with chronic health conditions, and students who may acquire disabilities during their high school years; c) Effective measurement of Pre-ETS in terms of long-term impact. In addition to Pre-ETS, there is a need for technical assistance on use of technology in transition, particularly in terms of students with significant disabilities using technology for support and enhancing their independence. There is a critical need for TA that supports working with families and individuals from diverse cultures and varied socio-economic backgrounds. We also suggest that providing TA to communities to engage local businesses in work experiences may be very fruitful in expanding options and connecting youth across racial, ethnic, and linguistic communities to work experiences.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    The challenge is that those sites that are most in need may not be applying for technical assistance. At the same time, those sites that do not initiate interest may not be receptive to technical assistance. It is suggested that data that supports the need for TA be a factor in identifying sites. Another strategy may be to create a TA approach that is working with multiple neighboring states as a cohort. By this suggestion, we are not requesting regionally based TA, but recognizing that public systems may look to their neighbors who may have similar economic conditions or who are already partnering on cross state initiatives to work together to look at employment and career options for students and youth. TA may not work very well if the recipient of TA views it as a required or imposed correction. It may work well to create a buddy system approach that identifies a “problem to be solved” across states.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    Identification of structures and models being used by states can be effective in this regard. Specifically this would include: a) How are partnerships structured and what is the mechanism for bringing entities together and collaborating? b) What activities do these entities collaborate and partner on? c) What drives the partnership? Individual student needs? System needs? Both? d) What outcomes are partnerships achieving and how are these measured? It is suggested that based on best practices, a center can provide support to states in developing and enhancing existing collaborations and coordination via technical assistance. The use of Learning Collaborative approaches may be very useful.

  27. Feedback on Improving Post-secondary Transition Services

    Question #1
    Challenges: Funding
    State and Local Education Institutions do not receive federal or state financial support. The high school transition program (18-21) receives no funding after age 18 on the federal level, as well as no state-level funding (no VR funding). Agency partners support students through agency funds and donations.

    Challenges: Guidelines and Post-Program Exit Planning
    There are no guidelines for curriculum, assessment or evaluation; what specific knowledge and skills should students know and be able to do before they leave the program? Our transition and postsecondary program ensures that students have a plan prior to exit, but it is not a requirement for programs to transition students out of a transition program. (Districts are not required to provide this information to families or walk families through the process, and doing so adds duties to an already full load for teachers willing to do this). Not all students sign up for adult services like OPWDD or ACCESS-VR on their own.

    Question #2
    Suggestions
    It seems that NY State has overlooked alternate assessment students. The goals and questions put before us seem to be focused on students with disabilities who are working towards high school diplomas, and it is often the case that even these students do not leave high school or college programs equipped to obtain or maintain employment. NYSAA students also need meaningful transition experiences.

    Question #3
    Helpful Resources
    The Employability Profile has been useful, and transition specialists have been helpful. Internships and work-based learning have been helpful (our program has been making these connections on our own without the help of a TA center.)

    Question #4
    New tools, resources or materials: Getting the word out to potential employers
    New tools, resources and materials need to be supplied to prepare employers to hire students who have exited transition and postsecondary programs. We need employers to be mindful of job postings and job descriptions and evaluate the need for a high school diploma, and to determine if it is absolutely necessary for the specific job. We need employers to reflect on the benefits of hiring someone with a disability (staff retention, equity, diversity, inclusion). Students who have participated in and are exiting from transition and postsecondary programs have enhanced employment readiness skills, but many employers are not aware of the benefits of such programs, and in hiring students who have participated in these programs.

    Question #5
    Recruiting/hiring/retaining support staff
    Support is a critical underpinning of any transition and post-secondary program. Our program is very under staffed, and it is difficult to provide enough support for students when there is not enough support staff. Solutions are needed to reduce turnover and increase staff retention.
    An increased effort to recruit and train diverse staff should also be incorporated.

    Question #6
    No Response

    Question #7
    Employment connections
    Most jobs require a high school diploma and some exiting students who do not have a high school diploma, even with the skills they have gained while participating in the transition/postsecondary program, still will not have a fair chance at gaining employment. We would like to understand business needs so we can develop training that will build skills necessary to support businesses so students can obtain competitive employment. More connections between post-secondary programs and employers is needed. This is critical. It seems that although transition and postsecondary students are learning skills for employment, businesses are not ready to hire them. A pipeline from a transition/post-secondary program to local employers is needed.

  28. 1.What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school? The challenges I have faced are absence of communication between schools and outside services as well as between parents and the schools. Sometimes parent participation and involvement are also slim. I also find that the correct services are not always being provided as well.

    2.Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace? Yes, although sometimes number 1 and 3 can be minimal. If the IEP team can ensure that the students/adults are getting the services and preparation for post-secondary life, then this issue can resolve itself.

    3.What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work? Transition tools and assistance centers, I have heard are quite helpful.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area? I think more videos and web modules that accurately cover information needed, Training for parents is also ideal as some parents are completely lost when it comes to the services their child needs. I also think the development of appropriate assessments is beneficial. Sometimes the assessments given are not proper for the student taking them and does not help identify areas or strength or weakness.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or re-positioned to better meet your needs?

    6.Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest? I do not have much of a

  29. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    • One major challenge we are facing with serving youth with disabilities between ages 14 and 24 is the accessibility and knowledge of resources. I think the overall dedication made by the IEP team is seen as more of a requirement, rather than a way to allow for an individual to reach their full potential. The follow up and support from the entire team is crucial for success. In addition, most services funded by the government are limited and the out of pocket costs for physical therapy, speech therapy, etc. is extremely high. When young adults can receive proper therapy and support at a reasonable price (or paid by the government), individuals will have an easier transition into their adult life.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    • Yes, my school provides all five goals. I do think work experience and making connections within the community is very important. I would suggest that more work experience is provided and begins before their senior year of high school. The additional time will give student the opportunity to experience and find a preference for their future career.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    • The most useful tools and resources have been listed on the “Best Practices” on the https://transitioncoalition.org website. These are straightforward in giving specific steps needed when beginning and continuing the transition process. I have also found that a “Social Thinking” class that my school offers is extremely beneficial! It allows students to discuss and participate in games and opportunities that help create appropriate social skills. The use of recent and relevant research is also beneficial in my school setting to ensure I am using the most effective teaching styles.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    • I believe more assessments should be available for educators and parents to help with the transition process to guide a successful future.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    • I do not work in a secondary school setting, although I would enjoy a professional development geared towards technology and the benefits it can have for individuals searching for jobs in the workforce and completing daily tasks. I would also enjoy more parent speakers to share their success stories with parent who are going through the transition process – a possible blog?

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    • I am not familiar with the current process.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    • I believe that the mindset needs to change. The transition team needs to have specific goals for each member. This life-changing process needs collaboration and dedication from each team member to help with a successful transition. I believe that through the teachings of digital videos, the entire team can pinpoint the exact requirements they need to provide to help the individual. I also am a huge believer in conferences – with a motivation speaker; your entire mindset can change for the better.

  30. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    –It is challenging to find reliable and affordable transportation for students to attend work study or training programs off the school site. There are options in our community, but students have to wait for a long time.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    –Absolutely, these are great goals. I am excited to see how they will be implemented and funded! Thank you for taking such time and thought to plan for our neediest citizens!

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    –Connections for my students have been the most worthwhile resource. Having the means to connect my students and their families with agencies, businesses, and resources that will be available to them for the rest of their lives has been the most relevant.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    –An online, interactive program that leads students and families through the transition process. It could provide interest surveys, dream sheets, job descriptions, and ore as resources. It could operate similar to an online college course. The student’s progress would be saved, and staff from the center would track and assist with progress. This should work in addition to assistance and support from a transition coach/coordinator.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    –Having an application process is still a great way to expand available resources. But, there could also be staff at the TA Center seeking out new sites through referrals or ‘scouting’.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    –Financial support. If more money is spent on students with disabilities when they are learning to become adults, then more adults with disabilities will be able to be independent adults. This will result in less dependence on disability, Medicare, and Medicaid.

  31. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    One of the biggest challenges that I have faced is the lack of parent involvement for students in schools. Communication can often be a struggle and language barriers can create even more challenges. Parents are often uniformed and feel as though they do not play a part in the planning of special services for their child, however, parents bring a unique viewpoint to the team. I think that communication needs to be more specific so that parents are aware of the importance they play in planning for their child to receive special services.
    Another challenge that needs to be addressed is the number of teachers and school staff who leave special education positions and positions that require the provision of transition services.
    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    I believe that these goals represent the challenges and are good goals to focus on. In relation to my answer above, I think it could be beneficial to include a goal related to parent involvement in an attempt to increase parent involvement, understanding and self-determination to aid the transition process.
    Additionally, I would ensure that to meet these goals school officials are getting the appropriate training necessary to facilitate the transition process. Many teachers and school officials lack the skills and knowledge necessary to truly understand the transition process, and more training would be beneficial.
    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    Modules from the Transition Coalition website have been extremely beneficial in aiding my understanding of requirements and best practices. Each module provides valuable information and means of self-assessing to ensure that participants have a full understanding of transition services.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    Professional development in the area of TA would be beneficial to teachers who are working with students who provide transition services. Additionally, funding and incentives should be provided for teachers working in special education and providing transition services in an attempt to keep teachers in the field.
    Any other resources that can be provided to parents can also be beneficial in informing parents of the transition process, which may lead to more involvement from parents.
    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    Providing an overview of the assessment process to IEP team members, and creating a wider variety of assessments will be beneficial. Consideration of languages should be taken into account, as assessment could be difficult if a students was to still be an English Language Learner.
    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    Yes, I think they should continue to identify assessment sites, as the a greater variety of assessment there is, the better we will be able to collect accurate and meaningful data. I think that there needs to be clear expectations and guidelines as to how to administer these assessments.
    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    Offering trainings and more information to members of the transition IEP team will aid in increasing participation. Specifically, I think that more attention and education should be given to parents and community partners to ensure that they understand their importance in the creation, implementation and evaluation of the transition process.

  32. 1) What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    One challenge that I am currently experiencing in my school district is the lack of parental involvement. When we hold IEP meetings (involving transition plans), it is difficult to get the parents or guardians involved. They show up to the meeting because they are legally required to, but they do not take an active interest. I think part of the reason they do not take an active interest is because they do not understand the process as well as they should. A lot of the time, we use specific terminology that they might not understanding the meaning of. I think one solution to this would be to hold an informational seminar centered around transition planning. Parents would be invited and it would be an open forum to discuss in depth how the transition process works (who is involved, what assessments are given, services that are available, etc). If parents understood more details about the process, maybe they would be more inclined to take an active interest.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    I believe that the five primary goals described accurately represent my challenges and support state goals. Since I work at a school that primarily serves children with disabilities (75% or more on IEP’s), the district focuses heavily on these goals. However, one issue I did notice was with goal 5, and how it states “students with disabilities receive rigorous academic preparation so they are prepared for success in postsecondary education.” The issue I see is this doesn’t take into account students with severe cognitive disabilities. For the most part, it is extremely difficult for a student with an intellectual/cognitive disability to engage in “rigorous academic preparation”. It might be beneficial to revise the wording of this goal to take into account student’s that are not capable of receiving rigorous academic content.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    Some resources that have been useful have been student interviews (Transition Planning and Career Assessment Interview), checklists (Self-Determination/Self-Advocacy checklist), and resources from the National Technical Assistance Center on Transition (NTACT).

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    As I mentioned before, I think it would be beneficial to have more parent resources regarding the transition process and planning. These resources could help address frequently asked questions and popular concerns that arise. The resources would also help inform parents on the process itself, to help increase involvement.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    While I am not aware of any new or emerging needs or topic areas, I think there should be more training on evidence-based practices to teachers, not just the Transition Coordinator. If teachers were more aware of the practices and research, they could better assist the student in the classroom and with their goals.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    I believe that the potential sites should continue to be identified through an application process.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    There should be more seminars and in-person trainings. When different school districts get together and collaborate, they are able to assess what is working and not working for each other. After seeing several other responses, I also agree that a list of available agencies and resources in each city or state would be beneficial.

  33. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    One of the biggest challenges is access to relevant, authentic, and meaningful opportunities that involve skill acquisition that transfer to life after high school. Academic and graduation requirements drive the curriculum and daily schedule of in-school students. Funding cuts and restrictions on services limit transportation to community-based activities.
    Engagement with out-of-school youth has been more limited. We do not have successful pathways in finding these youth in an environment when their basic needs are met and they are in a stable state to focus on participating in services
    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    (1)Youth and young adults with disabilities receive and participate in evidence-based and promising practices in secondary transition services and supports.
    There is definitely a need for a resource sharing platform of evidence-based promising practices.
    (2)SEAs and LEAs implement evidence-based and promising practices and strategies, including early warning and intervention systems to reduce dropout and increase graduation rates. There is a need for training on promising practices that identify the root cause of dropout rates and research-based engagement strategies that lead to increased graduation rates.
    (3)Students with disabilities participate in career-related curricula so they are prepared for postsecondary employment and careers.
    Students often face challenging academic rigor that limits their participation in career-related activities. It would be extremely beneficial if the curricula was integrated into their core competencies to serve a dual purpose. For example; researching a business of interest, visiting the job site, and interviewing employees, then preparing a presentation on the experience to earn and ELA/ communication credit while also exploring career options.
    (4)Students with disabilities receive rigorous academic preparation so they are prepared for success in postsecondary education.
    Rigorous academic preparation should not be limited just to those students planning to participate in postsecondary education. Programs should also be available to prepare students for participation on apprenticeship and vocational pathways as well.
    (5)SEAs, SVRAs, LEAs, and local VR offices use data-driven decision-making to develop their respective plans and reports.
    There should be an increased focus on data sharing agreements and collaboration so that the plans and reports are not analyzed in isolation in an effort to better support and serve students with disabilities
    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    The NTAC website is extremely helpful; particularly the training modules, tool kits, lesson plans, and data developed to support field services. I have found the webinars where other states share their success and struggles very useful. The Capacity Building Institute is an incredible opportunity to collaborate on best practices, student outcome, and successful service delivery models.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    Establishing a framework for best practices in collecting outcome data would be helpful. As we are engaging in collaborative team efforts and delivering promising transition practices, then it would be useful to have a tool that measures the effectiveness of the services being provided.
    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    States that have not received intensive training should have priority through an application process to technical assistance and support. States that have already received multiple years of intensive training should have a firm foundation of support established and can benefit from targeted training.
    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    Proving regional opportunities for state-level teams are to plan, collaborate, and share resources, ideas, and best practices

  34. American Psychological Association – Division 22 (Rehabilitation Psychology) and the American Psychological Association Response to Inquiry Related to Technical Assistance to Improve Postsecondary Transition Services

    Rehabilitation Psychology is a specialty area within psychology that focuses on the study and application of psychological knowledge and skills on behalf of individuals with disabilities and chronic health conditions in order to maximize health and welfare, independence and choice, functional abilities, and social role participation, across the lifespan. Rehabilitation Psychology, Division 22, is the division within the American Psychological Association (APA) that many rehabilitation psychologists identify as their professional home. Division 22 and the American Psychological Association have reviewed both the request and the services offered through the current KT center and are grateful for the opportunity to provide our members’ expertise through this comment period as well as for the funding provided for this important initiative.

    1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    As rehabilitation psychologists who work with individuals with a range of disabilities, a primary challenge that we encounter is that the issue of transition has not been approached prior to the age of 14 (or even older in many cases). Where typically developing children receive a wealth of information about their abilities, strengths and limitations as they grow up and shape their ideas for the future based upon those, children and adolescents with disabilities are often sheltered or protected. Many people – from well-meaning parents to school counselors to teachers – do not feel as if they have permission to conduct realistic discussions about both limitations and strengths. As such, we would urge the technical assistance center to provide guidance about:

    • How to consider, and begin to discuss, realistic expectations of transition in an age appropriate manner from the onset of impairment (whether at birth for individuals with congenital disabilities or soon after injury for those with acquired disabilities);
    • Addressing both strengths and limitations / challenges in a transparent way; and
    • How stakeholders within the transition process can help the child / adolescent / young adult identify overarching goals and priorities and then facilitate realistic planning based on strengths, challenges and limitations. The TA center should facilitate training in how to provide assistance in coming up with a back-up plan for careers and education in a transparent process that is not hidden from the recipient.

    Another challenge that we face in serving children, adolescents and young adults with disabilities is that many schools use a “cookie cutter” approach to transition. We would recommend a tailored approach that assesses needs, age, functional limitations and strengths and then provides evidence-based recommendations based on these combination of factors. Transition plans need to continue to be refined with multiple options developed over time, such as in the typically developing population.

    A third challenge is that the quality of transition planning and the transition process varies greatly. Well-funded schools and wealthy school districts often have access to more resources and opportunities to develop “high quality” individualized educational plans (IEPs) with not only case managers but also teams including educators and vocational rehabilitation specialists. In contrast, other districts may involve a single individual in the IEP process, and transition plans are poorly informed by either student abilities or the services, supports and opportunities that may be available. We believe that the federally funded TA center can be particularly helpful in this area, particularly if it is able to engage multiple stakeholders (e.g., agencies, educators, parents) in lower performing districts. It may be beneficial for them to reach out directly to vocational rehabilitation agencies and facilitate inclusion in all IEPs and transition plans from an early age.

    Finally, there is often no plan for what will happen after the age of 24 and what the young adults will need to know or have in place in order to address issues associated with employment, education or independent living after that time. Providing technical assistance directly to families and young adults to answer questions and address next steps and to facilitate connections with appropriate resources and solutions would be beneficial.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and technical assistance (TA) needs and support your state’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    One of the key issues that is not addressed in the technical assistance goals provided by NTACT is related to assisting in developing tailored plans that recognize the specific diagnoses, impairments or challenges of children, adolescents and young adults with disabilities. In particular, while we strongly advocate for providing needed accommodations to ensure that all children have the opportunities to access and engage with a multitude of opportunities, we also recognize that different children have different needs, challenges and limitations and so will differentiate from what is offered. As such, we advise revisions to goals 1, 2, 3 and 4 as suggested:

    Goal 1. Youth and young adults with disabilities receive and participate in evidence-based and promising practices in secondary transition services and supports that are informed by and tailored to their specific impairment(s), severity of disability, and interests.
    Goal 2. State Education Agencies (SEAs) and Local Education Agency (LEAs) implement evidence-based and promising practices and strategies, including early warning and intervention systems, to enhance successful outcomes, whether those are associated with graduation, employment, independence or opportunities.
    Goal 3. Students with disabilities participate in skill development and career-related curricula and opportunities so they have the knowledge, skills and experience they need for postsecondary education, employment and independent living and to advocate for themselves in these settings.
    Goal 4. Students with disabilities receive rigorous and informed preparation, tailored based both on interests as well as qualified assessment of abilities and limitations, so they are prepared for independence and success in postsecondary education, employment and community settings.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    Rehabilitation psychologists working with individuals with disabilities in healthcare settings reported little awareness about NTACT and the technical assistance tools, resources or materials that have been developed.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your state’s work in this area?

    Given the aforementioned lack of awareness about NTACT, it is recommended that future US Department of Education-funded Technical Assistance Centers on Transition increase interactions with other stakeholders invested in the transition process, in particular engaging parents, psychologists and other clinicians in the healthcare systems through liaisons and TA methods that push information to those audiences. Possible solutions to these and other challenges include:

    • The development and dissemination of kits for educators and parents associated with identifying resources and having difficult conversations.;
    • The development of a clearinghouse of state / county specific regulations, resources, programs and contacts that can be accessed by parents, teachers or young adults with disabilities.;
    • Information about the differences between diplomas and certificates of completions with realistic assessments of the costs and benefits of each.;
    • Advisory panels linking the TA Center to disability specific advocacy organizations.; and
    – Providing educators with information and technical assistance about diagnoses / impairment to help the child develop realistic health management plans which generalize to college, employment and community settings.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    Based on our experience as rehabilitation psychologists, we believe that it is importance that a TA Center may consider including information to address health self-management needs, including addressing the performance of required health behaviors (using a catheter, hygiene, medication management).

  35. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    • Trying to build in vocational activities within the academic school day. There can be struggles fitting in DVR service activities during a school day when students are available.
    • Difficulty getting access/permission to meet with students in the schools during their day.
    • Lack of student engagement and/or lack of engagement of the parents which is important to help the student be successful.
    • Parents expectations being more focused on the school side and helping them get into college and not seeing importance of the vocational services.
    • Parents and teachers having low or no expectations that the student can achieved employment in an integrated/competitive setting.
    • Lack of capacity to serve all students needing services. i.e. not enough school staff to ensure transition activities can be supported, service provider capacity issues, and VR staff capacity to meet all the needs of students.
    • School budgets can be challenging and do not always meet transition needs of students.
    • There can be a lack of alignment between high school expectations and expectations that postsecondary institution has.
    • Difficulty locating employment opportunities and work experience for students with significant disabilities. Many skills being obtained by students are within the school and not in the community.
    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    The goals are very broad. It may be helpful to narrow the goals and make more specific to help states focus on TA needs and provide feedback on how helpful they are or give specific examples of activities that would fall under these.
    Consider a goal specifically on training need and education of employers.
    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    • Fiscal forecasting tool on Pre-ETs.
    • Interagency Agreement Template.
    • Ideas of what Pre-ETS covered.
    • WINTAC has been helpful in providing Section 511 information.
    • FAQs.
    • Consultation when needed.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    • More resources and tools surrounding Measurable Skills Gains and Credentials.
    • Evidenced based best practices on services that are most impactful in serving youth based on data being collected by VR agencies. Make easy to understand and easy to apply.
    • Where are states losing students in the school and VR process and what are the unserved/ underserved populations and best practices for serving them.
    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    • Schools should be assisting more with helping students with CTE and youth apprenticeship.
    • Reauthorizations of IDEA to align with WIOA.
    • Serving youth whose guardians are not around but are in need of services. Without parent consent and signature, we cannot serve them. E.g. foster youth, homeless youth, etc.
    • Emerging practices- Peer mentoring, trauma informed care, strategies to better serve students with mental health needs, rapid engagement.
    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    • No recommendation.
    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    • Grants to bring stakeholders and agencies together within each state at regional or state level for common training on transition.

    • Best practice documents for interagency collaboration- where to start. Including how to braid services and funding.

    • How to work and incorporate long term support agencies and collaborate to meet he students needs.

    • Grants or strategies for data sharing among agencies- common consumer identifier for tracking through the agencies, credential information, MSG information, UI information, etc.

    • Additional training on specific disabilities. Resources, knowledge, and techniques on working with students who qualify under various disability categories.

    • At federal level have agreements to collect from institutions the credentials and enrollment information in place of collecting at the state level.

    • Reduce data collection.

    • More collaboration with parent information and training centers and best practices on how we can work together.

    • Information on the effectives and employment outcomes of individuals that participate in
    Comprehensive Transition Training Programs (Think College).

    • Have someone from the national center assigned to each state inter-agency partners monthly or quarterly, so the technical assistance person is more aware of state regional dynamics, and can better address TA needs as they come up (rather than waiting for a specific request or enough state’s to indicate the need so it comes up as part of the general TA).

    • Have the TA Center help create and support regional Communities of Practice. This would allow for neighboring states to connect to each other on a regular basis (conference calls, webinars, maybe even in person conversations) to learn from and support each other and request additional assistance from the TA Center as needed.

  36. To be blunt, you probably have not received a comment from anyone in IL because transition services are so poor. There are pockets of updated ideas and better practices, but IL has much to learn from neighboring WI.

