An Assessment of Transition Policies and Practices in State VR Agencies

1. An Assessment of Transition Policies and Practices in State VR Agencies Michael Norman The Study Group Inc. David R. Johnson Institute on Community Integration University of Minnesota Secondary Transition State Planning Institute: Building for the Future May 7, 2008

2. Policy Framework for Collaboration • IDEA and the VR Act define transition as “a coordinated set of activities for a student, designed within an outcome-oriented process, that promotes movement from school to postschool activities, including postsecondary education, vocational training, integrated employment (including supported employment), continuing and adult education, adult services independent living, or community participation.” • The Act requires that state VR agencies develop and implement formal interagency agreements with state education agencies. • These interagency agreements must at a minimum provide for: • Consultation and technical assistance to assist education agencies in planning for the transition of students with disabilities to postschool activities. • Transition planning by state VR and education agency personnel for students with disabilities that facilitates the development of their individualized education program (IEP). • Roles and responsibilities of each agency. • Procedures for outreach to and identification of students with disabilities who are in need of transition services.

3. Study Purpose The purpose of the study was to provide the U.S. Department of Education, Rehabilitation Services Administration, with a descriptive national picture of current transition policies and practices among state VR agencies, including the amount and source of resources supporting such practices, and to identify policy issues and promising practices in the provision of transition services. Specifically, the study was to accomplish the following: • Describe and classify state policies and practices for identifying and serving youths with disabilities who are transitioning from school to work; • Describe policies, promising practices, and other factors that facilitate effective collaboration, transition planning, and provision of services; • Identify major obstacles to collaboration and early intervention transition planning; and • Examine the influence of financial management considerations.

4. The Four Phases of the Study • Phase 1: Federal agency interviews and literature review. • Phase 2: National survey to collect standardized descriptive information on transition policies and practices from all 80 state VR agencies. • Phase 3: Case study of promising practices within three states. • Phase 4: Final report development and dissemination.

5. Study Methods • A variety of multi-methods were used to in relation to each of the four phases of the study, i.e., literature reviews, secondary data analysis, interviews, survey, and case-studies. • Respondents included the 80 state VR agencies from the 50 states, District of Columbia, and U.S. territories. • The study began in October 2004 and concluded with the final report submission in June 2007. • Each phase of the study was closely reviewed and approved by the Rehabilitation Services Administration. • In addition to gathering new information via case studies and a national survey, extensive efforts were made to analyze current RSA data (R911), RSA monitoring reports via state plans and cooperative agreements, and other reports and technical documents. Summary data obtained from state agencies in relation to the case-studies and national survey were returned to respondents for further clarification and validation of information prior to publication.

6. National Survey Findings Five study domains of interest: • State and local interagency agreements. • Identification, referral, and application. • Role of VR personnel. • Transition services. • Resources and funding.* *90% response rate obtained.

7. Agency Characteristics • 80% of the VR agencies reported having personnel who have statewide responsibilities for coordinating transition services. • The mean reported case-load for fulltime VR counselors was 108 (range 46-202). • 63% reported having counselors with dedicated case-loads of only transition-aged youth. • 46% reported having counselors co-located within office space in local high schools. • 25% reported having a waiting list as a consequence of order of selection.

8. State and Local Interagency Agreements Most effective policies and practices: • Local interagency agreements are established with LEAs within the state. • Local VR agencies work with LEAs to identify barriers within each organization that may impede the local delivery of transition services. • Local interagency agreements identify the specific roles to be played by VR agency and LEA personnel.

9. State and Local Interagency Agreements Most significant barriers: • The state and local interagency agreements overestimate the capacity of the VR agency to fully implement what is required in these agreements. • Mechanisms are not in place to determine whether procedures, processes, and services specified in the interagency agreement are actually carried out or have achieved their intended impact. • State and local interagency agreements are not specific enough concerning the roles and responsibilities of each agency in addressing transition service needs of students with disabilities.

10. Identification Referral and Application Most effective policies and practices: • The VR agency and LEAs work together to develop procedures for outreach to and identification of transition-aged youth who are of school age but not currently under an IEP – those who have a 504 plan who receive no special education services, or who have dropped out of school. • Local school district personnel have available informational materials that detail VR eligibility, referral, and application procedures. • School records and assessment information are used by VR agencies in making eligibility determinations. Most significant barriers: • Difficulties remain in identifying eligible VR youth who are served under 504 plans or who are currently not enrolled in special education. • LEA personnel do not understand VR practices well enough to make appropriate referrals of transition-aged youth to the state transition agency. • Family involvement is difficult to achieve.

11. Role of VR Personnel Most effective policies and practices: • VR agency personnel actively participate in transition planning meetings. • VR agency personnel provide follow-up to students at their high-school completion to assist eligible transition-aged youth in connecting with postsecondary education, employment, and independent living opportunities. • VR agency personnel work collaboratively with LEAs to identify opportunities for transition-aged youth in work-based training situations. Most significant barriers: • LEA staff have a limited understanding of the purpose of the state VR agency, eligibility requirements, application procedures, and the scope of services that may be provided. • VR agency financial resources are limited, making it difficult for agency personnel to participate in transition planning meetings. • Time and resources are not available to support the continuing education and professional development of VR agency personnel focused on the service needs of transition-aged youth.