    As a parent, an Illinois Partners in Policymaking 2019 graduate, and a partner in a for-profit organization in this field, I know what I’m talking about when it comes to Illinois services.

    Thank you for the opportunity.

  37. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    In school, there is a lack of parent involvement. Most of the families are absent from the meetings. Many of them are migrant families who cannot financially risk being out from work in order to support their family. They also do not realize the importance of parent involvement and the positive effects it has to enhance their child’s self- determination. Relating to my past experiences, I know that many Spanish-speaking parents feel like meeting can be nerve-wracking, even with the translator on site. I think it would be beneficial for the parents and team to have some kind of brief preparation or training. This way they are aware of their child’s options and their part in the meeting.

    There is a lack of accessible opportunities for students looking to learn more about possible career paths. There aren’t many option local.
    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    Yes, they do.
    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    Information and resources from The National Technical Assistance Center on Transition (NTACT) and Transition Coalition. TC is also good for professional development. It is also helpful when the parents are provided with transition materials and information, such as “what to expect “pamphlet.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    I think training on what to expect during the transition process will be helpful. Furthermore, making each team member knowledgeable about their part in the meeting.
    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    Making the transition topic earlier, so they are truly prepared for the future- even if it’s just brief discussions about the future before the age 14. I also think more access to transition specialists.
    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    I do not have enough information to contribute to this question.
    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    Make it easily accessible for everyone and give options. Online webinars are a great collaboration tool.

  38. As the Coordinator of Disability, Diversity and Nontraditional Students Services of the State University of New York (SUNY) at System Administration, the following recommendations are largely intended for college-bound students on the Autism Spectrum, but also broadly apply to all college-bound students with disabilities. These recommendations are endorsed by Student Disability/Accessibility Services Professional Staff across SUNY, and align with evidence-based practices for transition to postsecondary education settings. Please note, this is not an exhaustive list, These are key areas where supports could be improved.

    There is a critical need for DOE to provide Technical Assistance to Secondary Districts to support evidence-based practices whose postsecondary goal includes college. There are specific competencies essential to succeeding in postsecondary education environments including: self-advocacy, social skills, academic skills and compensatory strategies, self-management, time management, organization, and more. College bound students on the Autism Spectrum have unique functional limitations navigating postsecondary institutions, including, but not limited to, respect to sensory deficits, activities of daily living including personal hygiene, interpersonal communication, self-advocacy, time management and health and wellness.

    Targeted transition-planning practices and IEP development for college bound students with disabilities, particularly students on the Autism Spectrum. Although there are specific requirements for how an IEP is to be structured, technical guidance is needed to develop a quality IEP that affords a student the appropriate transition to postsecondary education. For example, creating a course of study that will promote students’ college-level reading and writing skills, and providing explicit instruction in key academic areas such as note-taking and study skills. In addition, improve independent daily living goals expected of college students, particularly those planning to live in residence halls or independently off campus (e.g., cooking, laundry, public transportation, medication management). Use of evidence-based transition assessments should be used to gather data on specific skills to address annually.

    Enhance employment preparedness experiences throughout high school for college-bound students with disabilities in order to promote work-related competencies, such as time-management, social skills, teamwork and other hands-on skills.

    Coordinate with mental health providers to continue mental health supports prior to, during, and beyond the transition to college and adulthood.

    Enhanced assistive technology training prior to enrollment in postsecondary education.

    Guide for parents of students with disabilities to be shared no later than when the student reaches the age of 14. Topics should include, but are not limited to, daily living activities and self-care, budgeting, medication management, relationships and sexual health, etc.

    Minimally, enhanced collaboration between school districts and postsecondary education offices supporting students with disabilities. Students and families should have prior knowledge of postsecondary legal rights for students with disabilities (e.g., differences between IDEA and ADA, FERPA, etc.), and understanding the interactive process of requesting accommodations.

    Updated comprehensive neuropsychological/psychoeducational evaluations within three years of graduation from high schools (use of adult scales during testing).

  39. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    Adult services have less resources than schools specifically in the areas like nursing and assistive technology. This often creates an issue with youth who are transitioning, when supports that have always been available to them disappear. Parents are not often ready for that transition and are unaware of what supports will no longer be an option for their child to receive. Vocational Rehab Services offices are doing a great job working with youth who require little assistance in their post- secondary support needs, however, they are often performing very poorly in supporting those with higher medical or behavioral support needs and in some cases denying services all together. Vocational Rehab Services offices need to be involved in all transition aged youth throughout that entire transition period to assist with employment. Transportation is another area that causes a huge barrier to employment for individuals with disabilities, specifically in rural areas.

    2. Do the five primary goals (listed below) accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    These goals appear to represent the areas that need to be addressed.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    Transition Planning Committees divided in specific counties have been very useful but not all districts are involved. Transition fairs to help education families on next steps have proven to be helpful. Many community providers are using curriculum created by major universities such as Oklahoma University.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    Missing from the resources available and adding to the gap in services is a streamline assessment tool and plan that can span across the life span of services. Medicaid Waiver case managers should be involved in the school system if an individual is near transition and already involved in waiver services. Transition Coordinators should be in all schools to help educate parents and families and should also educate families on benefit management and navigating means tested benefits. Many families are scared of employment because is could cause a loss of SSI or Medicaid benefits. Discoveries and Customized Employment should begin in the school system so students are ready for employment once they exit the education system.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    Parents should be educated on Supported Decision-Making vs Guardianship and the roles that guardians play in an individual’s life. Assistive technology is another area that needs to be developed further as technology is advancing so are the opportunities for individuals with disabilities to have community based employment opportunities. Creating Customized Employment is another topic that TA centers need to focus on to help individuals reach employment related outcomes.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    Data gathered from the previous grant cycle should be utilized to determine where sites are needed.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among State Education Agencies (SEAs), Local Educational Agencies (LEAs), State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies (SVRAs), Career and Technical Education, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    If a child has waiver funded HBS services, those supports should be working collaboratively with the school system to complete assessments and discoveries that can span across all services. Encouraging collaboration and ease of transition between multiple agencies has happened on a limited basis through Regional/ County Transition Planning Committees but more education on the system in general is needed.

  40. 1. Challenges we experience in NH related to serving students and youth include: receiving timely and required parental approval to receive Pre-Employment Transition Services (Pre-ETS), data collection and data sharing, the successful engagement of students, youth and families and successful strategies to include Pre-ETS in Individual Education Plan’s.
    2. The goals OSERS captured will be broad enough to accurately capture the needs of state requests.
    4. Training in higher education program on how to work specifically with students with disabilities. They don’t get this unless they take a special certificate and with the large focus on transition in VR this should be a focus in higher education programs. Marketing materials that could be modified for states would be helpful. Tools to assist SEA and LEA’s in collaboration would be helpful.

  41. 1) What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving 14 – 24 year old youth with disabilities? Many YWD are severely lacking self-advocacy skills or even the motivation/will to do things on their own. After showing & telling students how to fill out forms (ie job application, intake forms for services & even FAFSA) the responses I get from students are “”Can’t I just have my parent do this for me?” or they think their teacher, guidance counselor or paraprofessional will be just as easily available to help them even after they are done with high school. Through my transitions counselor work, I’ve seen it’s because the adults in the YWD’s lives (parents, teachers – especially paraprofessionals) “jump in” at the first sign of struggle to do the work for YWD, even at the transition age so that the YWD do not know how or even have the motivation to learn how to do “adult things” for themselves.
    2) Yes, the 5 primary goals accurately represent the current challenges & needs of New York State, but especially NYC’s transition services goals
    3) The most relevant resource the NYC DOE has developed are the TCAC centers in each borough. The centers are still too new to determine how useful they are for the work I do.
    4) Resources & materials that would be most efficiently & effectively support NYC transition services for YWD would be: a) mandatory professional development training on PBIS for paraprofessionals to manage behaviors of YWDs; b) increase the education level requirement to become a paraprofessional in NYC public schools; c) Make self-advocacy skills a mandatory part of the 8th or 9th grade curriculum so by the time a student has to attend their IEP meeting, they have the ability to speak up for their needs; d) Make parent training on “helping their child become more self-sufficient & independent” easily accessible & readily available
    5) Transition topic areas that still need to be improved and expanded upon are basic financial planning for students, workplace communication skills and student’s self-advocacy and parent training on what the parent’s role is during a YWD’s transition into adulthood.
    6) Yes.
    7) Improve collaboration & coordination between relevant agencies & organizations by having a continually update (ie once a month) list that’s easy to find with the program’s contact information & current web links to their online information

  42. The Arc appreciates the opportunity to comment on OSERS’ blog on transition. The Arc is the largest national community-based organization advocating for and serving people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) and their families. With over 600 state and local chapters nationwide, The Arc promotes and protects the human rights of people with I/DD and actively supports their full inclusion and participation in the community throughout their lives, including in the education system from birth through transition.
    1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    Transition services have been required by law for decades. In response to poor implementation of these services, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) of 2015 included a requirement for State VR agencies to spend 15% of their budget on pre-employment transition services. However, despite this welcome incentive, students with disabilities – particularly those with more significant cognitive disabilities – continue to experience problems in receiving appropriate, and person-centered transition services for the reasons outlined below:
    a) Lack of Individualization. Job placement options are often based on available programs rather than on students’ individual needs, preferences and interests.
    b) Accountability. There is little agreement about which agency is responsible for necessary transition services and the differing funding stream complicates matters. In addition, data collected is not outcomes-driven.
    c) Coordination. VR agencies and/or the state Developmental Disabilities (DD) Agency don’t get involved until late in a student’s schooling and rarely participate in IEP development, even if they are invited.
    d) Type and degree of disability. Transition programs are not well prepared to serve students with more significant disabilities or more than one type of disability.
    e) Accessibility of vocational programs. Students with cognitive disabilities are frequently denied admission to district vocation programs, leaving them relegated to programs that focus on life-skills and not employment.
    f) Capacity. Few programs have dedicated transition staff, trained in the specific needs of supporting post-secondary goals, leaving this responsibility to teachers who may have received little relevant training. This problem is due, in part, to the lack of transition education in teacher preparation programs.
    g) Transportation. Transition programs are not meeting the needs for transportation to and from a student’s job, or other education settings, including travel training or covering the costs of travel.
    h) Parent information. Parents have trouble finding practical information on transition options for their children, such as service providers and employers in their communities, or the effects that their child’s earned wages could have on his/her eligibility for public programs.
    i) Independent Living Skills. Many parents report that skills needed for further education and employment are lacking in transition services, such as social communication, time management, and money management.

    2. Do the five primary goals described below accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    The Arc supports retaining the five goals while recognizing that there continue to be many challenges in meeting them. For instance, school systems frequently require students to fail before intervening; career related curricula is often lacking and exploration is limited to a very small list of options, such a food preparation and product assembly; and students with intellectual disability in particular, are not meaningfully involved in transition planning, continue to face very low expectations, and are not taught to grade level standards.
    I) Youth and young adults with disabilities receive and participate in evidence-based and promising practices in secondary transition services and supports.
    II) SEAs and LEAs implement evidence-based and promising practices and strategies, including early warning and intervention systems to reduce dropout and increase graduation rates.
    III) Students with disabilities participate in career-related curricula so they are prepared for postsecondary employment and careers.
    IV) Students with disabilities receive rigorous academic preparation so they are prepared for success in postsecondary education.
    V) SEAs, SVRAs, LEAs, and local VR offices use data-driven decision-making to develop their respective plans and reports.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    We cannot comment on specific tools, but we are very pleased with the work of the National Technical Assistance Center on Transition (NTACT) and the RSA-funded Parent Training and Information (PTI) programs.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    • Videos and catalogues showcasing a range of successful employment and post-secondary education outcomes. Transition providers, parents, and students with disabilities could benefit by seeing the variety of jobs and higher education experiences of students with disabilities. For instance, an employment example could include descriptions of the transition planning involved in securing the job, the basic elements of the job, remuneration (hours per week and hourly wages), lessons learned, etc. We believe OSERS should seek nominations for successful case descriptions from across the country to highlight and ensure that they are shared with students as part of their transition process starting when the student reaches the age of 14.
    • Sample partnership agreements for LEAs, VR, and community businesses. The TA Center should provide model documents outlining shared goals, benefits, and responsibilities of these key partners for successful transition.
    • Information for parents on ABLE Act programs. Parents of transition aged students should be provided with information on ABLE accounts to help pay for transition related services in addition to helping to preserve this program for all persons with disabilities. ABLE accounts are similar to 529 savings accounts and allow eligible people with disabilities to save money for education, employment, and other costs without losing important federal benefits. Since the passage of the ABLE Act in 2014, over 34,000 ABLE accounts have been opened nationwide. However, the National Association of State Treasurers reports that enrollment in ABLE accounts is too low to maintain self-sustainability and continue to offer a robust choice of ABLE plans with low fees.
    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    As noted above, we believe that the Department of Education should develop and expand resources on transition success stories.
    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    We believe that a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on Transition should modify its process for identifying potential intensive TA sites. Unfortunately, sites that are faring poorly often do not seek out assistance through a grant application. We believe OSERS should also provide opportunities for students with disabilities, their families, advocates, and others to nominate sites for potential intensive TA.
    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?”
    RSA developed a very helpful checklist to analyze SEA and VR collaborative agreements. This could be used as a platform for more extended TA on these interagency agreements. A variety of model agreements would also be very helpful.

  43. NDRN Comments on Transition Blog

    On behalf of the National Disability Rights Network (NDRN), thank you for the opportunity to participate in this blog on transition. NDRN is the membership association for the 57 Protection and Advocacy (P&A) and Client Assistance Program (CAP) agencies as well as the federally funded training and technical assistance provider to the P&A/CAP Network.

    The P&A and CAP agencies are a nationwide network of congressionally mandated, cross disability rights organizations operating in every state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Territories (American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, and the US Virgin Islands). There is also a P&A and CAP affiliated with the Native American Consortium, which includes the Hopi, Navajo and San Juan Southern Paiute Nations in the Four Corners region of the Southwest. The P&A/CAP Network has the authority to provide legally based advocacy services and legal representation to all people with disabilities. The P&As and CAPs pursue legal, administrative, and other appropriate remedies under all applicable federal and state laws to protect and advocate for the rights of individuals with disabilities. Collectively, these programs make the P&A/CAP Network the largest provider of legally based advocacy services to people with disabilities in the United States. Education cases comprise a significant percentage of the P&A’s overall caseload. In 2016 the P&As handled just under 14,000 education related cases for individuals.

    Our comments are based on our experiences providing technical assistance and training to the P&A/CAP Network as they work with transition aged youth. Please note, we comment only on the questions below for which are applicable to the work of NDRN and the P&As/CAPs.

    1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    Transition services were added to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1990, yet at the time, Congress indicated they were not adding anything new to the IDEA: effective transition services should have been considered a necessary part of providing a free appropriate public education (FAPE} from the beginning. Transition services were added to Title I of the Rehabilitation Act in 1992 and the responsibility of the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) program to provide transition services and to coordinate with local education agency (LEA) individualized education program (IEP) Teams has consistently increased over time. Currently, in addition to traditional VR transition services, State VR agencies must spend 15% of their budget on pre-employment transition services (Pre-ETS). Pre-ETS include both providing services and participating with IEP Teams to assist in developing the IEPs for transition-aged students.
    Despite this long-standing commitment to improving transition services, NDRN as well as the P&As/CAPs still see major shortcomings in providing appropriate individualized transition services to students with disabilities, particularly those with the most significant disabilities.

    The issues facing the States in providing quality transition services, particularly Pre-ETS are highlighted in a recent GAO Study, STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: Additional Information from Education Could Help States Provide Pre-Employment Transition Services, GA-18-502 (September 2018) (GAO Study). We refer to the GAO Study throughout our comments.

    • Lack of individualization by school districts

    o Most services are one size fits all. Despite the fact that transition age-students are greatly varied in their abilities and challenges, services for students are often limited to one or two “programs” and are not individualized.

    o The standard programs offered are frequently geared toward students with intellectual disabilities, but schools fail to provide appropriate, individualized programs for students with average cognitive abilities whose disabilities impact them in other significant ways.

    o Services are based on available programs rather than on students’ needs, preferences and interests.

    o Students with disabilities have difficulty getting into the regular vocational programs operated by school districts. Barriers school districts construct include reading/ math level is too low, student does not have enough credits to participate, program may need to be adapted in some way. None of these reasons should serve as a basis for keeping students with disabilities from participating in regular vocational programs.

    • Low expectations – the service system is not quite to a culture that views competitive integrated employment as the primary outcome. Staffing issues complicate the ability to make culture change. There is wide disparity in the expectations of staff, including school transition coordinators.

    • Accountability – the general lack of outcome accountability in the special education system also extends to transition services. The failure of the State agency to ensure IEP content is meaningful and connected to the student-specific data results in IEPs that are cookie cutter, and do not result in better life outcomes for students as reported in the State Performance Plan.

    • Staffing – the staffing shortages also plague the delivery of transition services, including turnover, multiple rounds of early retirements, and shortage of qualified staff in all sectors of transition services. These shortages extend to both evaluators and support providers and are especially acute among staff who work with people with low-incidence disabilities.

    • Lack of coordination between the LEA and the VR agency

    o VR agencies do not get involved until late in a student’s schooling.

    o The VR agency is rarely at the table to help the school district develop the IEP for students.

    o There is little collaboration about who is responsible for services that could be considered covered under either IDEA or the Rehab Act. This was highlighted in the GAO Study in several places. Unfortunately, the National Technical Assistance Center on Transition (NTACT) noted some of the States for which they provided significant technical assistance still were not working closely together. (GAO at p. 28).

    • Lack of adequate Pre-ETS services.

    o The GAO reported that fewer than half of the 74 agencies reporting to them had used at least 15% of their VR grant each year on Pre-ETS. (GAO at p. 18).

    o We have been told that in many States the VR agency will contract with a program to provide Pre-ETS services, but the full range of available services is not provided and the services were not individualized.

    • Lack of integrated employment experiences for students still in school, particularly after school or during the summer. We know one of the best predictors of future employment is employment. Yet we also know that students with disabilities frequently do not get opportunities for employment while in school. A simple remedy would be to provide integrated employment options either after school or during the summer. The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has indicated that integrated employment with appropriate supports meets the definition of transition services within the least restrictive environment. However, this option is rarely offered. This would be an ideal option to be provided by the school district and VR if they developed adequate collaborative agreements.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    We cannot comment on specific tools, but we are very pleased with the work of the NTACT and the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) funded Parent Training and Information (PTI) programs and the work of National Resources for Advocacy, Independence, Self-determination and Employment Technical Assistance Center (RAISE) in coordinating those programs.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    We propose using the results of OSEP monitoring to identify needs for TA to support transition work.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    We believe that more than additional TA, one of the most important needs is for the availability of existing advocacy resources. The laws and policy guidance governing transition are clear and helpful. The biggest impediment to effective transition services is that these laws are still not being implemented consistently, thus denying transition age youth their rights under both IDEA and the Rehab Act. The P&A Network does not have any dedicated funds to advocate for students’ with disabilities education needs. We recommend the Department establish a trial P&A program for students in transition to see if increased advocacy support can result in improved transition services and outcomes for transition aged youth.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?”

    Over half of the VR agencies in the GAO study indicated they could use additional assistance on coordinating with state educational agencies. (GAO at p. 28). RSA developed a very helpful checklist to analyze state educational agency (SEA) and VR collaborative agreements. This could be used as a platform for more extended TA on these interagency agreements. NTACT has also developed a practical checklist to help when developing interagency agreements.
    https://www.transitionta.org/system/files/toolkitinteragency/2.DiscussionPrompts-Interagency%20Agreement.StateLevel.FINAL_.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=1303 However, it would also be helpful to showcase some actual agreements which model what an effective collaboration agreement looks like.

  44. 1) What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that: To the extent appropriate, with the consent of the parents or a child who has reached the age of majority…the public agency must invite a representative of any participating agency that is likely to be responsible for
    providing or paying for transition services.” 34CFR §300.320(b)(2). Vocational Rehabilitation counselors are not receiving invitations to attend the IEP or are receiving a very short notice. It is critical that we are working together.
    Parents do not understand the value of employment and getting that first work experience. Also planning for the future while still in school. Why are students with disabilities passed over for looking at AP classes or running start programs with taking some college classes while still in high school. Planning has to happen now.
    2) Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    Yes, with the addition of students also focusing on the independent living skills and soft skills needed for life after school. A student that is brilliant in math but can’t navigate between rooms at school will struggle in college.

    3) What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    4) What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    There is a disconnect between K-12 education and the public vocational rehabilitation program. Parents and teachers do not understand the VR program and how they intersect in services for students. Needs to be training that targets this area.

    Also training on all options for work. Why is apprenticeship or technical college viewed so poorly? Many times, this training is a better fit with hands on learning, no student loans, great pay.

    5) Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    Education of parents on the importance of developing independence in their child….this starts at home. Helping their child to practice independent living skills at home and school and also understanding the importance or work based learning experiences. It is critical to understand the endgame after school so all the work done while at school drives toward that goal.
    Parent education should focus on the partnership between the family, school and VR so that the student can achieve maximum independence and employment.

    6) Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    Continue the application process.

    7) How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    Provide training and guidance on how effectively collaborate between all these partners. Use examples from states that do this well. Huge struggle on the Pre-Employment Transition Services and lack of understanding down to the teach level on what this is. Develop some basic training that can be replicated across the country.

  45. The American Physical Therapy Association offers these comments:

    1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    School-based physical therapists experience challenges with having sufficient time to provide community-based intervention, large caseloads, and lack of administrative support/awareness for about the role of physical therapists (PT) on transition teams. More specifically, the lack of administrative support, results in limited access to PT services in the schools unless parents request and advocate for the services. In addition, a lack of educational opportunities/materials exist (e.g., published articles, online training modules/webinars, local, state, and national conferences) that provide an interdisciplinary perspective or incorporate the role of PT as a related service provider under IDEA with transition content. A final challenge includes the lack of educational opportunities/materials that support PTs to develop/hone their skills in navigating multiple systems to engender and advocate for the myriad of supports, including health care, youth with disabilities and their families need following graduation, and that encourage LEAs and administrators to support the involvement of PTs with older students.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    Overall, the five primary goals support our current challenges. We would encourage more focus on interprofessional collaboration that includes physical therapists as related service providers. Collaboration between educational and medical professionals is key as students move into adult-oriented health care providers from pediatric providers.

    More focus/emphasis should be placed on community-based, work-based, college-based interventions/activities, as evidence-based and/or promising practices/strategies. Administrators and even transition teams must support provision of services in a variety of locations, including those off-campus.

    Transportation is an enormous barrier for most students and impacts the ability to achieve all of the primary goals. Because of limited/inadequate funding, as well as personnel limitations and liability concerns, few transition plans address this barrier effectively. Specific supports for collaboration with community partners (agencies, employers, businesses, classes, etc.) should frame expectation for post-secondary transition.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    Some of our members use NTACT resources as part of their local practice and during presentations to national audiences. Members share the resources available on the NTACT website as a way to improve their current knowledge and practice when serving transition age students with disabilities. Materials developed and disseminated by NTACT are useful to advocate for greater involvement by related service providers in post-secondary transition.

    In particular, the “Toolkits” and “Quick Guides” are concise and helpful for therapists who are new to practicing in a school-based environment. We would like to encourage the involvement of PTs in the development of resources for practicing therapists, as well as LEA and SEA administrators. In addition, the evidence-based practice and predictors of success resources provide practicing therapists with current research to improve their practice. They include various links to additional resources, which our members find helpful.

    Two of our members have worked with the staff at NTACT, an OT, and an SLP to develop and provide a webinar on the role of related service providers in transition. In addition, each profession has submitted articles on evidence based predictors of success for secondary students to their respective professional association journals as a way to impact the improvement in service provision for students with whom our members work.

    In addition to the resources of NTACT, our members have found resources from the National Joint Committee (NJC) on Communication Issues for People with Severe Disabilities (https://www.asha.org/njc/) helpful. NJC is an interprofessional group that includes occupational therapists, physical therapists, speech-language pathologists, special educators, general educators, etc. and has produced research and resources that consider all needs when addressing communication concerns. A final source of information focused on Transition Education that our members find helpful is The Zarrow Center for Learning Enrichment (http://www.ou.edu/education/centers-and-partnerships/zarrow/transition-education-materials).

    Staff and funding for Vocational Rehabilitation that focus on students entering the workforce have been effective. Collaboration between public school units and VR can be further leveraged for improved efficiency and effective job training and sustainable paid work.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    Adding literature/evidence-based practice information/annotated bibliographies for related services (PT, OT, Speech) would be helpful. Some of the research and journal articles available through the NJC provide examples of interprofessional information that would be helpful. The pilot studies and projects available from the Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC) offer information about involving self-advocates and other professionals in medical education and is a critical piece that should be included to efficiently and effectively support youth with disabilities and their families during transition.

    Producing quick guides and tool kits on the role of respective related service providers in transition would increase awareness and improve knowledge about the role of therapists in improving outcomes for students with disabilities. Such information would be relevant for practicing therapists, as well as public school and state agency administrators. During transition, students often face barriers that can prevent or delay positive outcomes, including but not limited to restroom use, transportation, and assistive technology use. All of the barriers mentioned are examples of areas in which physical therapists can use their expertise to support students in overcoming such barriers. Having tools, resources and materials that underscore the importance and value of students having access to and/or receiving physical therapy during transition is critical to improving student success following graduation. The Academy of Pediatric Physical Therapy Special Interest Groups have produced fact sheets that may be helpful to enhance interprofessional efforts.

    Tools, resources, and materials should be developed to support collaboration with local transportation agencies, ride-sharing companies (such as Lyft or Uber) to improve student access to work and community participation. Communities, especially in rural areas, would benefit from increasing the availability of accessible, reliable ride-sharing.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    Information about health and physical activity needs of youth with disabilities between 14-24 years of age is often overlooked. As students with the most significant disabilities are living longer and in a range of community-based settings, such content is essential to consider as part of transition planning. While health and wellness as we age is critical, there is a serious deficit of information and knowledge about how to access health care, especially preventative care, for youth with disabilities. Ensuring that youth with disabilities have access to opportunities for fitness from community-based settings that may include the support and guidance of a physical therapist would be helpful. Having medical providers better understand needs of youth with disabilities as they age is critical and we believe PTs provide can help facilitate more efficient and effective a use of health care services.

    As previously stated, addressing transportation needs and facilitating collaboration within communities and across state agencies, including VR, are critical and should be expanded to better support the needs of youth with disabilities during transition.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    We support a competitive application process that ensures the quality of the TA centers. We would recommend the addition of criteria that would require applications to address mechanisms for interprofessional collaboration across agencies and professional groups. Information from the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities is a critical research and service group that should be informing TA Center on transition, as well as educators and related service providers. Providing supports to states to foster collaboration between state employment programs that ensures they work together to help youth with disabilities become gainfully employed and maintain such employment is critical.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    Having a center on transition disseminate a wide range of resources that is inclusive of the many professionals involved in the transition process would be most helpful. Our members report that transition services vary greatly across districts and states, so the training needs will vary. Because local needs and state needs within each of the agencies will be different, designing materials that summarize the role of each agency and/or team member is critical.

    Having materials with real examples of interprofessional collaboration would possibly help to meet these varying needs. Though most states’ agencies operate differently, identifying common issues, the most effective collaborations and strategies, program features, and funding mechanisms or agreements that support students and could be used across agencies would be most helpful for teams. Showcasing creative or resilient transition programs that successfully support students, especially those with complex disability, is needed.

  46. OSERS is asking for feedback relevant to these questions:
    1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    A. We need a better understanding between our Federal and state partners that are able to help Students with disabilities. In our state there is a lot of in fighting and no one wants to share information.
    A. VR programs are stilled viewed as an outside Entity. When a student’s signs up with VR it is often hard for us to meet with the students during school hours. In my time at VR I Have realized that there is a lot of miss information within our K-12 educators around what VR eligible is and what isn’t. Also VR staff do not always have a clear Understanding of IDEA or of their own VR requirements

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and technical assistance (TA) needs and support your state’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    A. A strong collaboration among Special Ed and VR must occur in order to implement the stated goals. This collaboration needs to start at the federal level with policies and guidance provided to the VR agencies, the SEA’s and LEA’s.
    A. Also I would add that one of them should be pointed at the parents/Guardian’s I believe they need to have more information available and they need to fully understand all of the supports and services that are available.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    A. Targeted training Topics that have been pushed out and Toolkits that NTACT website provides.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your state’s work in this area?
    A. I think some parent training would be really helpful for our community. Have a one STOP center that Includes transition service for VR and ED including Pre employment transition.
    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    A. There is a need for OSERS to have more of a focus with the Education Community and promote collaboration and partnership between VR and the LEA’s. Ultimately IDEA would be amended and aligned with WIOA. Also TA needs to be provided around access and accommodations for students with disabilities to participate in school based Career Pathways and Apprenticeship programs offered to the student population at large. Students with disabilities are often denied access to these critical training programs because teachers are not trained to provide necessary accommodations. These programs lead students on a path to better paying jobs and more successful careers.
    I would also be interested in a way we can collect Data of students who drop out with an IEP
    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    7. How can a center on transition best support states in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among State Education Agencies (SEA), Local Educational Agencies (LEA), State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies (SVRA), Career and Technical Education (CTE), Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

  47. 1.What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school? Maturity and self-awareness. Understanding the students career development level is key a key part of transitioning them into employment. Also best practice for specific employment barriers, such as best practice for students that struggle with completing non-preferred tasks.

    2.Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace? Yes, the evidenced based research is great and needed information. However, information on step-by-step methods for the implementation of those practices is still needed. Many “best practice” examples, particularly for the lower functioning student, listed by NTACT are completely unrealistic with adult employment laws, adult Voc. Rehab. service provision, and are in no way a realistic goal based on the information and age appropriate data listed in the example. These faulty examples demonstrate the lack of knowledge NTACT has with practical application and anything outside of idealistic outcomes.

    I also think there needs to be more collaboration with rehabilitation counselors. The Transition related provisions in IDEA basically requires the degree of knowledge of a Masters level Rehabilitation Counselor (employment laws, labor market, vocational evaluation and testing, disability impact on employment, vocational counseling, etc.). Teachers do not receive this level of training required. Bringing Rehab Counselors into a school district to provide appropriate assessments would lead to appropriate transition and subsequently IEP goals as well as outcomes.
    However, School Districts aren’t “reimbursed” for employing a Certified Rehabilitation Counselor (CRC) as they don’t hold a Teaching Certification. I think the Board of Ed should recognize CRC as a reimbursable certification to get this IDEA required specialty area of knowledge into school systems for Transition Planning to increase successful outcomes.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work? The evidenced based and emerging practices for success.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area? Training on age appropriate assessments (there was a 3 part-series scheduled that I wanted to attend, but it was cancelled and not rescheduled). Have some evidenced based predictors for post-secondary success (currently only promising).

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? Research on career development levels and effective practices for the varying developmental levels. Research into the effective practice multi-goal transition plans and the benefit of implementing the development of a Plan B into post-secondary outcomes.

    If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs? Reschedule the cancelled age appropriate assessment training program.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest? The research is needed and essential. However, in addition to the research, there needs to be practical applications of the tools and recommendations the “think tank” is making. There should be some sort of partnering with “boots on the ground” practitioners testing the recommendations for feasibility prior to publication of “best practice” examples being shared.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations? There should be more collaboration with actual practitioners, acceptance and collaboration with Rehab Counselors, and realistic examples.

  48. I originally went into my Special Education credential program back in the fall of 1997 to become a transitional specialist. My goal was to assist and support the students in develope life-based compensatory skills they could use to become as independent as realistically as possible. I was very disappointed to learn that there were very few positions in this area. This interest was the catalyst for my master project in 2009 back is very qualified to speak on the transitional process for many reasons. First I am a fully credentialed teacher in California and have acquired three degrees along the way.
    My background goes back to 1987 where I started as an Instructional aide and interpreter for the Deaf, to Substitute teacher, then classroom teacher. During this time I have collaborated with bath case managers from both California Regional Centers and the California Department of Rehabilitation and Can tell you that they do their own assessment(s) and briefly look at the student’s Transitional Plan’s Goals and Objectives. In short, it is tossed into the wastebasket and shredded. As a result, I would suggest dropping the removing the Transitional Plan for the IEP process and revamp the whole process with

    Based on my experience I can tell you that at about the time the student is preparing for the transition to middle school/Junior High school they are at a junction where it needs to be decided that if there are not on a realistic pace to achieve and acquire a high school diploma then need to be placed on a certified track for a more functional based-curriculum that will be more life-skills and vocational based.
    Having been a consumer with the California Department of Rehabilitation due to my own disability So, I can tell you that the transitional process is very political and almost impossible for the person transitioning to be successful as there are too many people influencing the students to do what they feel is best for then Middle school is where the kids need to be vocationally assed with a carrier inventory and be given a basic keyboarding class with technology-based medications if needed. At the end of the student’s middle school career, they should have some form of an Individualized Service Plan ISP/ITP in place and they should have the responsibility of writing with one adult that they pick who they want to be their scribe and support person.

    This document would have 5 sections:
    1. Living Accommodations
    2. Employment
    3. Recreation
    4. Community – Local, state, national and international
    5. Educational/Training
    Once in High School, they should have learned how to do a resume and cover letter as part of their functional writing skills classes with the support of educational technology. The late price that should be looking at a Internships or Apprenticeship ( November is National Apprenticeship Month) to give than the partial experience of working in that area(s) of employment. Paid internships should be used as both as an academic and behavioral both at school, community and at home. Placements need to based on Assessments and results-driven form showing that the student(s) can be successful in that placement.

    Sincerely Yours,
    John S. Burnett

  49. 1. Currently, in serving students with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24, my biggest struggle is finding out the ways in which I can best prepare them for their future. While I strive to prepare them academically and work on reading skills needed (ELA teacher), I usually have little information regarding the transition plan in place for each student, as well as how I can best help with that plan. As far as academics, I feel as though I have strong support and a good amount of guidance as to what should be done.
    2. As far as I am aware, the five goals listed meet my state’s goals and needs. I do not work directly with the transition process, but these are all goals that seem relevant to what my state/school implements and what they are working towards.
    3. Personally, I previously worked at the middle school level and the transition assessments that I used were resources created by a local university. These were checklists and inventories that students were able to complete with the help of an adult. Presently, I work strictly as a teacher of service rather than a teacher of record and I do not administer transition assessments.
    4. I think that one TA resource that would be helpful is guidance in how to help schools and teachers to work together in implementing the transition plan as well as what types of responsibilities would be appropriate for team members not actively involved in the planning process.
    5. While I do work in a secondary setting, I am not involved in the transition process. I don’t think I could accurately respond to this question.
    6. I think that an application process would be appropriate, especially in order to make sure that resources are rigorous and provide accurate information.
    7. Centers on transition can help improve collaboration between staff by providing professional development as well as examples and trainings in how to include all staff involved. Additionally, I think it would be helpful to provide a list of available organizations or agencies available in each state.

  50. 1. For students with significant cognitive disabilities, challenges include difficulty of recruiting qualified teachers/providers, and relatively low administrative priority attached to managing low-incidence programs in large, mixed-ability high schools. For other students, challenges include lack of student awareness of post-secondary opportunities, and increasing disengagement from school.
    2. The five goals above do accurately represent my challenges.
    3. Thoughtful federal guidance and free online tools and webinars/conferences have been the TA tools most relevant to my work.
    4. The SPP13 rubric provided a common definition of the parts of a transition plan, but it may have outlived its usefulness. Rubrics assessing the quality of transition programming and efficacy of school-community partnerships would be helpful in supporting my work. Universal online college applications are a promising development. In addition to funding/promoting accessibility features for these applications, it may be worthwhile to consider the development of online portfolio tools/checklists that students with disabilities could use throughout high school to gear up for applications their senior year.
    5. New tools that leverage the ubiquity of mobile devices are worth considering.
    6. The existing application process should be maintained.
    7. Collaboration and coordination among agencies seems to work best when agencies have explicit shared goals, and when a prescriptive framework for collaboration is imposed on all actors. Project Search has imposed this sort of framework on post-graduation vocational programs in my state with great success.

  51. I’m going to address question 4: What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop?

    In all the comments here, there is minimal to zero discussion of the role assistive technology (AT) can play in supporting young people with disabilities as they transition from school to post-secondary and work environments. Under IDEA, AT consideration is mandated during the development of an IEP, but, in my nearly 20 years experience as an AT specialist in schools, AT is fairly frequently neglected in the development of transition plans (partly because my state’s IEP transition forms really bury the mention of technology as a service). The problem is actually rooted in the lack of a consistent approach to AT consideration and assessment in early grades. Ideally, the student’s AT needs for academic and pre-vocational tasks should have been considered, assessed and implemented all the way along. But the determination (I would argue “self-determination”) of AT changes as the tasks change, which means that AT needs to be reconsidered from the perspective of the post-secondary environments as the student nears their exit from IDEA-provided services (high school and/or transition). There also needs to be increased coordination with vocational rehab counselors, who are often not trained to consider AT, so that students can have the AT they need through funding sources other than IDEA.

    The National Technical Assistance Center on Transition (NTACT) website mentions assistive technology on multiple pages but in the Transition Assessment Toolkit, assistive technology receives only passing mention in a reference to the WATI assessment package as an “informal” instrument. The development of a more formal and student self-directed AT assessment screening tool for transition is sorely needed, if only to raise the level of awareness of AT as a potential solution.

    One existing resource that does not get a mention on the NTACT site is the set of Quality Indicators for Assistive Technology in Post-Secondary settings (QIAT-PS). This is a separate project from the original QIAT that is funded by the Great Lakes ADA Center and includes a student self-evaluation matrix (essentially a rating scale) that can be used with a high school/transition population to increase self-determination and self-advocacy. http://qiat-ps.org/students/.

  52. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    Some of the challenges that I see in my community and school where I work is that there isn’t a lot of connection with the community and the businesses here in our town. There are courses and extra-curricular activities sometimes at our school but never anything where the students can match up with a company or business and get some vocational training regarding their interests and goals for their future. We have a few places where students get to do this, however the connections to others is not happening in our schools or communities that I have seen.

    Do the 5 primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs to support your states goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    I think they accurately represent a lot of the challenges we are seeing in our state goals and schools. One goal that sticks out to me is the gap of providing job based opportunities to gain experiences for post-secondary goals. I think goal 3 should be revised with field experience for post-secondary employment and careers experiences. Although, it’s important for students to get the career related curricula, it’s important for field experience and hands on experience within their interests to truly see if you like something or not and really get some information and experience doing it.

    What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    One of the resources we use often is called Mapping Your Future and it uses the Birkman Method with 24 easy to answer questions. The test is color coded to aid students with visual discrimination problems. This helps understand their interests, preferences and skills from the students’ perspective.

    What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    Since we are always stressing student’s self-advocacy and its importance regarding transition, What if they developed a student check list to keep with them when they are working with career based curricula or are in the field or in an experience at a community center or job. This way they can monitor their own understand of what they are learning or check off if they still like this aspect of what they are doing. I think it’s a good idea, it will make them feel like they are in charge and in control of what transpires.

    Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    Someone else within the blog, mentioned the same things that I was going to say. Making employment and career services more of a concern in our schools for students. Some won’t go to college or get a higher education, some will learn a trade and work right after transition from high school. Parent involvement needs to be higher so that parents are prepared to help their children be successful in their planning and implementation of transition services.

    Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    I am not sure about whether I think the process of identifying intensive sites or information should stay as an application process or be modified. Maybe if there was some more information regarding the application process, I could look into that and then make an opinion about which would be better and in what ways.

    How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    I would say just to open up the lines of communication more and offering trainings, informational sessions for parents and students as to what is out there. Especially vocational agencies or rehabilitation centers. Students need to have access to vocational routes so they can see how they can handle certain things and gain experience and confidence. Another thing I think that would support these avenues, is providing more and better transportation opportunities for students and families involved.

  53. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    • Lack of equity in interagency collaboration at all levels
    • Level of preparedness of teachers/providers in
    o planning & providing transition services
    o supporting youth with low incidence disabilities/autism/ED
    • Public Education Agency (PEA) & provider knowledge, experience, and capability to provide evidence-based transition programming to prepare students with any disabilities for postsecondary education or training and the workforce
    • Improving overall (i.e., school, community) awareness of transition, people-first language, and employment first
    • The absence of training in the area of secondary transition from our higher education institutions is producing many secondary teachers that are unprepared to facilitate the transition planning process.
    • Teachers are not familiar with the career development process and strategies that could impact the facilitation of transition services. This concept is not a part of the secondary education curriculum
    • Through SEA training experiences, trainers have encountered staff who describe themselves as minimalists and will only offer the most basic of supports to students with disabilities. PEAs often are going through the motions of filling out boxes along with activities that usually say something like “explore” or “research,” with very little thought to work experience or accommodations in the workforce.
    • Family & student engagement is poor in some parts of the state. Although not the only population, this is a concern that has been reported on multiple occasions from PEAs serving students from Native American tribes. There appears to be a cultural aspect that is contributing to this issue. As a predictor of post-school success, the IEP team should always strive for improved family and student engagement. However, PEAs have also reported not knowing what else they can do to improve engagement.
    • AZ SEA has a lot of data collected but has struggled to prioritize the analysis of the data in order to make some data-based decisions that could potentially impact the post-secondary outcome of students with disabilities, as well as program development and service provision decisions made by the PEA
    • There is an increase in need for PEAs to have technical assistance (TA) for students with SLD, OHI, and ED in the area of employment support after high school. These unseen disabilities are often overlooked in the transition planning process.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    • Overall, these goals continue to represent current challenges and needs. Each goal is critical to the development of transition training, programming, and research that will enhance secondary transition outcomes for youth with disabilities. Continued work, guidance, and support in each of these areas are needed.
    • Yes, all 5 represent current challenges and TA needs for Arizona. Although some initiatives are in place for some of these, they are all nonetheless areas needing improvement.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    • Individualized support at the state-level through Intensive Technical Assistance
    • Professional Development opportunities (e.g., webinars)
    • Toolkits
    • Newsletter (especially the updated format that showcases other states and current research opportunities)
    • Capacity-Building Institute
    • The NTACT website
    • I-13 Checklists
    • All predictor of post-school success documents (e.g. Predictors by Outcome Area)
    • Effective Practices for MPG areas of transition planning & post-school success
    • Case Studies
    • I-14 resources
    • Events Page
    • From Assessment to Practice: A Model for Teachers
    • PowerPoint of Transition 101
    • CTE & SWD Guide

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    • More in-depth research, and program/lesson plan/activities for emerging/promising/evidence-based practices (i.e., the predictors). These resources would be crucial for LEAs and Pre-ETS vendors to easily incorporate evidence-based practices in transition planning/programming.
    • The tools are great, but perhaps they need to be more interactive/accessible. For example, create a summary in the form of an infographic or video so an individual can determine if a resource is appropriate at one quick glance.
    • “Career Development: A Framework for Transition Planning” toolkit with career development strategies that can be used to facilitate the transition planning process. AZ SEA has developed training on this concept but would like to consider recommendations made at the national level.
    • A Community of Practice Coordinator is needed to help support and maintain SEA communities of practice on transition as well as their local groups.
    • Recommendations on content for curriculum that could be adjusted by each State and then presented to higher education institutions for launching secondary transition programs and/or supplemental courses in the area.
    • Webinar recordings that offer training on NTACT toolkits. AZ SEA is specifically looking for the topic of non-engaged students.
    • Expanding on the Predictors, NTACT can highlight exemplary states and showcase them on the website so that other states can have a one-stop-shop for great ideas and resources.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    • Customized Employment/Employment First initiatives
    • Tools for interagency collaboration at the local level, including communities of practice
    • Support for data-based decision making (beyond STEPSS) for all levels
    • Tools for increased knowledge of pre-ETS service delivery for state and local education staff
    • English language learners in the IEP Process
    • Customized Employment options for more significantly involved students.
    • Supports for teachers working with students with emotional disabilities
    • Supports for secure care/juvenile justice facilities with their limited resources
    • Facilitate the development of secondary transition programs for teacher preparation across the country

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    • Yes, the application process is effective because it forces the SEA to critically analyze the current state of the State. The application process should include an interview prior to application submission for interested States. The interview should have multiple purposes. First, the interview should confirm that the SEA understands the concept of an ITA as well as the supports that will be available through the evolution of the project. It would also be ideal if NTACT could take some time to learn about the State to do more than just facilitate conversations and strategic planning meetings (e.g. offer appropriate recommendations national perspective for progress in target areas).
    • There should be intensive TA states, however, adding more structure on follow up and follow through and on a coaching model for the NTACT facilitators would be helpful to meet difficult goals that may need more intervention from NTACT to bring together divergent stakeholders.
    • The application process is appropriate, however, there needs to be common contingencies/agreements between the TA center and agencies if staff change in order to bring the new staff up to speed on the project or to reassign the project.
    • A better understanding of the requirements of the project needs to be documented between the TA center and the agencies involved.
    • Offer ITAs that are specific to improving interagency collaboration
    • Offer training to stakeholders in the ITA project that brings them together and increase common language and knowledge.
    • States participating in ITA projects would benefit from a framework and direct guidance on the process and timeline of participating in and benefiting from being an active and engaged team member.
    • Consistency nationwide between facilitators in providing guidance through the ITA process.
    • ITA-Offer recommendations and guidance to the team during the application process regarding the direction of the ITA project(s).
    • ITA- NTACT should communicate directly with agency leaders/ administrators for several reasons, including:
    o so that agency commitment is evident throughout the entire ITA for more than just the SEA.
    o to help recruit appropriate staff from partner agencies. (The importance and value of the ITA can be shared with leadership with this purpose in mind.)

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    • Resources for interagency collaboration/communities of practice on transition
    • Connect states together throughout the year to learn about success stories, strategies to develop a support system
    • Aiding these partners in developing transparency in their service delivery/support to youth/young adults with disabilities. Opportunities for workgroups/projects in identifying what needs to be collaborated on to better reach youth and enhance outcomes.
    • Resources for stakeholders to understand the importance and mutual benefit of collaboration and coordination.

  54. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    Some of the challenges that I see in my community and school where I work is that there isn’t a lot of connection with the community and the businesses here in our town. There are courses and extra-curricular activities sometimes at our school but never anything where the students can match up with a company or business and get some vocational training regarding their interests and goals for their future. We have a few places where students get to do this, however the connections to others is not happening in our schools or communities that I have seen.

    Do the 5 primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs to support your states goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    I think they accurately represent a lot of the challenges we are seeing in our state goals and schools. One goal that sticks out to me is the gap of providing job based opportunities to gain experiences for post-secondary goals. I think goal 3 should be revised with field experience for post-secondary employment and careers experiences. Although, it’s important for students to get the career related curricula, it’s important for field experience and hands on experience within their interests to truly see if you like something or not and really get some information and experience doing it.

    What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    One of the resources we use often is called Mapping Your Future and it uses the Birkman Method with 24 easy to answer questions. The test is color coded to aid students with visual discrimination problems. This helps understand their interests, preferences and skills from the students’ perspective.