12. Transition Services Most effective policies and practices: • IEP/transition plan and individualized plan for employment (IPE) are coordinated before the student completes high school. • VR agency personnel provide career counseling and guidance services to eligible youth who are still attending high school. • VR agency personnel actively build rapport and personally encourage eligible transition-aged youth in their efforts at school and in work experience activities. Most significant barriers: • LEAs do not effectively engage VR agency personnel in the planning and provision of transition services. • It is difficult for VR to pay for specific vocational services while the young person is still attending high school. • Parent and family involvement is difficult to achieve.

13. Resources and Funding Most effective policies and practices:  • The state or local VR agency and LEAs share the costs of transition services, such as assessment, community-based work experiences, and job-coaching while the student is still in school. • The state has a mechanism for tracking the funds expended on transition-aged youth. • Third party agreements are used by the VR agency and LEAs to support the planning and delivery of transition services. Most significant barriers: • The VR agency has insufficient funds to provide transition services for all eligible transition-aged youth in the state. • The VR agency has insufficient funds available to participate in transition planning meetings. • VR agency and local school district special education policies make it difficult to coordinate services and share the costs of programs.

14. Case Study of State VR Agency Policies and Practices Sites visited: • Alabama Department of Rehabilitation Services. • Colorado Division of Vocational Rehabilitation. • Vermont Division of Vocational Rehabilitation.

15. Similarities in Promising Practices across the Three States Visited • A long-standing commitment to collaboration as a mechanism for improving programs for transition-aged youth. • Strong state leadership and guidance. • A framework for collaboration through state and local interagency agreements and through clearly defined roles and responsibilities. • Program monitoring and evaluation. • Professional development and technical assistance. • Innovative approaches to problem-solving and program development within each state.

16. Summary Conclusions Transition-Aged Youths The extent to which these youths are receiving collaborative transition services from VR and education or are receiving VR services while they are still in school is not clear. National VR data do not differentiate between transition-aged youths who are in school and those who have dropped out or exited. We found little evidence to support the identification and referral of transition-aged youths who do not have an IEP, such as those on a 504 plan.

17. Summary Conclusions State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies There appear to be two organizational characteristics that consistently support and promote transition programs—visible and articulate state leadership, and strategic assignment of VR personnel. We found consistent evidence of the importance of state leadership at the policy level and the value of state level transition staff with the primary responsibility of coordinating transition efforts. Equally important is the assignment of VR counselors and other personnel to work in support of collaborative transition programs at the local school and community levels. Throughout the site visits, consumers, parents, and school personnel confirmed the significance of the presence, availability, and support of VR personnel in all areas addressed by this study.

18. Summary Conclusions State and Local Interagency Agreements Our site visits confirmed that the utility of interagency agreements increases in proportion to the specificity of the agreement, the infrastructure(s) created, and the degree to which the implementation of the agreement is monitored. Identification, Referral, and Application The communication among VR personnel, school personnel, transition-aged youths, and parents is critical to the appropriate identification, referral, and subsequent applications of VR-eligible youths. Availability of information about VR and visibility of VR personnel in schools and the community are key factors in establishing and maintaining such communication.

19. Summary Conclusions Role of VR Personnel VR personnel are focused on participating in transition planning for eligible youths while they are in school, and providing VR services once the students exit school. However, the agencies we visited demonstrated that VR can take a more active, collaborative role while students are still in school through cooperative funding arrangements and the development of state and local cooperative planning and service delivery efforts.  Transition Services While the most frequently provided VR services to transition-aged youths with disabilities occur near or shortly after school exit, VR agencies value early engagement with eligible youths and coordinated IEP/IPE planning. Moreover, there are examples of agencies, such as those participating in the site visits, which provide eligible students with community-based vocational assessment, training, and paid work experiences while they are in school.

20. Summary Conclusions Resources and Funding The variance in expenditures and average costs associated with VR services across state agencies, including the agencies we visited, makes resource and funding comparisons difficult. The majority of agencies believe that current funding levels are insufficient to fully support required transition activities. Even so, few agencies use cost-shared positions with educational agencies to expand transition services. Alabama and Colorado, however, demonstrated that jointly-funded positions can and do benefit participating VR and education agencies, as well as transition-aged youths and their families. Similarly, Vermont used cooperative planning and service delivery with multiple partners to expand its available transition resources.

21. Summary Conclusions Promising Practices A number of state VR agencies are engaged in promising practices that support transition-aged youths and their families. These practices are based on the varied needs and circumstances of the agencies involved. Many are focused on allowing youths with disabilities access to community-based vocational assessment, training, and work experiences known to enhance post-school outcomes. Through fiscal and programmatic collaboration, VR, education, and related agencies are able to provide transition experiences for youths that would not be available from any single agency.

22. Policy Recommendations • Promote state and local interagency agreements as a strategy for enhancing the collaboration between VR and special education programs in supporting the transition of youth with disabilities. • Strengthen state and local interagency collaboration. • Strengthen information, identification, and referral procedures. • Strengthen pre-service and continuing education programs for VR personnel. • Establish more comprehensive and integrated state systems between VR and education systems. • Support the collection and systemic use of postschool follow-up information in planning and policy development.

23. Thank You! For further information, visit: www.vrtransitionstudy.org