    What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    Since we are always stressing student’s self-advocacy and its importance regarding transition, What if they developed a student check list to keep with them when they are working with career based curricula or are in the field or in an experience at a community center or job. This way they can monitor their own understand of what they are learning or check off if they still like this aspect of what they are doing. I think it’s a good idea, it will make them feel like they are in charge and in control of what transpires.

    Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or re-positioned to better meet your needs?

    Someone else within the blog, mentioned the same things that I was going to say. Making employment and career services more of a concern in our schools for students. Some won’t go to college or get a higher education, some will learn a trade and work right after transition from high school. Parent involvement needs to be higher so that parents are prepared to help their children be successful in their planning and implementation of transition services.

    Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    I am not sure about whether I think the process of identifying intensive sites or information should stay as an application process or be modified. Maybe if there was some more information regarding the application process, I could look into that and then make an opinion about which would be better and in what ways.

    How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    I would say just to open up the lines of communication more and offering training, informational sessions for parents and students as to what is out there. Especially vocational agencies or rehabilitation centers. Students need to have access to vocational routes so they can see how they can handle certain things and gain experience and confidence. Another thing I think that would support these avenues, is providing more and better transportation opportunities for students and families involved.

  55. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    I do not currently work in a classroom setting with ages between 14 to 24, but from experience as a substitute and interviewing a friend who works in secondary education I have found these challenges. Lack of support and resources in school. Especially a school that does not receive as much funding as other schools. Lack of resources such as larger printer, tape recorded responses, private room for testing, preferential seating, etc. Parents being out of the loop, or parents not giving enough time to their child. Lack of parent involvement is seen greatly in title 1 schools here in Hollywood, FL. Students needing more time to complete assignments. Those students with disabilities I have seen to be rushed to complete an assignment at the same time as their fellow peers.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    I do agree that all five of those primary goals needs to be implemented for a student in the TA services. It is important to implement evidence-based practices and promising practices to students of students of all ages. These evidence-based practices rely on scientific evidence, not tradition or intuition. I do not agree with students being put into career-related curricula. Students should be able to speak upon their interest and skills they would like the venture into. The school should be identifying the students appropriate strengths, needs, preferences, and interests. From there they can develop a plan along with family and other professionals to create a vision for the future.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    Resources such as providing experience to the youth in a work environment they have chosen. Hands on experience working in a setting they have interest in for the future. Providing field trips to the youth to help with independent functional living. For example, going to a grocery story, locating items, placing items in cart, and taking items to register.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    In my opinion the U.S. Department of Education should have resources and support for parents once their child completes high school. Have resources of where they can turn next to and what they can do. Have a list of provides and agency that will continue to support their child needs. Resources to see what their child can do in the community.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    Resources such as PATH and MAPS for children with autism can be put in place by the U.S. Department of Education. These resources are collaborative action planning process. They are used to help individuals create a plan for his or her own life. Promoting self-self-advocacy. It is important to teach an individual to make decisions for themselves. Doing this, will help aid the transition process and will develop skills that will benefits them at that moment and in the future.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest? I am not sure what the question is referring to.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    Centers can provide families with support to assistant in providing the best interest of their child. As I mentioned above, the best way to identify appropriate strengths, needs, preferences, and interests of the student is to develop a process whereby the student, his or her family, professionals, and others can gather necessary information and create a vision for the future (Transition Coalition). Also perhaps providing resources as in providing parent training. Give more to parents, do not let parents feel as if they have no no where to turn.

  56. My name is Shyla Patera. I am an Independent Living Specialist employed by North Central Independent Living Services, Inc. in Black Eagle, Montana . NCILS serves students and people with disabilities throughout north central Montana. NCILS believes that OSERS should work with states for raising the graduation age Raising the graduation age for some students who need it would allow more opportunity for students, families and districts to bridge academic and life skill gaps if needed. Further it would allow school districts, communities as well as education and human services providers to explore ways to assist students and families as they transition from school life into adulthood either by attending college or university or exploring possibilities joining Montana’s workforce.

    We need to maximize state funding and instructional strategies for Montana students with disabilities. By maximizing funding, NCILS believes that Montana would set high expectations for students and faculty .NCILS encourages OSERS to assist all Montana school districts to implement all strategies to improve district accessibility for all students Accommodated learning should be a priority for all students but especially those with disabilities. Classroom instruction should teach not only pencil and paper academics, but also skills for the digital age . Students with disabilities need to know that they can compete in many fields. Students need to know disability history and self advocacy skills and we encourage Montana educators at every level to learn about disability movements throughout American and world history,

    I would also encourage OSERS to encourage the Montana Office of Public Instruction to work with the Montana Department of Labor and the Disability Employment and Transitions staff to ensure that Montana’s workforce is competitive and integrated for all including those students with disabilities. NCILS calls for networks and benefits planning assistance throughout states and nationally to focus upon Competitive Integrated employment with competitive wages for all. We believe that all states should be required to submit state wide competitive integrated employment transition plans. State wide Departments of Education should also be invested in the transition to competitive integrated employment.

    NCILS encourages the Commissioner on Higher Education and Montana’s Board of Regents to ask for maximized funding for disability services offices through out our Montana University system. We need to ensure that campus accessibility in all forms is maximized. NCILS asks for a Disability Studies major and for innovative ways to support Montana students .

    Shyla Patera

  57. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    Outcomes and services available differ from office to office within MA and greatly, in other states. There is no consistent delivery of services. Some states offer little services and it is very difficult to coordinate delivery of what can be offered, particularly in OVR

  58. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school? The challenges that my colleagues are facing with serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 is the lack of communication between the community agencies, families, and teachers; parental involvement between the school and the transition team; and the student understanding of the transition process in its entirety.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace? No, those five goals described above do not accurately represent the challenges and TA needs. The goals shouldn’t be to just allow the students to participate in a career-related curriculum, they should be allowed to experience their job interests firsthand. With hand on experience and training. Also, the data should not be the only way to determine the students plan or report. The student’s interests, goals and aspirations should determine their destiny and journey in life.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work? The trainings, family night (an option to get to meet not only the student’s family but other families in the school as well it happens once a month), computer and technology used to assist students with learning.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area? Maybe collaborative workshops that display new tools and updated resources teachers could use effectively in classes. Each state has its own set of materials used; however, there are some tools and resources providers aren’t aware of so if we could come together as a community and share our experiences and successes it would be a great way for us to learn more as well as motivate us to continue the work we do.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs? There needs to be an emphasis on the vocational rehabilitation aspect of transitioning. We need to think out side of the box with the new age. The old way of engaging students is fading away due to a society change. Students need to b guided on real life experiences and taught to be more independent (on an as needed basis). As teachers, we focus on the areas of growth; however, the students tend to think in survival mode. Meaning, they are trying to adapt to the changes taking place and adjust to what’s happening around them.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest? I’m not familiar with this process.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations? As stated above, identify the needs of providers, partners, teachers, parents, students and administrators. Make sure when decisions are made, they are made from the prospective of those that work closely with families and see what the needs are daily. Host workshops, conferences, newsletters, monthly emails (listserve) or just brochure information by mail on the new things happening along with informative information. Communication is the key!

  59. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    a. At this time, I do not serve students between the ages 14 and 24. I work in an elementary setting; however, coursework has shown me that students with severe disabilities need strong and willing advocates to ensure transition assessments are done effectively and properly. Concerns I have also include the students who require assistive technologies to communicate not getting the appropriate accommodations during assessments.
    b. Providing transition services can be difficult when outside individuals are involved in the process. Online modules have discussed how transition services can be affected when the outside individual who agrees provide the services fails to do so. Therefore, outside agencies should be held more accountable when there is an agreement to provide services to student and then those services are then revoked or not provided.
    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your states goals? If not what do you suggest we remove, revise or replace?
    a. The five primary goals are all practices that need to be implemented in supporting students with disabilities. Online course work has shown me that in order to properly support students with special needs the five goals must be put into practice every step of the way.
    b. While I am new to the field of supporting students with special needs, I know that teaching must be meaningful and research based as well as evidence based. Individuals I know who serve students at the high school level- the transition process that is conducted by the ESE specialist is on-going and the students are supported throughout the phases of the process. If the five primary goals that were described are not followed it is unfair for the students as it will have the greatest impact upon their adult life outside of school.
    3. What kind of TA tools, resources or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    a. While I currently work in an elementary setting, ensuring that my students have their required accommodations met is the most useful way in ensuring success. Providing those same accommodations during transition assessments may also be best practices and allowing for accurate and reliable results.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S department of Education funded TA center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that should be expanded on or repositioned of better meet your needs.
    a. Student success is not a one size fits all. Students with disabilities require different services. However, in order to serve students as effectively as possible it is important to give evidence based practices and service the most consideration. These practices have extensive studies, and evidence to support their effectiveness. Giving children a proper and decent education SHOULD NOT have a price. I suggest investing in as many evidence based services and practices as possible.
    7. How can a center on transition best support states in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent information and training centers and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    a. I believe that accountability is essential. We work in the field of education where we prepare the future generations for success. The more we hold outside stakeholders accountable and provide every participant with essential information about transition services.

  60. Agree with

    ** Change Medicaid so disability and waiver services are not poverty based elgibility. This would allow one to keep their support services such as supported living services, eliminating the disincentive to get out of poverty if you have a disability. As it is now, many people fear advancing their careers because of a fear of loss.

    ** Change Medicaid policy so it that disability services are not an estate debt allowing the persons with a disability to pass on their assets to their heirs after death if they have recieved services. In addition, clear all barriers for persons with disabilities to recieve inheritances and assets from parents without losing services.

    * Provide support systems for persons with disabilities to learn the skills to develop healthy relationships and transition to community partipcation and living

    **Tool to assist teachers with structuring comprehensive secondary school planning to include academics and career planning.
    ** Benefits planning information for educators – not to provide benefits planning, but to know it exists and information resources to share with families.
    **Role of families, expectations and responsibilities in career planning and developmen

  61. The law immediately sets up a conflict of interest. Those responsible for paying and providing disability services should not be the same ones identifying and determining the severity of a disability. The enforcement of IDEA should not solely rest with parents who are forced to file complaints against their schools.

  62. ASHA is the national professional, scientific, and credentialing association for 204,000 members and affiliates who are audiologists; speech-language pathologists; speech, language, and hearing scientists; audiology and speech-language pathology support personnel; and students. Audiologists specialize in preventing and assessing hearing and balance disorders as well as providing audiologic treatment and devices (e.g., hearing aids). Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) identify, assess, and treat speech and language problems, including swallowing disorders. More than half of ASHA member SLPs are employed in educational settings. The services provided by ASHA members help ensure students receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE).

    The transition from secondary to postsecondary settings for students with Individualized education programs (IEPs) can be daunting and confusing. Regulations for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) no longer apply and IEP recommendations do not directly inform whether a student should receive support through a postsecondary disability support service; particularly because the IEP goals may not reflect the current needs of a student in a postsecondary setting. Parents and educators need additional guidance to bolster their understanding about the differences between secondary and postsecondary support for individuals with disabilities. Additionally, they need information on how Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and ADA Amendment Act of 2008 are applied to support individuals with disabilities in postsecondary settings.

    ASHA appreciates the resources the Department of Education (ED) hosts on its OSERS website for individuals with disabilities and their families transitioning from secondary to postsecondary education, including those on the Office of Special Education Program’s (OSEP’s) and Rehabilitation Services Administration’s (RSA’s) websites. RSA’s website has important resources on improving the nation’s public workforce development system by helping Americans with significant barriers to employment, including individuals with disabilities. ASHA supports continued funding by OSEP and RSA for the existing National Technical Assistance Center on Transition (NTACT). Many state departments of education and rehabilitation offices also offer their own resources on transition assistance.

    The Office of Postsecondary Education, which implements the Higher Education Act, has useful resources on its website for postsecondary transition that ASHA members use. ED should ensure that important federal resources are readily available to students with disabilities and families on assistance such as job training, employment services, and housing referral. While some tools, resources, materials already exist, ED should share these resources (federal and state) related to transition to postsecondary settings on one site (with appropriate links) for the consumer.

    ASHA encourages ED to enhance existing tools and resources, by building upon existing  resources, such as the Q&A: Increasing Postsecondary Opportunities and Success for Students and Youth with Disabilities (September 17, 2019) available at https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/increasing-postsecondary-opportunities-and-success-09-17-2019.pdf.

    Finally, ASHA urges improvement and expansion of dissemination efforts to get the valuable tools, resources, and materials into the hands of stakeholders—like parents and students with disabilities—to help them navigate the institution of higher education and state vocational rehabilitation experiences. 

    Thank you again for the opportunity to provide these comments.

  63. I would also prepare the parents to tell them what transitioning actually means legally and socially. It’s not your child is going off to college and the academic support center at the college will keep in touch with you

    When your child is 18 rights you had at an IEP meeting automatically transfer over to them–and their paperwork becomes confidential. You no longer have access to it unless the student specifically authorizes it. This is a BIG shock for parents. It really upset my father who was unprepared for it when I went off to university and expected he would still be invited by the campus disability services office.

    He called up the department my undergraduate degree was in and screamed at them because he wasn’t able to plan my degree. He had not been sufficiently prepared for the ADA/504. We need to do a better job preparing parents as well.

  64. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    Not enough opportunities for those with higher support needs, medical or behavioral, to participate in the community- work, volunteer, fitness, sports and recreation. Barriers are limited and unreliable transportation, limited or no PSWs or community partners to support their participation. So families, educators, and service providers cannot meet the meaningful and full participation goals in the individual’s community because the supports are not there. Even those with funding for PSWs are short-staffed or no-staffed because of the low wages in our state. Until the wages are equal to level of care and skill of the work to be done, a full and meaningful life in the community cannot be achieved.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    No they don’t because the population I serve has higher support needs due to level of developmental disability, medical complexity, and behavioral challenges. These three groups of 14-24 year olds, have nowhere to go, nowhere to learn, practice, intern in the schools nor in the community. The barriers are lack of evidence-based stratified curriculum of job skills in the schools and in the community. Staff do not have time nor resources to find these work internship learning experiences in the community. If they do, they are only available to the higher functioning students. Once again, leaving behind those who want to work and participate in their community, but are given access. Once again, these students are not getting access to the same curriculum, and learning experiences as their peers. Access and expectations for success need to be available with the supports needed for learning.
    Supports are transportation, opportunities that are consistent and scheduled frequesntly enough to build learning and success, and lastly, PSWs. Job coaches, program assistants to facilitate the learning.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    Person centered plans, using the Discovery process as well as customized employment tools have directed the learning, the experiences in the community and home.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    Pulling together a comprehensive working document that encompasses all areas of community participation from Discovery plans, Person Centered Plans, and Customized employment plans.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    Customized employment in the schools, in the service provider system must be part of the core transition curriculum so that young adults can transition from the school years directly into employment as they age out. This would give the most educated and guided learning to the student and the family, who will be taking on this role for the rest of the student’s life. Their needs to be curriculum to educate parents on their role past the school years, and it needs to start at 14. If our families were well trained, our students would have greater success working, living and fully participating in their community.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    I don’t know.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    All trainings, webinars should be shared with every transition program in the state so that every school, every service provider and every family would have access to these trainings. Webinars save money, time, and bring greater access for all.

  65. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    The challenge in some instances is getting access to eligible students who need services often because of full course schedules and the VR program still viewed as an outside entity. Some Special Education staff are not educated about the VR requirements per WIOA and VR staff do not always have a clear understanding of IDEA. Additionally parents and guardians need to be educated about resources and opportunities available for their children as it relates to career planning.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    The five goals are accurately described above. A strong collaboration among Special Ed and VR must occur in order to implement the stated goals. This collaboration needs to start at the federal level with policies and guidance provided to the VR agencies, the SEA’s and LEA’s.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    Targeted training topics that have been presented to the field as well as the toolkits and information on the NTACT website provide useful information.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    The current tools should be expanded to include more topics relevant to the Vocational Rehabilitation Community as well as a focus on parent training. We believe a more effective structure would be to have the US DOE fund one center that includes Transition service for VR and Ed including Pre-Employment Transition.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    There is a need for OSERS to have more of a focus with the Education Community and promote collaboration and partnership between VR and the LEA’s. Ultimately IDEA would be amended and aligned with WIOA. TA needs to be provided around access and accommodations for students with disabilities to participate in school based Career Pathways and Apprenticeship programs offered to the student population at large. Students with disabilities are often denied access to these critical training programs because teachers are not trained to provide necessary accommodations. These programs lead students on a path to better paying jobs and more successful careers.
    A process should be developed to share data collected in regard to Indicator 14 (students who drop out with an IEP) for referral to the VR Program.

    LEA’s and the VR program should share data related to Indicator 14 (drop out information) to better serve students who

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    An application process is fine for a certain portion of the intensive TA provided to sites; however states that often have the greatest need for TA should be identified by OSERS and RSA to insure there is service equity for students no matter where they reside.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    Again OSERS might want to consider one National TA Center with sub-divisions around major topics. If this were to occur OSERS needs to ensure there is a compete migration of products and tolls developed by the current TACS.

  66. Youth with disabilities must be prepared for employment or the furtherance of their education after completion of secondary school. Transition services are key to preparing youth for these opportunities which are critical for them to lead independent lives in the community. Accessing resources to serve individuals with the most significant disabilities can be challenging. Technical Assistance Centers provide an avenue for states to access information that helps them shape how those scarce resources can be most effectively used and improve outcomes. They provide a level of expertise which is essential in helping to prepare and train staff and overall improve post-secondary transition services.

    Interagency trainings and conferences are particularly helpful and should continue, as should the encouragement for interagency state transition teams to participate in these trainings and conferences. Guidance documents and trainings that demonstrate the crosswalk between each agency’s efforts to support youth with disabilities is also helpful. We also request continued grant opportunities to fund valuable projects related to enhancing post-secondary transition services.

  67. As a Director and now parent advocate, I tried to hold a Job Fair. The parents were available of course after 5 and all the agencies or providers were not.
    If the technical state staff were to make a list of possible resources available and provide to Middle and High School IEP teams the connection and planning will then take place. Basically now they graduate and fall off the cliff to find help. Also, post secondary vocational tech schools are to late after graduation. States and county should provide attendance during High School. Right now the lists are to long for assistance after graduation and most parents have no idea where to go. Start in Middle School or 14 with specific program training outside to vocational appropriate training.

  68. In Northeast Ohio, the School’s Transition Program was very poor. They basically were going through the motions and just checking the boxes. Not much was accomplished. We (after much controversy/disagreement) eventually got our young adult into Project Search although the school fought us all the way. They fought us because they were going to lose the money that they would have gotten had we gone to their poor/low expectations job training program, and that was more important than what was best for our young adult. Project Search was the best thing that happened to our young adult. We just wish it was a two year program not one year.

    We feel parents could use more supports and information. We really wish there was a mandated safety program component to all of this transition planning. It keeps getting emphasized to us that he/she needs to work in the community, but the safety training that he/she needs to be safe in the community has never been made readily available to us. We have traveled hours to other parts of Ohio to get some of it, but it needs to be more consistently available in our opinion. Safety is an important aspect of this that has been almost ignored in transition planning in our area.

    We agree with one of the other writers about the importance of inclusion, starting at Kindergarten. Once again, if he/she is going to work in the community, they need to be included with the other people who will be in the community when they get there. Even if they don’t work in the community it gives them a better chance of doing well because they were included for their entire school career.

  69. There appears to be an extreme disconnect between the amount of money and effort spent on training and outcomes as well as between transition plan compliance and outcomes. A valuable and appropriate role for USED and a technical center would be to conduct in-depth research into what is really happening or not happening at schools including focus groups with students and parents. This is what should guide future efforts.

  70. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school? The school has failed to assist with Dyslexia in a manner a Dyslexic could learn. My 12th grade son is reading at a 5th grade level even though he was diagnosed in second grade. Two school districts have refused proper assistance. In addition, my student is not ready for a vocation outside of school. He has no skills (along with Dyslexia he has Executive functioning issues, social cognitive functioning and social communication issues, and Auditory Processing) none of which have been dealt with and will hinder outside vocation. He is simply being pushed through school and he thinks he is “bad and stupid” but in reality he as an IQ of 125 that they have not successfully assisted.
    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace? Money that goes to West End SELPA is spent on Attorney’s to fight parents and not to help children. SELPS’s need to be abolished and schools take care of their local problems on their own. The TA that was recommended for my student was ignored and they do not use evidence based programs to assist therefore they are not teaching in an appropriate manner.
    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work? The use of Lindamood Bell for Dyslexic reading and math is evidence-based but the schools refuse to use it. Many computer programs for Dysgraphia and Dyslexia are available but they refuse to use them they stick to Google based programs that are not the same.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area? Better educated teachers on LD’s, Lindamood Bell services, non-google based programs.
    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? The fact that Executive Functioning, Auditory Processing, social cognitive functioning and social communication issues are not being dealt with and preparing our students for life beyond school.If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs? Lindamood Bell Reading and Math programs in the school for Dyslexia, Better Auditory Processing means to deal with students. Better look at how districts are simply pushing kids through school and not teaching them!
    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest? All schools should have this access in order to provide FAPE or other wise.
    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations? I am never notified by SELPA as to what is going on or available assistance that is relative to my student.

    • Your first paragraph is my grandson but he is a eleventh grader.
      I was just told that they will not help him until the 12th grade. TO LATE!!!

  71. We need serious policy and legislative change to rebuild transition for the 21st century. We have historically built transition on the era of marginalization of persons with disabilities with very low expectations such as group homes, sheltered workshops, and low wage careers. WE NEED TO SEND THIS EXPECTATION TO THE WRECKING BALL AND BUILD A NEW MODEL BASED ON HIGH EXPECTATIONS, PERSON CENTERED PLANNING, COMMUNITY LIFE, APPLIES ONES TALENTS AND GIFTS FOR CAREER PATHS, AND ENDS THE CULTURE OF POVERTY AMONG PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.

    To Accomplish this, we need to do the following:

    * Give school districts incentives to push real high school diplomas for persons with disabilities for all that are capable of obtaining one. Functional skills track needs to be a last resort option, not the default option for special education.

    * We need to diversify the career fields of transition programs to incorporate jobs the full marketplace, and not put an overemphasis on entry level, menial, minimum wage jobs. Historically we have focused on jobs like coffee carts, retail, janitorial, and others. These jobs are declining in our workforce with the massive downsizing of he retail industry and the number of dead malls. We need to instead focus on a variety of real careers that pay living wage salaries that spans numerous industries and a diverse range of occupations.

    * We need incentives and tax breaks to encourage employers to hire persons with disabilities at living wage salaries. We should eliminate the sub-minimum wage provisions and replace them with an incentive to hire at living wages. We also should give employers and incentive to look beyond subtle cues when interviewing and instead look at what the person can do.

    * We should work to make more career training available to persons with disabilities such as vocational, career technical education classes in a variety of fields, and training for a careers in a variety of fields, especially industries that are expanding or in need of workers in today’s workforce. This can be accomplished by expanding CTE offerings in high schools, through vocational training, community college and university coursework, obtaining college degrees, and a variety of other ways. I think it is beyond time to bring back home economics and shop class in all high schools.

    * We need to implement community life as the normal expectation for persons with disabilities and accelerate the rollout of the new HCBS rules. Most persons with disabilities can live in the community, with or without supports depending on their needs. This should be prefered over institutions, group homes, and hospitals.

    * Person centered planning and consumer directed service delivery models of disability service with an open marketplace for services should be the new policy for all post-high school transition plans.

    * We should enable persons with disabilities to have a high quality of life comparable to those without disabilities. This means making sure they have access to fitness, community groups they may want to be a part of, accessible public places such a stores, restaurants, and recreation facilities, vacations, hobbies, arts and culture, sports, religious services of their choice, free time, social time, the rights to date, get married, have children, and other aspects of personal and social life.

    * The $2000 medicaid and SSI asset cap is way too low and should be abolished ASAP. This is below the average cost of living in most cities across the USA now. We need to change this so one does not lose their SSI, Medicaid, or disability support services they rely on for getting jobs that pay a higher living wage. I suggest changing the rules as follows:

    ** Change SSI and SSDI payments do not start decreasing until the sum of their Job Salary + SSI or SSDI is greater than 4.5 times the median rent or mortgage payment for the number of bedrooms in the city the person resides in). This would allow a person to use their SSI or SSDI money to qualify for market rate housing in most cities.

    ** Change Medicaid so disability and waiver services are not poverty based elgibility. This would allow one to keep their support services such as supported living services, eliminating the disincentive to get out of poverty if you have a disability. As it is now, many people fear advancing their careers because of a fear of loss.

    ** Change Medicaid policy so it that disability services are not an estate debt allowing the persons with a disability to pass on their assets to their heirs after death if they have recieved services. In addition, clear all barriers for persons with disabilities to recieve inheritances and assets from parents without losing services.

    * Provide support systems for persons with disabilities to learn the skills to develop healthy relationships and support marriage, dating,s and sexuality of persons with disabilities

    Stephen Hinkle
    Self Advocate on the Autism Spectrum

    • I would agree with everything Mr. Hinkle says, with the addition of more opportunities and better affordability when it comes to public transportation. My 23-year-old daughter would be a great worker, but getting her to a job is impossible, so she is losing out on invaluable experiences that typical 23-year-olds have.

    • Thank you Stephen. You have the most accurate representation of the system, it is dysfunctional, corrupt, lacks total accountability and is causing lifelong harm to students and families.

  72. The biggest issue with the population I work with is that the local schools contract with organizations to provide amazing community vocational opportunities as part of the transition program. However, these opportunities don’t actually exist outside of the school setting leaving graduates with no place to use these skills. The places where the students train won’t hire the individuals/let them volunteer because the schools have contracts with them that prevent former students from doing so.

  73. Challenges experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school—My district has denied any and all services to my child. Even after the school board unanimously approved special education services, the district staff along with the West End Special Education Local Plan Area (WESELPA, only exist in California) have refused to provide any services such as vocational or educational services that would prepare my child for post-secondary education. My district/SELPA choose to spend the education dollars they receive to pay attorneys to tie up service requests in court. I have litigated my district for seven years and won a Ninth Circuit Court case which found Upland Unified and WESELPA violated my daughter’s rights by denying services. Reading services are sorely needed but services that work such as Lindamood-Bell are routinely denied. In my district only 0.2% of children with disabilities even attempt to take the SAT/ACT (college indicators) probably less are attending post-secondary education.
    What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work—More oversight from the U.S> Department of Education is needed in California as the education dollars are not going towards providing services to students but rather to litigate against them to deny services. The process has been hijacked by lawyers, teachers have been marginalized.
    What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area—Monitoring to ensure that dollars are not being used to litigate against students. Also, put a cap on the amount of funding that can be used to hire administrators and specify the services are to be used for funding direct service providers such as Lindamood-Bell reading instruction.
    Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs—More emphasis on literacy such as reading skills. Students in my area are deficient in reading and when students can’t read, they will most likely not be able to get accepted to colleges and universities. The U.S.DOE should monitor the activities of the WESELPA and audit their expenditures as they are misusing the funds they receive from the State and Federal government by hiring attorneys instead of teachers.

  74. Here is a speech I wrote about my current issues with transportation. I do my best to advocate for those with special needs who struggle with transportation. I hope this speech helps a lot.

    Hello, my name is Josh Hauck. I am a gifted musician who can pick up any instrument and start to play it on the spot. I am also an individual who lives with high-functioning autism. I always dreamed of making my own money and living on my own. I was like many others with autism who struggle to live this dream. The truth is, individuals with autism look more capable on the outside than we feel on the inside. Without the help of our parents and supports, we would not be able to function as well as we do in society. Thanks to my support network, I have gained full independence. I now live on my own in my own apartment, working my dream job as a store pianist at Von Maur. However, I have never been able to drive, and as a result, I have had to depend on public or medical transportation. Unfortunately, there are many things I find uncomfortable with this. A lot of us on the autism spectrum are uncomfortable with public or medical transportation for a host of reasons, and I would like to share with you some of my own personal experiences.

    The public RTS bus is the most often used method of transportation for people who do not drive. Whenever I took the RTS bus I always had to go through the transit center, as there was no direct route that went from Henrietta to Victor. Living with high-functioning autism means that I struggle in situations that many of you may find unthreatening. The transit center is full of endless crowds with profanity, smoking, and inappropriate behavior. There were many times where the onslaught of sounds, smells, and loud activity made me feel very anxious, tense, and overwhelmed. Once I got on the bus at the station, the feelings would only continue. Unknown strangers sat down next to me and if all the seat where taken, I would be blocked in by people crowding the aisle. If the bus was fully packed, the person next to me would put their sweaty hand on my shoulder. Screaming babies or people shouting profanity into their phones could be heard from the furthest row away. After 6 months of taking the bus I couldn’t handle it anymore. I had an anxiety attack, shot up out of my seat, fled down the aisle and out of the bus at the intersection of Chestnut and Court. After that experience I have never set foot alone on an RTS bus.

    Unfortunately, my experiences with Medicaid Transportation have not been much better. Some of my friends with autism still share complaints about these services that I can relate to completely. On a typical day, the driver would often be an hour or two late, assuming they didn’t forget the stop entirely. There were many occasions when they forgot my stop. When I was at Hochstein School of Music, my final lesson of the day ended at 2:00 PM. The taxi cab arrived at 4:45 PM to take me home. I had no availability to practice music at home during those days, which put stress on my teachers and I. There were many times when the taxi cab would wait at a Hospital until an unknown passenger or two would arrive. There was a chance that the passenger next to me could be ill and I could not sit far away from them. Due to constant frustration and stress, I made the final decision to stop using Medicaid Transportation in 2017. When it comes to cabs, I only feel safe using Uber because I can see the driver’s photo and know that it is just the driver and I. I currently pay $120 each month for Uber when it comes to only medical appointments and music lessons. Uber is a luxury due to the high prices. Most people with special needs cannot afford $35, which is why it is not the secondary option if Medicaid Transportation is unaccessible. Line Line, also known as RTS Access, is the secondary option. Because my budget will not support $320 for Uber each month just for my job, I will soon have to use Lift Line again as well as many other people with special needs.

    Lift Line is very similar to Medicaid Transportation because they are just as unreliable and they transport multiple people at once. Lift Line has a 20-40 minute scheduling queue on the phone, a 20 minute pickup window, and wait time that can feel like hours. When scheduling a ride, Life Line has no cooperation and no flexibility. If I want to schedule a ride home 5:15, they tend to choose the worst time ever such as 4:50 or 6:20. I either have to leave my appointment early or wait in the lobby for over an hour. Unlike Uber, there is no app to schedule a ride. The only way to schedule rides is by spending over 30 minutes on the phone, waiting forever to speak with a scheduling agent. I feel like I am at DMV and I am not the only one who feels this way. On top of that, I have to listen to the same looping music over and over which makes me anxious. With a tight schedule of the many passengers to pick up, Lift Line cannot not arrive promptly in any way. Based upon my experiences in the past, they often arrive 5 minutes early or 10 minutes late within the pickup window. There have been times when I got a call that the bus has arrived before my therapy lesson ended. There have been times when the bus passed right by just as I opened the front door. There have been times when the driver did not arrive at all.

    Currently, all my Lift Line friends at my apartment wait for over 30 minutes for the bus to show up. They tell me that the public RTS bus is much more reliable than Lift Line and I do not disagree with them. For me, waiting in a transit center for 30 minutes feels better than waiting 30 minutes for a bus that might not show up. I feel very uncomfortable when riding Lift Line because the environment is identical to Medicaid Transportation. There is no way of knowing where you are at what time, who you will be sitting next to, and how long the ride will be. In order to feel safe on a ride, people with Autism must have some source of guidance such as a schedule or map. Without that guidance, it feels we are floating out in the middle of the ocean with no horizon in sight. As of now, I am using Facebook as my backup source, asking friends for rides.

    I love being in Henrietta where there are many cool places to go to and many social events for me to hang out with great friends. My freedom of independence and social growth is back again. Unless I schedule another lousy Lift Line ride, I am still unable to see my friends outside of Henrietta. When Uber arrived, I thought the base fare was only $2 and I would never have to deal with Lift Line again. For me, limitations in transportation is the primary issue holding back my full potential of social growth. Unfortunately, there is no hassle-free method of transportation without any issues unless they have a staff or family member to take them. My new vision is to have transportation that is always on-time like Uber, but more financially accessible and comfortable for those with special needs. We are capable of anything if we have the right supports, and making those supports financially viable is the first step. I didn’t ask God to give me autism, but I find the lessons I have learned make me who I am today. I am standing here before you today to show you that life with autism, while challenging, is also a very fulfilling living life.

    Thank You

    • Oops! I accidentally sent the unfinished version. The updated version is this:

      1. I talk about how unfair it is for those who cannot afford Uber when the RTS or Taxi Cab never shows up.
      2. I also explain that my friends say that both Uber and RTS Public Bus seem more professional and reliable than Medical Motors and Lift Line.
      3. I explain that I am doing my best not to criticize or judge. I am telling how I feel and my experiences
      4. I give feedback on updates. RTS Access should have more musical options when it comes to being on-hold and they should allow live chat with an RTS scheduling agent.

      • I found the version you sent to be very informative. It really shows how impossible, stressful and frustrating it is to find appropriate, safe, reliable transportation.

  75. 1. As teachers, we feel that we need a defined list of resources available to our students in the community. We currently select from a handful of local agencies, while our students could benefit from access to more support from transition agencies. Additionally, there needs to be a balance between rigorous academic standards and the opportunity for vocational training or exploration within the secondary school.
    2. The primary goals do accurately represent our current challenges and TA needs, and support our state’s goals.
    3/4/5. We utilize PaTTAN, which produces quality materials for teachers to use. However, we feel that PaTTAN could be utilized more effectively if there were more locations around the state to support the teachers who currently need to travel multiple hours to reach one location. Additionally, we could use more professional development specifically in transition goal writing and available resources. A list of organizations in each state/county would be extremely beneficial for special educations teachers to access when creating transition plans. Furthermore, having dedicated transition coordinators to assist special education case managers in further supporting their students while exploring possible vocation, post-secondary, and independent living options would add to their success upon graduating.
    6. A US Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should continue to identify potential intensive TA sites, but the process needs to be modified. Teachers do not know what resources are available and do not know where to find said resources.
    7. A center on transition could support groups and their collaboration by having someone/a group create a comprehensive list of resources, including what agencies are available, how best to contact them, and what they can be used for. A user-friendly website would be beneficial in giving teachers direct access to these resources and organizations. When compiling the resources and organizations, it would be helpful to have a list organized by state and county. This way, team members can easily access the resources and agencies available in their specific counties.

  76. 1. Student have a lack of support in their communities. Sometimes the school may determine a student would benefit from a work based learning experience, but there is no such service nearby or companies are unwilling to work with students with disabilities.
    2. They match student needs in Pennsylvania.
    3. Assessments that have been developed to help students determine where student levels are related to post secondary transition.
    4. We suggest that these resources are readily available and free rather than lucking out with private organizations.
    5. We need to place more focus on regulating the academic settings and standards for all students within special education. Sometimes we assume learning support or emotional support students don’t need much in the way of transition or we presume competence. Perhaps there should be more focus on accessing academic resources. Let’s try to teach students how to apply for a college too, are they really going to just stop at applying for an on-site job?
    6. Many schools don’t even know it exists. As an organization, can you provide schools more information about it?
    7. Contact local resource agencies and send those representatives to local resource teams.

  77. I have a unique perspective on these issues as a result of working in a variety of roles as a special ed teacher, community based trainer, Job coach, Work Study Coordinator, Transition Specialist for a students 18-21 program, WIA counselor, and State Rehabilitation Council member. I can see the potential of this work but often times our students don’t get to realize the actual outcomes desired.

    What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    In our state and particularly in our local district, we still struggle to see that transition and academic rigor can and should co-exist. Transition services are often times piecemeal- They meet the requirements of Indicator 13 documentation, but lack the quality and depth to actually result in the desired outcomes. Our teachers are both case managers and instructors that tend to focus on school based efforts to graduate or complete credits/courses and only really consider transition when it is IEP writing time. Our related services are segmented and separate from the transition process. We do not do a good enough job of emphasizing the reasons for the work we are asked to do and the accountability for the outcomes that our work should produce.

    Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    I agree with the five goals as written. The problem is, that monitoring of such goals is at a systems level and don’t always result in any meaningful change of practice in the actual classroom and community where the work is done. We need to do more to bring these goals and resources to the front line workers. I would like to see more TA driven projects (similar to the TOPS project of many years ago) to address quality and not just Indicator 13 requirements.

    What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    I avidly use many of the NTATC, WINTAC, VCU, PACER Center, NCWD, RSA, DRIVE, etc. resources. I actively have to seek out this information and make every attempt to share it with my colleagues. However, I can tell you that this is not the norm of practice in my district. The creation of these materials is invaluable in providing training and information. The problem is that it doesn’t alway land in the hands of the right people to disseminate and share.

    What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    I think the creation of simple documents, videos, and webinars are very useful. I would like to see more access to archived webinars with regular list serv or email blasts to promote their existence and access.

    Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    I feel in our state there is a huge disconnect between understanding the various aspects of employment training, laws, and practices with our school personnel and state level agencies supporting individuals with more complex needs. I feel we miss out on valuable information and understandings between agencies when we don’t capitalize on sharing resources and information collaboratively with WIOA partners. I think work in helping the state (at least our state) to better work in collaborative efforts is greatly needed.

    Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    I am not very familiar with the intensive sight process and don’t feel I can give adequate comment.

    How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    I think this dialogue starts with support of developing the actual State Plan. In our state, each separate entity provides it’s perspective and then it is merged into a larger document. While it meets the requirement of the law, I feel it lacks in the spirit of why a collaborative partnership is mandated. Our various agencies don’t see the opportunities for shared or blended funding, resource sharing, training, and implementation of ideas beyond their own perspective. I think the result is duplicated efforts, silos of operation, and fragmented work that is less impactful than it has the potential to be.

  78. Students need to have time in High Schools for developing vocational hard skills, soft skills (executive functioning, social cognitive functioning and social communication skills needed in adulthood) as well as independent living skills. There is not currently enough time to accomplish all of this with the high level of focus and rigor placed on academics (that may or may not be used in the future). There should be time available in HS for such broader life skill development. Currently transition years are only available for non-diploma track youth. However, diploma-track is not a good assessment tool for needing the development of these other broader life skills. Vocational soft skills are the number one predictor of successful employment but are under-recognized and utilized. There is a great evidence-based intervention developed in San Diego Ca called SUCCESS- Supported, Comprehensive Cognitive Enhancement and Social Skills that teaches these vocational/life soft skills. There are versions for transition age youth- TAY SUCCESS, college students- College SUCCESS and vocational rehabilitation participants- Employment SUCCESS

    • If all high-schools have the same focus of meeting A -G requirements as transition to post-secondary for students with disabilities, perhaps we can minimize homelessness, unemployment and dependence of federally funded assistance. As a former high-school Education Specialist, I have witnessed success in students with disabilities involved in Workability Programs. I recall one student that ecstatically announced that he earned his first paycheck of $300.00 and he can finally buy his Dad a birthday present. Unfortunately, due to the limited grant funding of the program, it was only offered to seniors. It is also concerning that not all that applies to the program get accepted. Attendance and maintaining a minimum GPA disqualifies the most vulnerable group of students. Also, students with PTSD, social emotional disorders, and less significant physical disabilities populate the waiting list because most of us consider them employable.

    • Could not agree more. With the increased focus on College readiness and academic requirements for receiving a diploma, many vocational and life skills opportunities are being eliminated. There is just not enough time in a Students day to avail themselves of the limited opportunities. We need to validate multiple pathways( that would include occupational courses) that would meet the needs of non- college bound students. This applies to all students, not just those with IEP’s. CTE is a valuable option for any student. As I say” Next time your toilet clogs, call a Stanford grad”. If they can do it, probably would help pay their student loan debt.

      • Agreed strongly with the need for prevocational and life skills training to start in high school and be reinforced over multiple years.
        Navigating our OPWDD system is complicated and time intensive and needs improvement. Perhaps an app which could help one apply or at least better understand the steps in the system.
        We need to do more work speaking to employers about the benefits and need to hire ppl with disabilities and the types and variety of jobs that they can do, which are many.

    • Very well said! Currently every ounce of energy a student has is to try to keep up with daily homework. There is no time to de-stress, much less be mindful enough to work on executive function, social, daily living skills, or to explore some programs so they can make informed and inspired decisions!

  79. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    Me- Schools including guidance counselors know nothing about post secondary options for our kids. Parents are left, if able, to gather info and research on their own. Inclusion is superficial. Kids that need extra time, extra year to finish school are not guided or supported in that unusual identity.
    Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    Me- “Career curricula” sounds suspiciously like vocational tracking and should be clarified as an option.
    Me – “Rigorous academic prep” worries me as code for segregated training class structures to meet arbitrary norms set by non disabled measurements and should be clarified since it could be interpreted and used as tool of segregation and oppression.

    What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    Me- Parent collaboration, disability websites and advocacy organizations, non govt regulated resources ( love voc rehab dept but way too heavily managed as though the world is just waiting to exploit them rather than open arms to our kids)
    What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    Me- Supports, funds etc should go to advocacy groups to inform and support individuals and their families. Grants available to businesses and schools to support increased ability and openness to incorporating a more inclusive and robust community receptivity to our transitioning youth.
    Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider?
    Me -Post secondary ed choices and programming that is inclusive. Expansion of ABLE capabilities for increased financial ability to access college.
    Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    Me- I Would like more information on this?
    How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    Me-Every child on an IEP should be assigned a transitional coordinator who’s sole job is to assist transition ( not conflict of interest with school employ or voc rehab employ)

  80. Please review the extensive work completed at the Burkhardt Center at Texas Tech in Lubbock, TX. Their program has maintained an exceptional transition program into adulthood for students with autism on their campus. The model itself is steeped in evidence-based practices and is producing students graduating at rates that far exceed their typically developing peers.
    That said, in order to provide evidence-based practices, it requires that students have access to the professionals who are educated enough to provide a very high level of programing. That cannot be accomplished through TAs alone. There MUST be funding and support to bring in qualified and trained therapists.

  81. A stronger connection on secondary education TA center side with Pre-ETS requirements is needed. Educators want/need to hear from their TA folks. SEA and LEA staff receiving information from federal funders or national level TA staff regarding Pre-ETS requirements, IDEA transition service requirements, and how to combine the requirements will benefit the student and further systems change.

  82. We are developing portfolios for elementary school students, academic and career plans for middle school students; all information that goes to the high school. All students must have these. Schools struggle with developing plans for students with significant barrier to learning. We need to develop materials such as assessments. It is difficult to find videos that show people with disabilities in the work place, working in a variety of careers. How about offering an OSEP grant to develop short employment focused video of people with disabilities working in careers outside of the typical work. In rural communities, employment is sparse so providing a WBL experience is difficult. Most special education teachers only have some knowledge of career planning and transition (not in the pre-service program) and even less knowledge of the workplace and CTE.
    IHEs might need to reconsider teacher prep programs and school divisions need to provide ongoing opportunities to learn about career planning, work preparation, job coaching, customized and supported employment. Provide internships for teachers to spend time in a business, with their counterparts in VR, so when they are in the classroom they speak from experience.

  83. I work for an adult service provider. There needs to be coordination between schools and adult service providers so that families are prepared and know what to expect. Right now, it’s two separate worlds with different priorities and focus. We are just starting the second year of a project designed to prepare students for work by teaching teachers how to do “Discovery” and concluding with a resume that the student can use to continue on with VR’s “Summer Work Experience”. So far, we have had challenges identifying schools/teachers that want to participate in the program, but we have also seen success and are excited about our second year. It just makes sense – we know how to facilitate successful community employment – why don’t we get started with teenagers in school?

    • Im not sure where to add my comment.
      I have followed a child thru school fot 10 years. He was Nevet Given Text books in CD. He has dyslexia and cant read. He has not been assigned books on CD to listen to for literature!!! Thats not an education. This is in Concord, ca. Hope this helps.
      Adriennr

  84. My 30 year old son has severe multiple disabilities. 3 Years ago when I got him into my #1 choice for residential I stood up my business supporting families to advocate for their children & adults with disabilities.

    As I have had a number of families of transitioning students & those who just exited school, ask me what is transition. Schools should be educating/preparing families while they are in school, as there is wonderful programs available only to the TY.

  85. I did not get much transition help for my teen with ASD. I had to become the expert and coach. I looked for an internship that would work for someone with ASD and had to cross state lines to find one that I could private pay for that was affordable. I set up various appointments with professionals, and worked on “adulting” skills. But I could not have done it if I was working. The district and DVR offered very little. 1 or 2 summer internships (if you were lucky enough to get a slot) and once a week community trip doesn’t cut it. DVR’s assessments were not helpful. As mentioned in other comments, the students with weak executive function skills need more direct training of planning, organizing, awareness of time, social hidden rules, soft business skills, hygiene, household, and financial skills. They need practice internships with coaches who understand EF and social thinking challenges. They need to try out different types of work to see which settings and tasks are manageable for them especially if they have sensory and/or anxiety challenges. It may not be clear even at 16 whether to follow an academic or vocational path. These students mature 3 – 4 years later than other students, So they may need the extra year or 2 in HS in an EF/Internship program instead of being kicked out because they managed all the academic requirements. But if the school doesn’t have that type of program because they lack funding for it, you’re out of luck. Some may say they must offer it becasue of FAPE. But you have to be able to afford the lawyer who may not win, so I chose to spend that money on the training instead. So the parent is stuck trying to figure out an affordable way to build the graduate’s skills with some kind of supports. Or they end up in the basement playing video games while the parents are out working. I’ve read posts about some graduates who try to get and keep jobs, but they fail because they really need knowledgeable coaches to teach skills, and also to educate employers. Key needs are Funding, Coaching and as others have mentioned Transportation for our non-drivers.

    • Thank you Bonnie! My experience mirrors your summary. 2E ASD students need a particular kind of executive function and social skills, which are not offered in public school. These students don’t benefit from curriculum offered. I’ve also had to search far and wide and I’ve yet to find the support that works. If I am hands off, my student makes little progress. As soon as I went hands off, at the school’s request, my child failed.

  86. My child is a special needs child with IDD/Autism/FASD he is 12 years old and in Middle school. My organization supports many children with FASD and other disabilities of children who have experienced chemical exposure before birth. The tragedy is that these children go undiagnosed, unsupported and misdiagnosed for so long that by the time they reach 14 they damage from being ignored leaves little hope of transitioning along with their peers and long lasting outcomes for them as they become adults. Starting with the Child Protective services that doesn’t have the funding to evaluate these children pass them off the the foster/kinship/or even winding up in residential treatment facilities because of the behaviors only later to find if they would have had better services they could have done better. Then the children become of school age and the damage is done. The school only will test for ability to learn not for a medical diagnoses. Leaving the child again in a situation that is unsupported. The children are often very smart and able to function, but because of the behaviors are labeled as bad kids, not kids with trauma, learning disabilities or cognitive issues. the lack of training in our schools for evaluators and educators is a must. Many times these children, like mine has been isolated into small (3-7 students) and made to think they are just bad kids. Never given a chance to excel and pushed through school as if they are never going to amount to anything anyway. By the time they reach an age of maturity 12 – 14 they start to show signs they may be able to learn now that they cognitively can cope with the trauma. But they are so far behind in school they will be lucky if they can catch up.
    Help yes there needs to be help, training and a big hard look at where the opioid and meth addictions in our country has taken the youth of our future to. You need to collaborate with our community agencies that want to help the schools and encourage the schools to take a look at the needs of some of these children. They are falling through the cracks and soon it is going to be a crack so big you won’t be able to fix it.

  87. One of the biggest challenges is that students with more significant disability labels continue to be excluded from innovative transition services, such as community integrated work-based learning opportunities, and instead are segregated in Special Education Centers and/or special day classes focusing on readiness skills until they exit school.

    Community Integrated Work-based learning opportunities are essential to ALL transition age students, to assist them to find work environments, duties, and experiences that provide the ability to make more educated choices about their career and what they do and don’t like to do (job wise).

    With the new CMS Rule on HCBS (Home & Community Based Services), our schools can no longer transition students into segregated day programs or sheltered workshops. We must provide opportunities for community integrated employment .

    We need to ensure that ALL student have access to community-integrated-employment experiences, regardless of the severity of their disability, otherwise they will be living in poverty on the meager income of welfare/benefit programs.

  88. I feel as though there needs to be more contact with parents of students with disabilities and all school leaders, officials. teachers and staff need to be held accountable for not adhering to the guidelines outlined a students IEP and the Department of Education needs to partner with Employers that are willing to come into the schools and/or have students with disabilities shadow employees to learn on the job skills (students with disabilities learn faster and retain more information if they are hands-on), they need to be taught life skills in school, home economics should be apart of their schooling, financial aware (budgeting, the importance of having good credit, the difference in between the credit types and scores). There needs to be a committee that oversees how funding is handled on a state, local and federal level. The parents need to have more involvement when it comes to decision making and changes that need and/or will be made when it comes to students with disabilities.
    My child has not once been asked about job skills nor trained for any sort of job so something needs to be done ASAP.
    The students need to be held accounting when they miss treat students with disabilities and just get a slap on the wrist, teachers need to be trained on how to read an IEP and on how to deal with students with disabilities and each student needs to be treated as person not as if they have something wrong with them no matter the reason they have an IEP.

    • Thank you Jessica. My experience as well. There is no accountability for the schools to create an IEP that has real merit and not meaningless and disjoint supports and goals aligned to the schools convenience, deliver no value to the student, and are unmeasurable. It doesn’t matter if you don’t sign it. They do what they want and don’t even tell anyone you haven’t signed it. We have not had ANY transition support even though we’ve been asking for years. Even though our school has a right college program, we are not included in it. Much less and exposure to jobs and we are in Palo Alto where go 2 blocks in any direction and you will find interesting businesses and organizations.

  89. 1. There are no supports for students with medical complexity.
    2. Agree with the goals except post-secondary education still isn’t the first thought for our kids. Also regarding drop-outs, there must be consideration of mental health issues as 50% of those students drop out. Lastly, there needs to be a focus in independent living skills and collaboration with the Centers for Independent Living.
    3. Best transition tools are from the PTI, Got Transition (health), Arc, and Boggs Center (NJ-AUCD).
    4. Transition as a lifespan issue, not starting at age 14 or 16.
    5. Lack of good programs for those who may not be able to work once school is done.
    6. Yes continue this work but look for solutions “outside the box.”
    7. Partner with CILs as well at PTIs.

  90. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school? Transportation, access to adult oriented providers who are comfortable in treating a wide range conditions facing our young adults with disabilities.
    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace? The five goals are listed as a)Youth and young adults with disabilities receive and participate in evidence-based and promising practices in secondary transition services and supports. b) SEAs and LEAs implement evidence-based and promising practices and strategies, including early warning and intervention systems to reduce dropout and increase graduation rates.
    c) Students with disabilities participate in career-related curricula so they are prepared for postsecondary employment and careers. d) Students with disabilities receive rigorous academic preparation so they are prepared for success in postsecondary education. e) SEAs, SVRAs, LEAs, and local VR offices use data-driven decision-making to develop their respective plans and reports. I would say the 2nd – 4th goals are not being met at this time.
    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work? Quality improvement projects that offer CME credit and MOC credit that enlist pediatric, family medicine, and internal medicine physicians and their staff along with secondary education staff, social workers, nursing, and local hospital systems to create systems to support young adults with special health care needs would help to make improvements in this issue.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area? A promotion of the resources from Got Transitions within exiting electronic record templates and prompts within electronic records to assess the readiness of youth and parents to transition the young adult to independent living.
    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs? see #4
    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest? Absolutely, our youth with special health care needs and their families need continued support and guidance to allow these young adults to live, learn, work, and thrive in a welcoming and supportive environment.
    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations? Enlist the medical community and hospital systems in these efforts.

  91. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    We need more teachers and para-professionals trained to serve the unique needs. With district funding so tight based on state funding and the funding gap for all LEA’s, we are unable to offer the ongoing specialized training that staff need to support this population. When Education is cut at the federal level it is has significant impact on the services that can be provided. Parents who have advocates and lawyers file for more related services in programs that are for profit and sometimes are not the best programs because of the accountability that is in place. If funding for schools was more realistic to the need then we can retain and attract quality staff and offer robust programs.

    Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    Our state, CA is doing a great job of promoting inclusion with the right supports so students with special needs are apart of our schools. They are in fact General Education students first and foremost. In my role, I have been able to build the capacity of administrators and teachers and this has resulted in more inclusion. We still have a long way to go to change mindsets and understand the unique ways in which students learn. Staff should have funding to attend training that keep their skills relevant and learn about opportunities. For example – Thinkcollege.net offers college opportunities for students with special needs. Students should have opportunities beginning with early intervention, and ending with opportunities to be successful in college and career. Funding is needed for Workability Coaches that support and help students identify their career or college aspirations. Pathway programs need to continue to be funded so students can begin to gain the needed skills for many of our hard to fill jobs that as a country we outsource to other countries.

    What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area? We are a large country so create a clearing house of best practices and resources that can be shared and utilized. We also need to know about successful practices that are occurring where student outcomes are high. It doesn’t make sense to re-create the wheel but share our knowledge and we all can be successful.

    Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    The post-secondary options for students as well as Day programs that keep adults with special needs engaged and productive.

    Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest? Yes – an application makes sense. Make sure the requirements are feasible to achieve. Often times applications are complicated. Provide funding and guidance to LEA’s in completing programs that are needed in their states.

    How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations? I have already answered it. Providing resources and best practice examples and as a country promote real inclusion. Increase funding for supporting parents and getting information out equitable.

  92. My son is 21 and in his last year of high school. We are in southeast Louisiana. The “success for all” mentality seems not to exist when it comes to young adults with more severe needs or disabilities. We were rejected by several day-hab programs because he is tube-fed and requires a little assistance in the bathroom. There is very little understanding or knowledge about HIS transition options from anyone–school, support coordinator, or parent training center. We need options for students with significant disabilities who are exiting schools. Perhaps being able to get information online about day programs so that we can compare them side-by-side, maybe in a grid format. Right now there is no option other than contacting each one by phone, which is tedious and time-consuming.

  93. As we are all aware, students with disabilities require a spectrum of transition supports, depending on their desired post-secondary outcomes. For students who require more intensive supports, are working towards a certificate of completion, and are planning to attend an adult program after graduation, there is discontinuity between the educational entitlement system and the DDA eligibility system. Although there is attrition and turnover in schools, the same concept does not exist in adult programs, which serve people throughout their lifespan. Currently there are not sufficient numbers of adult providers to continue to accept and meet the needs of the transitioning youth. Transition specialists need to be well versed on the changing landscape of the adult systems and start transition activities as soon as possible, including increased community outings and vocational activities. One of the goals missing from the paragraph above is community integration. State or region specific training for transition specialists, teachers, and families could help to address this gap. Additional research looking at the outcomes of students with disabilities who graduate with a certificate of completion could help to determine factors that impact acceptance into adult programs, address needs in the current curriculum, and improve post-secondary outcomes.

    • Community integration is essential. Self Direction can help with that however there are several problems with Self Direction. Fiscal Intermediaries make parents feel as if they are cheating the system for trying to help their children utilize legitimate classes in the community.
      More money needs to be focused on paying professionals to work with adults (community habilitation, residential workers) and educating potential professionals in how to best work with adults.

  94. The problem starts early. If all students were included they would be included in Reading curriculum and learn to read. That is a whole lot different than skill based teaching. Also social skills needed to succeed in Transition would be natural, learned with practice and great role models. We sell our students with disabilities short when we don’t give them the opportunity to succeed. We segregate them as if workshops were going to exist for them. One must have high expectations if they expect students to transition to work later.

    • I agree, thank you Gay! We have a saying, “Included but not taught.” Classes are too large, single teachers without training or experience, no accountability for IEPs being implemented, so our students just sit in class, don’t get included in group projects, don’t understand what is going on soon after the beginning of the term because they quickly get so far behind they can’t follow along in class – and nothing changes! The IEP doesn’t get adjusted, the teacher doesn’t engage more, just trying to convince the parent expectations are too high, even if the student is cognitively gifted.
      Our District is completely failing special education students

  95. 1. Better training and funding for the case managers who are supposed to help families transition.
    2. All public, private and non-public schools need to have transition coordinators on staff to prepare students and parents.
    3. We need better Day Habilitation programs for transitioning students who are behavioral and aggressive but still have potential in an internship.
    4. Pay staff and 1 on 1’s more, they along with teachers are not paid enough.
    5. All staff working with children or adults with disabilities should have more than a high school education and a few weeks of training. Must have a background in field.
    6. It shouldn’t be so hard to find a placement when you are fully funded by the state. Options are pretty crappy and or just glorified baby sitting.

  96. I attempted to leave feedback the link does not allow for feedback
    Here is feedback that the US department of Education and Special Education should consider. Federal laws and NY state laws are in place. NY state is ranked 50 in segregation, there is no accountability the school districts are not following the law and are doing so without accountability. How in the world can Post Secondary and transitional outcomes get better when all the kids in NY state are segregated?????the districts are restrictive in GE setting access, GE Curriculum, restrictive in time spent with typical peers. When you separate these kids there will be no success at post and transitional. Look at the root of the problem no bandaids. Enforcement and accountability of inclusion and NATURALLY post secondary and transitional services will have improve results. I have been fighting for 4 years for any kind of inclusion for my sone with Down Syndrome. They will not even let him have lunch with the kids

  97. I think more investment needs to made into programs such as the city connections programs through Pittsburgh Public school. This program does a nice job at transitioning into adulthood with a focus of lifeskills and work. So many lifeskills class rooms are either too focus on career that they loose sight of lifeskills or are too focused on easy topics to train in the classroom instead of community experience. Also the OVR programs only help with career in a very limited capacity.

  98. I have only one major issue. Pa.. Does not have any facilities in our county, or surrounding ..that I can take my daughter with a nurse at a day program. She turned 21. No more wheelchairs, therapy, (thats a big one) day programs for more severely handicapped, and resources and case management is a joke here.

  99. It is like what challenges are we not facing as parents of students with disabilities:
    there is such double standard, the IEP team in schools dont have any clue about college level programs for students with ID, I dont know what makes people think literacy can be more functional after high school, reading is life long, I dont know how come there is so much stigma around college education for students with ID, we all went to college and got higher education which then gave us more learning and knowledge to make better decisions, the high school teams stops academic inclusion in freshman year for my son, we had to push and fight for all four years. Academics is as important as any other aspects of transition, I dont know why someone esle decides what my son should do and should’nt do, I advocate for post secondary education and college for students with ID

  100. I am commenting as a parent. The need to develop valuable academic and transition programming for twice exceptional students (high intelligence coupled with low social, executive function and emotional regulation skills) is profound. Transition plans must have concise academic, vocational and life skill goals that are individualized for the student and recognize the potential for learning throughout the lifespan. Transitioning out of K-12 education at 21 with no opportunity for continued learning and skills training is incredibly short sighted. Some students are lucky to reside in LEAs that attempt to provide transition services. They often fall short due to lack of resources to assist in curriculum development and staff training. Resources for districts and staff are fractured. There simply is no single resource to which someone can turn for help developing in these areas while continuing to learn.

    Beyond the school level, the lack of coordination among community resources is appalling. Students exiting out of districts are unaware of what state and non-profit resources are available and how to apply. Human service agencies struggle to connect with potential clients because there is very little information on who is entering the market each year at graduation.

    For transition to improve, there needs to be accountability. For example, state VRs must demonstrate what innovative solutions and programming they develop and support, precisely how WIOA funds are being used and include data in annual reporting to support their assertions. This will alleviate state VR from “sitting on” the 15% WIOA required for transition.

  101. Transition planning should be mandated to start much earlier than what IDEA suggests.

    A true transition assessment plan should be done for each student and treated like an IEP. It should be updated at least annually as skills and interests change.

    Access to various on the job training programs, whether in the school or outside of the school, should be available so students are better prepared to go to work.

    Guidance counselors should be trained to work with students on identifying post-secondary opportunities, and removing barriers to access those opportunities.

    Rehabilitation services are grossly understaffed so they are not attending most transition meetings because their schedules are made months in advance and they are invited to meetings a week or two in advance, if at all.

    Parents need to feel supported and encouraged when pursuing post secondary opportunities.

    Mandatory annual in house TA provided to each district. Pro-active vs reactive.

    Accountability for TA centers AND districts. TA centers can develop a plan of action for the district (an IEP of sorts) and implement measurable goals!

  102. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    I am a parent. My child recently graduated with a 3.9/4.0 GPA and experienced very little transition support during high school and virtually none currently. We continue to try to negotiate a bewildering and fragmented set of government systems with seemingly opaque rules. My student, on the autism spectrum, is very bright, wants to go to pursue higher education and meaningful work, but needs assistance in social or soft skills to better integrate into social/school/work life. Graduation should have been a joyful celebration but instead kicked off the reality and depression for my student that they are on their own. I have stopped work to fill the role of transition coach providing transportation, planning and skill building activities, and emotional wellness to avoid my student from becoming lost for years like so many other young adults on the spectrum. In our case, the relative need is small and not costly and the lack of that help is, for now at least, losing two productive and tax paying members of our society.
    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    5 goals:
    1.Youth and young adults with disabilities receive and participate in evidence-based and promising practices in secondary transition services and supports. ANSWER: In our experience this goal was not even close to being met. The school system pushed my student (and several others) off an IEP to a 504 since they got good grades and weren’t “disabled enough” for an IEP. They must feel the need to do this because of the burden to assist the students. How can we make the system more doable for all parties? Disabilities is a wide net. I’d suggest breaking down the evidence based and promising practices when implementing. Measurements (the right measurements) can help with accountability and starting much younger than 14 will spread the teaching/learning to be more manageable and effective for both the educators and students.
    2. Don’t know enough to comment.
    3. Students with disabilities participate in career-related curricula so they are prepared for postsecondary employment and careers. ANSWER: Seems like a good goal to have. We didn’t see much evidence. My student did participate in a VR summer program working at Goodwill which was helpful and that was about it. See the answer to #1. The school said that the personal finance class that all students are required to take is my student’s preparation. Trained and sufficient staff, starting earlier than 14 and individualizing at least somewhat to the type of disability would be an enhancement.
    4. Students with disabilities receive rigorous academic preparation so they are prepared for success in postsecondary education. ANSWER: There is a lot to “academic preparation”. Intellect was not an issue for my student, but executive functioning, how to successfully manage the interpersonal interactions with peers and educators was highly stressful and had little support. You can be smart enough to know the material but absolutely fail at executive functioning or if you feel ill at ease or don’t know how best to navigate in our very social world. My suggestion is think broader on this.
    5. Don’t know enough to comment.

    3. through 5. Don’t know enough to comment, but would ask for consideration in the following areas:
    -More training for students that are “2E” or twice exceptional. These high ability and high potential students are languishing because they don’t fit in the current system to address disabilities.
    -Ability to partner with non-profit organizations and or providers in the community that DO understand our students and can help them with the transition to work and or higher education. Perhaps grants to fund research/ community service provider or nonprofit / school emphasizing cross collaborative learning and capturing of information to inform promising models for wider dissemination. Similar to HRSA grants to spur innovation in rural healthcare models.
    -Public transportation is not available or practical to use in our part of the country. Assistance with either some sort of transportation or specialized or extended driving lessons may allow my student to be able to drive independently.

    • Frances, very well said. Services just don’t fit 2E and force fitting them without executive function or social support is traumatizing, putting them in cognitively challenged special ed classes causes all sorts of dysfunction and failure.

      We have no support for autistic 2Es since they can pass (not do well and with an incredible amount of suffering, bullying and isolation) they do not get support in our district. Most things done for them are really to them and are harmful.

      It goes without saying there is no transition support as many don’t make it to graduation.

  103. Continue needed therapies in schools to students with SEVERE autism beyond age 16. Currently they are sent off campus to be trained for a menial jobs and they don’t need 6 years to learn how to pick up trash or fold towels.

    Provide continuing education beyond age 22 as any other human has the right to. Autism is not a static condition and these individuals can continue to progress. They have life long needs that are ignored right now.

  104. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    School Districts in schools need more funding to provide a more extensive work experience program for 14-22 year olds.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals?

    Yes these are the goals of California and our district.
    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    Our District uses SEIS as do a majority of districts in California. It would be beneficial for the state if all districts used the same system as it is challenging to get special education records from districts, especially for homeless and foster youth.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    If the state could create an affordable on-line transition curriculum, like “Unique Learning System: the most complete, current and research-based instructional support available for your special education program. Easily set up your class schedule and student data, create lesson plans, view point-of-use standards alignment and monitor progress toward mastery—all from our powerful Teacher Dashboard, designed to help you do the important work of providing every student with meaningful access to learning and lifelong opportunities,” this would assist.
    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    School Districts need more financial resources to meet the needs of our students.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    Again resources to assist districts with monetary sources specifically to meet the transition needs of students is needed.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    What has worked to streamline resources in our district is create a Local Partnership Agreement with our local Regional Center. It takes time, and is always a work in progress, but the payoffs are significant for our adults aged 18-22. CTE classes that are designed to meet the needs of our disabled adults at local community colleges is a need in our area.

  105. Whenever we asked about transition services, we were told to wait until junior year of high school. I asked every year since my daughter turned 14. They need more people/staff trained to assist in transition services, specifically job training. They need buy in from the community, businesses to support this. Some kind of public school, private business partnership.

  106. School districts should begin a transitional education prep program and parent informational initiatives as early as 3rd grade for students with disabilities. School districts need to optimize opportunities to infuse curriculum steeped in innovative technology and resources to garner students’ interest in the use of technology. School district must establish mandatory curricula and guidelines specific to Vocation, Communication, Job-Readiness, Self-Advocacy, and/or Independent Living. A significant number of schools across the US do not have specific curriculum in which teachers and parents alike can work collaboratively to address the preferences, strengths, and weaknesses of students with disabilities continuously throughout a students’ k-12 learning experiences. Life-Plan portfolios are necessary and should become “the” reflective guide, which facilitates a focused, yet, evolving action-plan. Too often, students and parents come to the pivotal point when decisions are being considered regarding post-high school and the Transition ARD fails to meet/address the needs of the student and family. The effects of districts’ fail in addressing the needs for technology-infused Life-Plans are distressingly realized many years post-high school. With Life-Plan curriculum for students with disabilities, educators, administrators, clinical teams, and families are given a transparent guide in which meaningful connections can be made, questions addressed and resolved in ways which promote the best outcomes for students as adult learners. So, what does this look like? We all remember being asked the question, “What do you want to do when you grow up?” That question and the explicit guide to seeking plausible answers are even more crucial to students with disabilities and their care-givers. Beginning in grades 3-5, parents should exponentially be involved through case management and home visits opportunities to directly influence the outline and development of their child’s Life-Plan Portfolio, this would be in addition to and as a beneficial supplement toward the effective Annual ARD process. Each Annual ARD’s goal is to increase the likelihood of students ability to attain the highest possible levels of functional progress, self-advocacy, and independence; by providing access to a curriculum enriched with technology solutions, students and caregivers can have access and thereby become more familiar with the plethora of community resources and networking. The IEP then becomes a living document! The realistic goals and objectives aligned to students’ Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance (PLAAFP) have more clarity and in-debt meaning to parents, students, and all relevant stakeholders.

  107. Transition outcomes and services need to start earlier than ages 14 or 15.
    High school is not enough time, with all the graduation requirements, to work on soft skills, self-determination, career awareness and training.
    Students with more significant needs are many times not given opportunities to learn work skills that lead to competitive integrated employment. Rural areas need more resources and collaboration from the DD system and DVR system to assist districts with minimal financial options.

  108. 1. What types of vocational experiences and transition services can be provided to students who have significant muscular and/or cognitive limitations? Should transition services look the same for every student ages 18-21? What if the family is not interested in paid work for their youth? Should they receive school-based transition services? What might the school day look like for a range of students; in other words, should everyone be on the same schedule or should it be tailored to individual need?
    2. You might consider incorporating parents into the fifth goal.
    3. I am not a direct TA recipient.
    4. Downloadable materials describing and/or summarizing: a. best practices in transition education for ages 18-21; b. best practices for various levels of cognition c. Specific strategies tailored to vocational education, community-based education, and classroom instruction for transition programs. d. A library or database of materials. e. a website highlighting examples of effective programs

    5. Project SEARCH is growing in popularity. Two drawbacks: a. it is very expensive to implement. b. It is geared to support a handful of students who are hand-picked for success. How can this model be applied to more students who might not have the maturity and work ethic that Project SEARCH requires? How can districts address the expectations of Employment First with less money? If all students are expected to be employed, how can we address vocational education with fewer staff?

    7. Provide information via website so that information learned over the past 5 years can be shared and benefit everyone. Include success stories or processes used to support schools which might be duplicated at a local level. Share lessons learned.

  109. More awareness is needed so that schools realize that technical assistance is available. When I started teaching transition-aged (18-21) youth, our group of teachers tried to find research and guidelines. This was around 2008. We had a good program in place due to some PD when it was redesigned around 2000, but we wanted to do some fine tuning. We just couldn’t find anything. For example, what should community based instruction look like? What should the school day look like? Should it be the same length school day, realizing that some students are on the bus longer to get to the centralized site? Should students be in a classroom for several hours a day? How much time should be spent on community based instruction? How should a district manage varying levels of students, from nonverbal, paraplegic to those who have some minimal work experience or who may be ready for paid employment in the near future? With budget cuts and new administration, the program was recently redesigned as a one size fits all program which restricted teachers’ ability to tailor activities to individual needs. This type of information would be valuable.

  110. 1.There is a lack of accountability of quality of the process
    2. There is a lack of qualified and experienced providers to meet the needs of a large number of students
    3. There is a denigration of CTPs in higher education institutions
    4. Lack of understanding of the certifications that CTPs in higher ed offer and an unwillingness to provide support for them
    5. Much of the collateral success in employment beyond the specific job skills are learned by experience in integrated settings, such as CTPs in higher ed. This includes self determination, social skills, practical living, safety and transportation transportation.
    6. Expansion of the demand side, employers, needs to be considered and addressed. Just working with the supply side, without true preparation for real work contexts ( not just job skills but the collaterals needed for success) is inadequate. Social service workers do not understand private sector workplaces.
    7. Reorganizing services without expanding capacity is not going to make a dent in employment.

  111. 1. No, we basically have door #1 and door#2. Door#1 helps students try to use an agenda and all students get the same goals regardless of diagnosis, baseline or capacity with some activities that relate to social skills. Door#2 is just the agenda type work and no social skills. The agenda work includes trying to teach the students how to find their homework on-line but the system doesn’t work and information is not accessible even to the teacher so this is a full on fail.

    Giving a student a chrome book, lacking appropriate software. There is no process. Each teacher needs to be engaged with independently but there are no clear goals and no comprehension of the students capabilities because his true diagnosis of autism as Jan stated earlier in this blog, is obfuscated and actually denied by the District. What is done is opposite of what should be done and the IEP, as implemented is causing severe trauma and achieving failing grades, which no-one bothers to address and then given a C to pass to the grade and avoid having the IEP challenged.

    Access to transition services until the student demonstrates proficiency at their cognitive level.

    2. Absolutely missing here in our district. No support is given until a student has failed. Even up to 3 Fs out of 5, is not enough. Not until the student has all Fs will someone consider making a change in the IEP but it will be a meaningless change. Students have to leave or be homeschooled if they want an education in our district. In fact, there is an effort to drive special needs family out of the district to minimize expenses. The schools have a stack of lawyers to intimidate and take families to court to make examples out of them so families will leave or not ask for support. Search OAH and OCR for PAUSD and you will see.

    3. No. They are not included in the rich college speaker and visiting college representative programs. When asked to participate, the IEP folks said no.

    4. Absolutely not! Here’s what happens, a twice-exceptional student recognized by John Hopkins as one of international High Honors student for mathematical, verbal and spatial abilities (Among the top 20% of all John Hopkins students correlating to the top .1 of 1% of all students) enters his high school and is failed and forced to drop out before more harm is done. The schools also do not provide any life skills, social pragmatic support, no extra-curricular support and no classroom education so inclusion doesn’t work and the student is isolated and failing.

    The schools do not know how to education many special needs kids and are incapable of educating 2E autistic students. These student leave more traumatized than they entered and definitely not independent which will cost the government hundreds of thousands over a lifetime. Instead of developing into an elite performer in their area of strength, they will need to be cared for.

    If it takes extra years to gain what they did not gain in public school, charge it back to the public school. Audit schools receiving federal funds for the capacity to successfully deliver lawful education to twice-exceptional students and hold them accountable. Many IEPs do not meet the lawful requirements, either in content or in characterization.

    The Office of Administrative Hearing has bias towards the school and the judges are not knowledgeable about twice-exceptional students. All that apparently is relevant is that the kid is passed to the next grade and not about the trauma suffered to even get a C when they are capable of much more. So the system is broken and there is nowhere to go for help for these suffering children that public schools are developing into dependent adults.

    My public school system in CA (PAUSD) does not have the capability or desire to invest in providing twice-exceptional (profoundly cognitively gifted but with executive function and social deficits) students FAPE or using public funds lawfully to ensure students make progress towards independence. They are not protecting from bullying and the teachers are the first to shame them. This is public knowledge among the families and the local press but the schools continue to gaslight with renewed promises that are yet to amount to any material improvement. There is bias against special needs, minorities and low-income students so they get inferior support and perform worse than the white and non-low income group. Currently special needs students are at 20% college ready compared to the entire district rate of 60%.

    5. No. The data they do use is flawed because they manipulate it. They do no list the right diagnosis. Almost everything is other health impairment. They change the name of classes but the content is the something that already didn’t work. The IEPs are the schools story and not the students reality. They do not track failures and they say everything they offer works in court and to parents at the same time teacher’s self-report they are failing 50% of special needs kids. My district is required to provide OCR data and they are providing invalid data.

    In conclusion, no effective transition program exists. IF they graduate, they are not prepared for college or independent living.

    These students need:
    1. True and effective executive functioning support. We do not have this in our schools and it’s the foundational deficit.
    2. Protection from humiliation and denial of medically and neurologically required support.
    3. An actual transition plan. Current plan has included being able to name a couple of colleges and a subject of interest.
    4. Actual development of skills within their diagnosed abilities to be able to complete coursework successfully (cognitively they probably know more than the teacher in areas of interest).
    5. Social and emotional education within their peer-set. Often older children who are trying to catch up get put in with younger students and it doesn’t work.
    6. Equity in education. Reduce busy work and develop their strengths, don’t just warehouse them for their deficits.
    7. True inclusion — call on them in class, make an effort to understand their interests because that is their best chance at doing well. Since interests are few but deep, when class content aligns with their interests, do include them in any special activities like roleplaying historic events. Often these students are not included because the teacher doesn’t know how they feel about it and it takes too much time to complete the project if they are involved.

    Einstein was a 2E, if he had gone to our school he couldn’t have made it as a barista.

  112. We need a national middle school and high school career path CTE program to train potential disability service providers, dsp’s
    This would create an interest in potential workers , help to fill the incredible void in the dsp workforce and identify those with this passion, as these are a huge asset
    In this work space
    I feel this too would help drive up wages for these passionate workers

  113. I’m all new to this as I’m a mother to a 23 yrs old and has a anoxia brain injury and is wheelchair bound. We reside in Covington,Louisiana. She is willing to work and wants to attend some type of vocational training that would fit her according to her disability. I do not see where this is even offered in our community without having to travel 50 plus miles. This is a major problem for our area. I hoped it will be reviewed and looked at for our area.

  114. Life skills, executive functioning, and socialization are really missing from the 5 objectives. For many young adults on the spectrum, what stands between them being functional members of society aren’t the academic area, but the soft skills that most students learn incidentally but need to be specifically taught to others with delays.

  115. In our state transition is suppose to start at age 14… however no real planning or work was done until my son made it to high school. Expectations are extremely low! To many staff are happy just to get the child a job… ( bagger, or janitorial) no real in-depth training for a job that interest the child.
    Reading needs to be a priority. Teachers need to be taught how to teach multi sensory reading…

  116. As a parent of a child diagnosed on the spectrum, I believe that transitioning needs to start earlier than age 14. I believe our school need to teach more life skill requirements and business related requirements. Students are not aware of what really takes place in the working environment. They need to be taught the basics such as being on time, how to dress, how and when to speak, how to address another person, boundaries, etc. In addition, children need to learn how to open a checking/savings account, how to rent an apartment and take care of it. They need to know money management and how to budget. I think in each class, teachers should be working on the goal of transitioning. We need to work on grooming our children from an early age so that they will be prepare to transition. I think in some cases students need to focus more on job skills, communications skills, life skills rather than learning Algebra II. I think we need to focus on the overall goal and that is transitioning from high school to the work field or secondary schooling. We need to prepare our students better. We need to set high expectations and hold the students accountable.

    I think there needs to be more community based workshops and summer employment so that students can begin to understand what it is like to work and earn money. I think they also need to experience working in different field so that they may find their niche or what they like to do.

    Also there could be jobs in the school that students could do and learn different skills. A school store could be set up in which the students run it; a coffee shop could be run, students could have jobs such as housekeeping and learn to clean and vacuum an office. Student could assist in the mail room sorting mail or assisting in the nurses office.

    In addition there could be a job training class out in the community where students could go and work for several weeks and then rotate to another place so that they can find what they may want to do. Job coaches will be needed.

    Parents need assistance too. Many times people are not aware of what is available in the community. Also, some of these programs sound great but they take too long or are too overwhelmed to assist. One program I tried to use had so many steps to takes, paperwork, etc. etc. and after all the paperwork was done and all the meetings, he really has not gotten assistance.

    The agency and community could have workshops for parents. How to assist their children, what is available, where to go for help, etc. They could hold 2 or 3 session/meetings a year.

    Teachers to be trained so that they can assist in transition from the day the child starts school. During Act80 days, the school could have trainings on how to assist in the transitioning and have agencies come to the school to speak to the teachers.

    Another important resource is our vocational school. Many students are not capable or just don’t want to attend college. There is a great need to skilled laborers and our vocational school can work with the students. It would be wonderful if the students who think they maybe interested in learning a trade could spend time in each area so that they could see for themselves.

    I think we also need to be able to set realistic goals for our students and be honest with them. When a 11th grader says she wants to be a model but has never tried it or doesn’t even know what’s involved, we need to be realistic about her goals. If that is something she really wants, then she should be able to follow a model around for the day, go to an agency and speak with them, see what it is really all about, that it is not all glamour and glitter. I think sometimes students say “I want to be this or that without any knowledge of the steps involved and what the job is really all about. I also think we need to be realistic in that a child who is unable to walk is not going to be a ballerina or a football star. We are only setting them up for failure.

    It would also be nice if students needed additional guidance, that the school would allow them to continue for a year with the guidance department. Maybe school could have a dedicated guidance counselor for students who graduated but need assistance.

    I think the community and workplaces need to be made aware of the skills and abilities these children have to offer.

    I also think there needs to be more places that a student could go for training. Many do not have the funds for vocational secondary schools and are not aware the schools that may offer training. Parents may need assistance too. Many forms can be overwhelming to them so they don’t fill them out.

    I do believe the high schools in my area are starting to assist the students in transitioning much more than in the past. It is group effort and all need to participate starting as early as possible. It is not just the school and the student but it is the school guidance counselors, case managers, parents, the community and government agencies. Everyone needs to work as a team to reach the goal of transitioning students from the school environment to the work force.

  117. Enforcement of the existing Americans with Disabilities (ADA) and Fair Housing Act (FHA) laws needs to be at the highest level, and it is not now. Every school should be inspected annually by qualified 3rd party inspectors to verify complete ADA and FHA compliance. Transitioning to another school is challenging enough for disabled and non-disabled. We don’t need to make it harder by having poor ADA and FHA enforcement. Furthermore, schools should be required to have certified ADA Coordinators or Administrators.

  118. I have Down syndrome and most of my friends have Down’s as well. We all live in Washington where we’ve limited resources. I’m not going to list any what we do or don’t have in our state but I can tell you there’s nothing for us other than federal government agencies. In Washington, people move up to work for businesses. This is a state among others that promote much of ocean life and recreational parks. While these are wonderous parts of our state, some of what we’re looking for is an inclusive resource for people like me to fully navigate our opportunities given to us. The reason not many employers from various strategic companies hire people with disabilities is because of our incapability to use our skills we’ve attained over a course of time. For me, I’m a social butterfly with an eye for creating a whole new system for this country but as it is my skills aren’t put to use. There are many issues at play. We need the resources even if it means paying for a higher sales tax on our state. Not many people will be happy with it but it’s the solution to solve all our problems.

  119. Extended school year services are a way to provide transition services in an authentic way such as via life and workplace skills in authentic environments (e.g. the home for life skills and a place to volunteer for workplace skills) given students are off for the summer. Students will progress and prevent regression in transition skills by using summer breaks in meaningful and authentic ways. The Endrew F. case reinforces this value of progression and not just preventing regression.

  120. As a parent we have all been told what they cannot do. But when we push for better for our children it seems to feel like the flavor of the month club. We all want them to be productive but there are not things in place for this to happen. He was able to get into Project Search which was a help but when that was done. Got him a job, then he was laid off, so you have to start all over again. I am pissed to say the least. he wants to go to college like his brothers. I will see where this takes me. we as parents have to fight all the time. Please! this is what happens to us in Union County in New Jersey

  121. Dear Education Secretary Betsy DeVos

    My name is Tom Gilbert. I have spent the better part of the last 50 years in the field of intellectual disabilities and the last 28 years developing a program for teaching full literacy skills to those within this population (aspergers, autism, cerebral palsy, down syndrome, dyslexia, traumatic brain injury, ADD, ADHD, etc.). I’ve tutored over 50 individuals from northern Ohio long term (years), one-on-one, in one-hour weekly sessions in a cooperative learning style, taking many individuals from emergent literacy skills to independent reading. I’ve logged just shy of 10,000 hours in the process.

    Dr. Monica Gordon Pershey (Assistant Professor, Speech and Hearing Department, Cleveland State University) and I have spoken all over the United States and in Canada at various academic conferences over the last 20 years. We have also been published in academic journals regarding the means for acquiring literacy skills.

    Although all of my students have progressed in their learning at tremendously different and varying speeds, they have all (without exception) learned following the exact same developmental progression; and considering the extremely eclectic mix of diagnostic variability amongst these students, I must conclude that I’ve actually discovered how literacy is in fact acquired.

    My own work and research have proven that the only prerequisite for learning how to read is the capacity for carrying on a give-and-take, two-way conversation with another, which is at about a 3.0-3.5 mental age (M.A) [Rather than the 6.5 M.A. incorrectly determined by Morphette and Washburne in their journal contribution back in 1931, which many physicians and psychologists are still using today]. Given that the process I have developed is effective in teaching those with intellectual disabilities who are verbal, then clearly it can also be successful with those who are of normal intelligence.

    All special educators (with the assistance of in-classroom tutors) need to begin spending a continuous hour every week with those who are above the Piagetian Group monologue behavioral level or parallel play behavioral level (about a 3.0 to 3.5 M.A.), doing shared reading one-on-one in a cooperative learning style impress method beginning with contextually rich repetitive simple emergent literacy texts in size 28 Ariel Font, for easy sight recognition. If one can read, one can teach someone else how to read. It’s not rocket science.

    For those at the Piagetian group monologue level who are verbal, but not really at a give and take communicative level, one can create picture autobiographies of their personal lives, copying photos from family members, if possible, and inserting appropriate picture related dialogue for each picture, and then sit with and read with them following the simple personal scripts of their pictured lives.

    For those below the Piagetian level, they can and should be read to daily (even if they are non-verbal): novels, short stories, poems, essays, whatever, and do it a lot, to prepare them for becoming literate. Literacy is brain food and is a very positive proactive social intervention that does seem to influence the creation and alteration of dendrites and synapses in the brain (look up studies on Neuronal Plasticity for details). All of my work, history, theories, discoveries, methods, and now my own curriculum materials at this point are available for you freely. Email me and I’ll forward everything (“Word” files emailed and/or flash drives sent through snail mail) that I’ve got for your use, seriously. The process is done and completed; we just need tutors who are willing to do the work.
    Our national school systems everywhere need to begin implementing literacy and academic education for all within the ID population now who demonstrate verbal skills [albeit simple], in order to supply them with the much-needed full opportunity of a federally mandated equal education.
    Almost all who are labeled ID in this country are currently unable to read when they leave school at the age of 22 and are forever from that point on ill-equipped to undertake any possibility of experiencing full inclusion and full integration, having not acquired literacy acquisition.

  122. LIfe skills training is what I see as most lacking. Even near-typical level students, cognitively speaking, leave the educational system not knowing how to keep an apartment or even a room safely clean or how and what to cook for balanced diet meals. Also, paid and supervised internships are vital to economic success.

    • Hi Susan,
      I totally agree with that department. As I posted my response to this blog, I mentioned ‘resources’ this includes life skills. Every parent should be teaching their kids the basics of home living. I work in Educational Child Care with toddlers and preschool, I find this a very difficult task for young children when they rely on their family cultural backgrounds to live up to their parents’ values for their family. As adults, we’ve to learn these things on our own with or without training. I have a unique perspective. I have a disability while also a woman at the same time.

  123. Technical assistance will be best used if educators/schools are incentivized to use them. Meaning, if schools are held accountable for the actual post-school outcomes of their students.

    When schools are held accountable to academic test scores, schools focus on that. When principals are held accountable for graduate rates, the needle moves. No one is held accountable for the post-school outcomes of students with disabilities.

    Additionally, all states should have licensure requirements for special educators who provide transition services. I have encountered many a special educator at the high school level who still does not understand what a Summary of Performance is and how to create an actionable transition plan.
    But, schools can’t do it alone. There is a desert of services to support students once they graduate. VR is underfunded and not very successful, and there are few other services out there that provide evidence-based supports, especially in rural areas.
    I am a university professor, researcher and preparer of special education teachers.

  124. In my state of Massachusetts, students who have disabilities that prevent them from accessing grade level content are not provided with a path to graduation or provided with an appropriate assessment of transition skills as part of their state alternate assessment.

    In Massachusetts, all students need to pass the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System in order to graduate. This is a test given to students in grades 3-10 each year in the areas of ELA, Math and Science. In response to ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) students who have certain disabilities are given an alternate assessment which measures achievement in these core subjects through a portfolio teachers create. The portfolio contains work samples in the form of authentic items or videos that show the student completing work that is at entry levels. The portfolios are then graded and returned to teachers to share with students and families.

    The grade the student receives depends on the amount of progress demonstrated in each area of testing. Students do not pass or fail but are given a score for their portfolio. These assessments are very time-consuming for students and teachers and do not assess student growth or achievement in areas of transition. Work on these portfolios takes valuable time away from life skills, vocational, social, and self-advocacy training. After the process is complete, even if they receive the highest score, these students are not given a diploma.

    This practice is against the principles of FAPE as these students are not provided a path to graduation while students who pass the regular test receive a diploma for their efforts. Furthermore, they are not provided with the instruction or assessment of the critical transition curriculum they will need to succeed post high school.

    It would be beneficial for these students if they were 1. given an assessment that gave them a path to graduation as their general education peers possess and 2. are provided with an assessment that addresses the critical skills they will need and use post high school.

  125. I am concerned about lack of capacity and lack of new providers for students exiting the school system and entering adult services and the work force. Many students with special needs need support after graduation, and the numbers have increased dramatically while the availability of support has not kept up with that growth. Direct Care Providers, DCPs, must be smart, skilled, and trained. It is hard work and it must be financially rewarded in order to attract and retain staff.

    • I completely agree with you. In the area I live in there are very limited resources for support after graduation. We have so much in place while their in school and when the student graduates there is limited programming and limited levels of support available to meet their individual needs. Many students with the most significant disabilities end up sitting at home with no services. It’s very frustrating.

  126. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing… First, there needs to be curriculum that is aligned from grades 7 thru post HS. Second, properly trained staff (teachers/job coaches/teaching assistants – grades 7 thru post HS). Third, post HS programs that are truly community-based/work-based (detached from campuses). Fourth, improved coordination and implementation of community-based learning programs (district) between state support agencies and the SEAs and LEAs.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges… in my district, only #4 (Students with disabilities receive rigorous academic preparation) applies. We need better state standards beyond the 4 core.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?… we have developed or own resources and materials. However, it is not aligned with what the district is teaching.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop… set the framework/expectations for SEAs/LEAs to follow in regard to developing secondary/post-secondary programs.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? … Along with teaching community-based and work-based skills, we also teach entrepreneurial skills. We operate several student run businesses. We need a relaxing of the rules regarding how monies (from these ventures) are used to benefit and grow students.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites … the short answer is yes. We need to investigate how modifying the process would improve outcomes.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?… remove barriers to allow student outcomes to improve.

  127. 1.What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school? I teach a program geared towards teaching this age group independent living skills. This area is a definite challenge. Most of the curricula out there is geared towards academics and vocational, but this area is still on the IEP’s and must be addressed. Without structured programming, it becomes very difficult to teach. Everything must be thought of and designed from scratch with each unit and new year, building on the skills they learned previously.
    2.Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace? For the most part, yes. However, the students I work with have great difficulty with academics and are more suited to hands-on, vocational-style kinesthetic learning. “Rigorous” academic preparation would only put them off and increase their negative behaviors. This would increase their anxiety and fear. I’m not so sure everyone is up to the task of “rigorous” preparation and I think we need to look at students one by one and not lump them all together.
    3.What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work? I have followed the format of the Life Centered Career Education Curriculum, albeit loosely, but it has been difficult to really find a curricula that adequately addresses independent living skills in a manner across the board. It also needs to be sensitive to culture, race, gender, etc., and I have yet to find that. Maybe when I retire I will develop my own.
    4.What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area? Since independent living is on the transition section of the IEP’s, I think we need a good, solid curriculum teaching a well-rounded aspect of independent living skills. I also think we need a good assessment similar to the Life Centered Career Education one that is more sensitive to culture, race, etc. that can be used across the board, in both rural and urban districts.
    5.Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs? Although it is good to look at up and coming/emerging needs, how about just getting back to basics? I think that is why independent living skills are so important nowadays. We are so busy with life and with our jobs, the basics tend to go by the wayside. A lot of the parents I deal with say that they don’t think about teaching this kind of “stuff” to their special needs kids because they are “too busy” or their kids are “not interested” in it. They don’t think about the long haul when they won’t be around any longer to care to that child once they become an adult. We know that’s why the IEP and Transition piece is there, but I think we need to do a better job a getting back to basics and providing a way to show the parents that it is still important for them.
    6.Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest? At this time, I think the application process is ok.
    7.How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations? It seems as though you need someone skilled in the areas of transition and communication to be able to act more of a liaison and be a link between the entities to foster the coordination between them. It may be difficult at first, but once up and running, would be more beneficial in the long run.

  128. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    As a parent of a child living with a disability:

    Considerations for post-secondary entry need to be re-evaluated to ensure students living with disabilities can meet entrance requirements. Ex. My daughter is living with a disability that impact memory recall and language. She has not been successful in trying to meet requirements for two high school language classes, for college entry, despite having 4 years and private tutoring. This is an antiquated requirement that limits options for students living with disabilities.

    Also, transition planning at 14 is too late in the process. Many states do not require transition services until age 16. There needs to be a requirement for transition planning at a much earlier age. There needs to be requirements for state Rehabilitation agencies to focus on transition work and join the IEP team at the minimum from 14 up. Ex. My daughter is 18 and a senior. We have requested state VR to join her IEP transition team since she was 16. We have still not had anyone attend or be part of the trantions process. We were told that the state VR team would not engage in the process until the senior year.

    As a result we are now facing limited post-secondary options as my daughter could not meet the language requirements. We are not fully aware of her options moving forward, as we have not had any communication from the state VR system, and not to mention her self-goals have been shattered as she thought she would be able to go to college with her peers and that option is no longer afford to her based on entrance and eligibility regulations that discriminate against individuals living with disabilities.

    As a professional in the field.
    WIOA has not clarified the role that each the School and VR agencies will play in implementing PRE-ETS. There is limited financial and time investment on both parts. Ex. The agency that I would for provides PRE-ETS to students. The school system wants to only allow 1 class period (45 minutes) per week to train students on employment skills, and are hesitant to increase due to needing to meet other core curriculum requirements. If a school system is interested in having more hours and a higher frequency of services including paid job shadowing opportunities, the state VR agency denies the request to pay for the services, due to the cost per student is “too much” and “violates the RSA process.” More clarity is needed for the federal government and state government and school systems to offer a consistent, structured, and accountable system for transition services.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    The five goals do support that goals, however there is a need to provide clear and consistent standards and a system of accountability on the state and school levels, to ensure positive outcomes.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    Parent resources and education are essential.
    More partnership between schools, post-secondary, and VR agencies will be essential to the long-term success.
    Increased employer and business education and outreach regarding the benefits of hiring individuals living with disabilities.
    Structured curriculum imbedded in school system education for ongoing skills development.
    Trained professionals that and conduits between the school and VR.
    Financial investment
    Standardized data analytics.
    Accountability systems at the State VR and School Level.
    Partnerships with Post-Secondary schools (inclusion programs and degreed programs)
    Partnerships with employers.

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    Structured curriculum imbedded in school system education for ongoing skills development that is accomodating to different learning levels (reading and math) and in interactive computer based systems or systems that are representative of the employment environment to help students seamlessly and successfully transition to the workforce.

    Establishing standards and accountability metrics to monitor VR agencies and schools implementation of the services and tracking of outcomes.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    See responses above.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    There should be a more structured accountability system that helps guide and create consistent standards, and when states, VR agencies, and school are identified not to meet those standards TA could be provided to help them met standards.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    develop a standardized process that includes all stakeholders with special attention provided during those pivotal points during transition (i.e. age of transition plan, middle school to high school transition with better planning for long-term success, granducation requirements and post-secondary requirements discussed earlier so that students and parents are prepared for the high-school to post-secondary or employment fields. Stronger relationship or transition program from high school to employment (consider expanding Project Search programs as an established program for students living with disabilities transitioning from high school that are not going into post-secondary education programs, review college entrance options to ensure that individuals living with disabilities are not being discriminated against and that they have an equal opportunity to obtain degrees, stronger connection between schools and employers, possibly connect with economic development groups on a federal and state level to develop a stronger relationship with businesses so there are employment opportunities for individuals).

  129. The NYS Commission for the Blind (NYSCB) has developed excellent transition programs for youth who are primarily legally blind and often experiencing other disabilities. NYSCB contracts with private nonprofit vision rehabilitation agencies to provide community and in-home VR services beginning at age 10 and a comprehensive array of pre-ETS services beginning at age 14. Many of the programs are short term residential programs (i.e. one week pre-vocational training programs) and after school work readiness and work experience programs. Pre-college programs held on or near college campuses introduce blind youth to the expectations of college life starting at age 14 so the level of independence expected is introduced early on. We are fortunate to have a 12-15 week pre-ETS program held at a residential vocational rehabilitation center in NYS for legally blind disconnected youth (not in school and not working) that targets legally blind high school graduates or drop outs and assists them in enrolling in community college certificate programs to become state certified nurses assistants, teacher assistants, vet assistants, web design and developers, HVAC technicians, etc. These are the youth that traditionally never made it into the workforce and collected benefits. Because this is a residential program, the youth are able to access all the supports they need to succeed in these community college courses with sighted and non-disabled students and get peer support from other legally blind youth. The residential pre-ETS program offers assistive technology training, social work counseling, mobility training, study hall and homework help, a nationally recognized customer service training curriculum, fitness classes and exercise, help with positively using leisure time, time management skills and all the soft skills (emotional intelligence) to be a good team leader and good team player, emotionally mature and able to empathize with and help others. The results are very positive with half the graduates of the pre-ETS program either enrolling in college as matriculated students after the program or employed in competitive, integrated employment. An additional 25% are job seeking and on the path to work.

    Pre-ETS funding should pay for room and board for these very successful residential programs and continue to fund the five Pre-ETS goals.

    The TA Center with funding from both federal education and rehab sources should sponsor an annual national transition conference (or regional conferences) where all the stakeholders from education and rehab settings (including the nonprofit sector) can learn about the implementation of these promising programs. In the case of the NYS residential vocational rehabilitation center for blind youth, there is capacity to serve youth with legal blindness or multiple disabilities from other states but the other states don’t know that it is a resource they can use to send their blind youth to if they are not already spending their pre-ETS 15% allocation.

  130. Michigan Teacher of the Self-Contained CI program for 33 years, 20 years on Macomb County Transition Council Executive Board, and Transition Coordinator for 20 years in my school district.

    What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    Michigan Merit Curriculum, lack of using personal curriculum (too many hoops, so teachers, administrators don’t like using it). The curriculum is based too highly on core academics and doesn’t allow for those NOT going into college, lack of CTE programs and follow through, and lack of education and buy-in from special education teachers that are evaluated on the MMC instead of their students personal growth towards transition.

    Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    Youth and young adults with disabilities receive and participate in evidence-based and promising practices in secondary transition services and supports. – AGREE
    SEAs and LEAs implement evidence-based and promising practices and strategies, including early warning and intervention systems to reduce dropout and increase graduation rates. – AGREE
    Students with disabilities participate in career-related curricula so they are prepared for postsecondary employment and careers. – AGREE
    Students with disabilities receive rigorous academic preparation so they are prepared for success in postsecondary education. Not an issue
    SEAs, SVRAs, LEAs, and local VR offices use data-driven decision-making to develop their respective plans and reports. – AGREE

    With all of these goals – the time, money and resources need to be in place for teachers to educate themselves and understand the importance of transition. Teachers evaluations are solely based on academic growth rather than transitional growth for each student.

    What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    We used the ESTR-R (but we were told that is wasn’t a formal assessment) we created an ESTR-R tool that went along with the ESTR-R assessment, to help teachers understand what their students actually were aware of and able to do. Resources for Transition Assessments are limited – I have used the Discovery Method with many of my students and found that to be the most useful – but that takes TIME and MONEY.

    What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    THE DISCOVERY PROCESS

    Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    I work closely with employment agencies that help persons with disabilities get jobs – there are a few important points that affect the job search and getting employment –
    1. TRANSPORTATION ISSUES
    2. PARENT UNDERSTANDING AND BUY-IN
    3. AFRAID OF LOSING SSI
    4. SOFT SKILLS AREN’T TAUGHT IN SCHOOL ANYMORE – SO THEY ARE LACKING.

    Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    Our County Intermediate School District used to receive funding for Transition Training (and it was only $5,000), the county never ‘hired’ a tradition transition coordinator – but instead used an administrator from their payroll and just added it on as part of their job – so needless to say, transition is NOT a high priority in my county. There needs to be a Transition Coordinator hired soley for Transition – to help support each district in our county, and allow for training of all teachers. It’s always about the money and resources =(

    How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    Make TRANSITION a PRIORITY in education for ALL STUDENTS. Teach soft skills, transportation skills and parent education on transition. Make it a priority where you will put more money in personnel and education.

  131. Post-Secondary Transition – Responses to OSEP Questions
    1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    Accessing students can be a challenge for both school staff and VR staff. For those who are in school, students may be otherwise occupied with core educational services and not available for pull out to participate in assessments and/or to participate in VR or support services. For those who are out-of-school, such as those recently in the foster care system, it is challenging to build momentum towards outcome-based services such as a program of services that leads to work because the youth may be transient. Other challenges include paradigms of either (1) working with students/youth in areas where resources such as transportation and access to outside providers are limited or (2) coordinating/aligning services and supports for students/youth in resourced areas in a manner that avoid service gaps and overlaps.
    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    With respect to goal #1 (Youth and young adults with disabilities receive and participate in evidence-based and promising practices in secondary transition services and supports.), the goal is relevant and lofty, however we would like to see states drive the research questions that subsequently result in evidence-based/promising practices. This assures that the practices remain tied to the needs of practitioners. Further, seeking state input to research questions aligns TA center products/outputs with those concerns on the minds of states including compliance and best practice with the most recent federal laws and regulations.
    With respect to goal #3 (Students with disabilities participate in career-related curricula so they are prepared for success in postsecondary employment and careers), the Department may consider revising language to reflect “employer-driven” or “job-driven” curricula as opposed to “career-related” curricula. This would promote consistency with WIOA and Perkins V language and would emphasize career preparation that reflects the needs of workforce and especially high-demand industries.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    Tools and guidance that help the SEAs and SVRAs to assist the LEAs and local VR offices to work together have been the most helpful (e.g., planning tools, resource mapping tools, example interagency agreements, team building and system mapping tools/strategies). Specific resources that can be passed along to SEAs and SVRAs for direct service implementation are also helpful (e.g., transition assessments, pre-ETS and transition curricula, student/family planning tools).

    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    It would be helpful to receive more tools that help states to plan across agencies and align resources for students/youth with disabilities. It would be tremendously helpful for TA centers to maintain and manage a database of projects/initiatives/strategies that they encounter in states and classify them in order to facilitate networking and problem-solving amongst states with similar demographics, innovation focal points, and/or challenges. Sometimes the best TA is that which connects states who can compare notes and borrow ideas.

    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    We would appreciate if work could be done to determine the best methods for delivering/implementing Pre-Employment Transition Services (e.g., how much? how long? how intensive? variations based on student demographics?) and Work Based Learning components identified in WIOA, Perkins V, and within the NTACT Effective Practices and Predictors Matrix. This would assist us in moving past compliance to those methods which are most effective in producing positive student outcomes.
    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    It would be fine to continue some topic-specific intensive TA so long as there are clear methods for all states to access more general/universal TA. A recommendation would be for each state to have designated TA center contacts. While one would expect intensive TA to take a deeper dive, it would be nice for states who are not selected as intensive TA states to have equal time/access to TA. Access to a menu selection of tools and resources on more general topics or a wider variety of topics that may not require an intensive TA plan would be most helpful.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    We appreciate the National Capacity Building Institute and the way in which this session brings state teams together for professional development, capacity building strategies, networking with other states, and state planning time. We would hope to see an activity such as this continue. We also appreciate joint training offerings between various DOE funded TA Centers. The more time, resources, and opportunities for coordinating and collaborating between programs, the better. It is also valuable to have models and methods for implementing a microcosm of this type of cross-agency coordination and alignment at the local level in our states.

  132. Hi, I am a Transition Employment Designee in a small, rural school district in East Texas. We are experiencing more success through the coalition between Texas Workforce, Vocational Rehabilitation, and the schools. Many of our seniors with identified disabilities have been able to go on past high school, obtain training, and achieve their dreams, thanks to this collaborative effort. Therefore, I would like to see that expanded, so that there are more post-secondary training centers for students with disabilities, possibly through colleges and universities. There is also a huge need for transportation assistance to that training and to that jobs for students living in rural areas. (This IS the greatest, outstanding need that has not been addressed at all.) Finally, the programs that allow youth to obtain work experience while still in high school, like Summer Earn and Learn in Texas and Year-Round Work Experience, again a coalition between the Texas Workforce, the Vocational Rehabilitation Commission, and the schools, is being so very beneficial to my students who would otherwise not have had the opportunity in our small, rural area. Please keep funding these programs. Thank you very much!

  133. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    My challenge is what will my son do once he leaves the system. He is slated for a diploma. My VR counselor told me (and other parents ) that they don’t do assessments until they are a senior or 18. When I asked about the options for 16/17 yr olds she told me that they were “mandated” to say that on the website. At every turn she tried to dissuade me from moving forward. I had to apply on my own (my school wouldn’t help). I am not hopeful. I don’t know one person who has had a good experience with the VR agency in my area. It all sounds good on paper.
    Also, there aren’t enough affordable post secondary programs with adequate support. My son wants to do some academics post high school but there are so few options with the support he may need.

    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    There aren’t enough academic programs for kids like mine. My S.D. is AP focused/college bound focused. My child needs to continue doing math (but not advanced math). My school with my help has pushed my son to do well academically. But my state’s exit exams are a barrier for many.
    What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?

    More opportunities for interning. My state has a Career Development Option but there are so few job opportunities.

    Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    Accountabiity of VR agencies. Accountability of school districts to provide good transition plans.

    Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest? Don’t know

    How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    Parents have no idea what is available. Schools have limited resources. My school doesn’t have a dedicated transition coordinator. I have pushed for all the job exploration and career exploration for my child.
    And CTE. My BOCES refused to admit my child to a CTE program because he didn’t get an 80 on his Regents. If he had support he would have succeeded. They told me “this is not special education school”; no assistance can be given. They only would allow him in a skills program which didn’t meet his job goals. CTE is too limited in my state. And very costly for my school district.

  134. Karen Bonuck, PhD- Co-Director of University Center of Excellence in Developmental Disabilities- Einstein/Montefiore, Bronx NY

    Paid Internships and Jobs- I would like to see a lot more links to actual position and less web toolkits. The website shows no dearth of online resources, but no easily apparent live/updated links to actual positions for young adults by region.

  135. (1) What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?

    Challenges faced include consistent staff dedicated to providing transition services, lack of access to/development across LEAs of evidence based practices to promote secondary transition outcomes, high degree of turn over with VR staff in the state which makes it difficult to form agency partnerships, tools for better family engagement in the IEP planning process for this target age, broad LEA knowledge of all potential agency partners; emphasis in the current IEP form on the importance of planning from a transition lens to inform the whole IEP development

    (2) Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?

    Yes, please continue and expand as well!

    (3) What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?

    The transition toolkits, targeted PD with NTACT, ability to network with other states at the CBI, sample forms, webinars — ALL OF IT!

    (4) What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State.

    Continued emphasis on cross agency partnering, tools to support new/novice transition providers through those that are meeting compliance but need to focus on transition programming and implementation.

    (5) Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?

    I think there is still plenty of work that needs done to help schools with competitive integrated employment, Pre-ETS, integration in CTE, creating accessible opportunities for employment and education/training. Perhaps a connection of inclusive practices and CIE.

    (6) Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?

    YES

    (7) How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?

    Multi agency collaboration and co-sponsored training. They do a great job with this.

  136. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    *I believe that transportation is the biggest issue that we are experiencing in the communities in our geographic region. Until youth with disabilities “age out” of public school, the schools could definitely provide transportation, but I believe that the best practice would be for youth with disabilities to be trained to utilize transportation out in the community. Unfortunately, in many communities there is no public transportation to utilize. But even in communities that have transportation assistance, through government grants, I believe, I see vehicles not being used because of the inability to attract enough drivers to these transportation companies. I hear that the required training to drive for these companies is not compensated by the allotted salaries offered to these drivers. In other words, with the same credentials, drivers can make much more money driving with other companies. TRANSPORTATION IS A REAL CHALLENGE!!!
    *One more very significant challenge, that may be beyond the scope of this question. There are just not enough TWS-VR counselors to adequately handle the caseload of youth with disabilities needed services within our public schools.
    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    *I think that goals should be measurable. In my opinion, goal numbers 1-3 are easily measurable. I do not believe that the subjective “rigor” of goal #4 is measurable. Goal #5 is arguably measurable, but I believe would take an unrealistic amount of effort to measure. Effort that could be focused on helping implement goal numbers 1-3 across our state.
    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    *I believe that the free webinars produced through NTACT have been excellent resources for all stakeholders who take advantage of them. I also find the resources on the NTACT website to be incredibly useful and easily accessible. Especially the evidence-based and promising practices information.
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    *I would appreciate a trainer-of-trainers type workshop series that focused on implementing the evidence-based and promising practices effectively.
    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    *I believe there is a real need to train educators on the evidence-based and promising practices that lead to the most positive post-school outcomes for our youth with disabilities.
    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    *I do not believe I am informed enough to make a contributable comment on this topic.
    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    *Maybe become a physical presence in our communities. I believe that “getting out among the people” is the best way to understand the challenges we face and collaboratively brainstorming ideas to overcome those challenges.

  137. 1. What challenges are you currently experiencing in serving youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who may or may not be in school?
    ● Initiating career planning and development around transition planning for students with significant disabilities at age 14 is not soon enough. There is a need to begin this process during elementary school to better prepare students for future postschool outcomes.
    ● There exists a disconnect between career planning and development and students’ preferences and interests. There is a lack of intentional sequencing of work-based learning experiences to help students to continually refine their interests and preferences.
    ● More emphasis is needed on transition planning that is individualized. Challenges exist to develop goals and activities that are more customized for students.
    ● Special education teachers need more training on workplace competencies, certifications, and have limited knowledge of the expectations of the 21st century workplace.
    ● There remains a disconnect between schools and community service agencies; service agencies are limited with number of staff and large caseloads. This results in the lack of collaboration, familiarity with students and the ability to attend critical transition meetings.
    ● Need for better collaboration between school counselors, special educators, VR, CTE, and families. All are critical partners in the career readiness and planning of students with disabilities.
    ● Challenge in balancing rigorous graduation requirements and providing employment preparation/training opportunities for students with disabilities while in school to prepare for transition.
    2. Do the five primary goals described above accurately represent your current challenges and TA needs and support your State’s goals? If not, what do you suggest we remove, revise, or replace?
    ● Recommend question four to be stated differently.
    i. “SWD receive rigorous academic preparation beginning in elementary school, so they are prepared for success in postsecondary education.”
    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work?
    ● Matrixes on practices
    ● Webinars
    ● Research on effective practices
    ● Predictor Implementation School/District Self-Assessment
    4. What kinds of new TA tools, resources, or materials should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition develop in order to most efficiently and effectively support your State’s work in this area?
    ○ Tool to assist teachers with structuring comprehensive secondary school planning to include academics and career planning.
    ○ Benefits planning information for educators – not to provide benefits planning, but to know it exists and information resources to share with families.
    ○ Role of families, expectations and responsibilities in career planning and development.
    5. Are there any new or emerging TA needs or topic areas that a U.S Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition should consider? If not, are there any current TA areas that could be expanded upon or repositioned to better meet your needs?
    ● Emerging fields in the workforce: what are the jobs of the future and how can students with disabilities be prepared? Students with disabilities are still be trained for jobs that will not exist in the future.
    ● What are the emerging topics within CTE and workforce development that can be more closely aligned with transition programs?
    ● Disability and gender inclusive schools.
    ● Social emotional learning.
    ● Trauma informed practices.

    6. Should a U.S. Department of Education-funded TA Center on transition continue to identify potential intensive TA sites through an application process or should this process be modified? If modified, what do you suggest?
    ● Yes, the current process of providing intensive TA through an application process is effective.

    7. How can a center on transition best support States in their work of improving collaboration and coordination among SEAs, LEAs, SVRAs, CTE, Parent Information and Training Centers, and other relevant agencies and organizations?
    ● Continue to offer annual training (CBI) and TA to state and local cross-disciplinary teams.

  138. I will answer the questions in order:

    1. Many teens and young adults are ‘stuffed’ into programs that do not fit their transition needs. Oftentimes, families are only given one option for 18-22 programming, when in fact other options may be available. In our area, there is little connection between Voc Rehab, Regional Centers and school districts, and participation/collaboration varies widely from district to district (SF Bay Area). Teens who are on a diploma track rarely receive adequate transition assessment and planning, with IEPs typically stating “I will be an , I will go to college, I will get a job” with no consideration of how any of that will happen, and with no consideration as to whether the goals are actually feasible. One IEP I saw last school year had a kid with severe dyscalculia, several other learning challenges, with the desire to go to UC Berkeley to become an astrophysicist, and this was endorsed by his district. He never made it through the first quarter at a community college because his reading comprehension was so low.

    2. No. ‘Find Child’ is still only rarely implemented, with many students receiving learning or other diagnoses late in high school or in college. Districts often ‘kick the can down the road’. They pass the students through classes without the students actually learning anything.

    3. Much of the career-related curriculum in our area is very low-level — making and delivering coffee, or making dog treats to sell at the school fairs, or sorting clothing at Goodwill. These are not viable jobs for many, and for others significantly undersell the student’s abilities (we work with kids who we hope to get into competitive, professional employment). And again — they rarely have anything to do with actual career goals, WIOA or no. And — there is no realistic training for how to be in the workplace — which is why we created our own curriculum.

    3. Absolutely not. Much of the legal action against school districts in the area is because of ‘social promotion’. I had a call today about a student who is 20, and his reading/math levels are at 2nd grade level. He has no learning disabilities other than PTSD. No one has bothered to teach him as he needs to be taught, and now they want to graduate him. He will be in jail in no time as he will not be able to get and keep a job without being able to read.

    4. The State of California dis something very strange a few years ago — they stopped collecting secondary diagnoses in their data, only primary. What this means is that only the current/presenting diagnosis is recorded, which will over time skew the data. For example, a student with autism may be coded as ‘Other Health Impairment’ or ‘Emotionally Disturbed’ because the district believes that is the presenting challenge. However, the underlying issue is autism, which usually requires a very different intervention than ‘Emotionally Disturbed’ because of bi-polar, PTSD, etc. Because of this, our state cannot tell what programs work for with diagnosis, which confabulates the issue of appropriate interventions.

    We really need smart, sophisticated, forward-thinking people driving special education from the top down — in ways that are accessible to all, easier to implement, and have actual outcomes that are tracked. No district that I am aware of actually tracks OUTCOMES — where is the student five or ten years after completion? You will have to ask people who are working with them!

  139. We, meaning we school counseling educators are doing our best to help and achieve many successes. However, the disabled-challenged high school graduate are being ushered into agencies across Arizona, with the promises of help our dear young graduates. I have personally witnessed how many of the graduates, I knew were spending months and years waiting to become gainfully employed, or at least assessed. My advocacy has fallen on deaf ears in Arizona because it remains the status quo, from Arizona agencies, who have no incentive to be held accountable. We desperately need a technological code(s) to help track, find where they go and how long they have been waiting to receive employment, training services. It has reached epidemic portions.

  140. 1. Outside agencies are not providing services as needed, for example, the Regional Center in Kansas City. They do not follow through, offer services, and support families without a considerable struggle. Parents do not know how to maneuver the systems and how to advocate. I have met with families and their KCRO service coordinator and told services they would provide and then there is no follow-through. Individuals who can not direct their services (minors) can not access independent living services supports.
    Transportation. Specifically, students who do not have the support to go and get their permit and drivers license and public transit. I believe it would be beneficial to provide drivers ed to students in high school. To align our VR counselors and other agencies to work more as a team with the schools. There is a need for continued supports after leaving high school without expecting the students to initiate. For example, a student may have a case with VR open, but if they do not follow up, the VR counselor drops the services. Paid internships/apprenticeships related to their career goals for students while in high school. There is a need for more teamwork between school counselors, VR, transition Specialists in the school setting.

    2. Rigor is not a challenge as much as the other items listed.

    3. What kinds of TA tools, resources, or materials developed have been the most useful and relevant to your work? NTACT is an excellent resource, College and Career Competencies, DESE MO Liaisons, Community Transition Team, UMKC Family to Family, and Transition Coalition. These are only a few resources, supports which have been useful and relevant.

    4. A central access area included linkage to services

    5. Providing earlier than 14

    6 Schools are a vital resource to outside agencies services, post-secondary ed, and training — the team approach to working together at an earlier age. Schools are reporting to agencies and services on their struggles when working with Regional Offices, Post Secondary Schools, Independent Living Centers, etc. For example, Creating training for parents to navigate the system of the Regional Office.

  141. We need to have career -oriented vocational centers to assist students with career planning and job placement. A center located in Southeast Michigan would support many students unable to attend MCTI (Michigan Career and Technical Institute) due to distance. These concerns have been expressed by parents who have toured the facility. In addition, we need additional representatives from MRS (Michigan Rehabilitation Services) to expand the Pre-Ets program offering more career experiences and employment opportunities. Schools also need more funding to provide accessibility to computer-based programs aimed at improving reading, math and technology skills.

    • All of these are great!! More career training and life skill education is needed. Bring things back like home ec and consumer math…Less testing as well. Especially for kids that are not going to transition to college. Make their education revolve around their career paths. If a kid wants to work with animals at a pet store, they don’t need Algebra.

  142. Needs:
    Trained Transition Specialists
    Transition services in the community such as transportation, job training, once student is in the midst of transitioning
    Funding for Non Profit organizations to assist with transition programming

    • Completely agree with above:
      Needs:
      Trained Transition Specialists
      Transition services in the community such as transportation, job training, once student is in the midst of transitioning
      Funding for Non Profit organizations to assist with transition programming

  143. The big picture when it comes to transition services and VRC’s is that they do not have the skills to assist the students they are serving. Their pre-service education lacks content specific to transition. Many IHE’s offer certifications/endorsements. This is where DOE should be redirecting its efforts. Either offer grant monies to state level VR agencies to select VRC’s to get the training or offer more grant monies to students currently enrolled in Master’s level VR training programs to take courses specific to transition. This really is the best way to get the VRC’s skilled and trained to assist students with disabilities.

    • Masters programs in voc rehab are going away in California because they aren’t profitable. We need online training, to.

  144. Yes, we need assistance and high technology to assist our autistic people with the skills they need to move foward. And Training especially in The Work Force.

Comments are closed.