Collaboration to Promote Self Determination
Advancing Economic Opportunities for Citizens with Significant Disabilities
February 10, 2012
U.S. Senator Tom Harkin
Chairman
Senate Committee on
Health, Education, Labor & Pensions (HELP)
United States Senate
SD-428 Dirksen Senate Office Building (Committee Staff)
SH-731 Hart Senate Office Building (Personal Office/Staff)
Washington, DC 20510
U.S. Senator Mike Enzi
Ranking Member
Senate Committee on
Health, Education, Labor & Pensions (HELP)
United States Senate
SD-428 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senators:
The Collaboration to Promote Self-Determination is encouraged to hear reports that the Senate HELP Committee
leadership is working on the development of a package of legislative proposals focused on improving the transition
outcomes of youth with disabilities. Since the inclusion of several strong transition provisions in last summer’s Senate
draft WIA reauthorization package, we are delighted to learn that the Committee is hoping to move forward a package
of bipartisan recommendations related to transition in 2012. Given CPSD’s strong record in the area of transition policy,
we would like to take this opportunity to provide suggestions to the Committee’s leadership as it continues its work in
this critically important policy area.
CPSD’s Recommendations related to the Transition Provisions outlined in the Senate WIA
Reauthorization Bill
Last year’s draft Senate WIA Reauthorization package included several changes aimed at transforming the current
vocational rehabilitation system, with a particular focus on significantly improving the transition outcomes of youth with
significant disabilities. The CPSD wishes to reaffirm its support of several transition reforms outlined last summer,
including but not limited to:





Extension of supported employment services to 24 months for youth with significant disabilities (and CPSD
would advocate for 48 months for youth with the most significant disabilities);
Direct emphasis on the preferred outcomes of competitive integrated employment and post-secondary
education for all youth, including youth with significant disabilities;
Required cooperative agreements among VR and other state agencies critical to the provision of transition,
employment and long-term supports and services to citizens with significant disabilities;
Stronger data collection & reporting requirements attempting to capture more detailed, outcome-oriented data
to better evaluate the effectiveness of the VR system in helping youth with disabilities transitioning into
adulthood complete employment objectives (emphasizing attainment of competitive integrated employment
and stratified by disability type);
Creation of local transition coordinators within the VR system tasked with ensuring the effective delivery of preemployment transition services for youth with significant disabilities and greater linkages between the VR
system and special education;



Targeting of 10% of all state VR resource allotments toward implementation of key transition objectives for
youth with significant disabilities;
Establishment of a National Demonstration on Transition of Youth with Significant Disabilities;
Funding directives to encourage more intensive state focus on the expansion of supported employment services
to youth with significant disabilities most at-risk of being placed in sheltered work or not securing employment
in the generic workforce.
We are deeply moved by the intentional, thoughtful commitment on the part of the Committee’s leadership to invest so
heavily in these concepts and believe that these components collectively would lead to major progress in improving the
outcomes of youth and adults with significant disabilities. We are extremely appreciative of these aspects of the
legislation and want to see them succeed as the Committee has envisioned. Additionally, we would encourage the
Committee to consider addressing two additional areas within its work on a new package of legislative proposals
focused on transition:

Presumption of Eligibility for VR services for all youth with significant disabilities ages 14-26: Specifically, CPSD
respectfully requests the Committee consider improving eligibility provisions in the context of the Rehabilitation
Act to ensure a presumption of eligibility of all youth with disabilities ages 14-26. In particular, legislative
language should prevent determinations of ineligibility, based on inability to benefit in terms of an employment
outcome, without youth first having access to supported or customized job development services for a minimum
period of time). Last year during deliberations over the Senate draft WIA reauthorization package, CPSD
recommended that legislative language around the presumption of eligibility must be strengthened so as to
avoid the perpetual rejection of youth considered the most difficult to place in integrated employment, without
any effort to actually secure such employment for these youth prior to the determination of ineligibility being
made. CPSD believes that a higher standard must be set with regard to VR agencies’ ability to deem an
individual incapable of benefiting in terms of an employment outcome from vocational rehabilitation services
due to the severity of the disability. No case closure and referral to any other option should occur unless
inability to benefit has been properly substantiated through actual attempts to secure competitive
employment for the individual for not less than 24 months. If this is not possible, at a minimum, any legislative
package should change the current legislative provision determining eligibility for VR services to require in
addition to work trials discovery or similar strengths-based supported employment assessments for youth and
young adults with significant disabilities. Work trials are not reliable predictors for predicting the employability
of a person with a significant disability and thus we respectfully request an expanded set of required
methodologies be deployed.

Clarify eligibility for transition services to include ages 14-26 for consistency and to ensure access for the
largest number of youth and young adults with significant disabilities: CPSD strongly urges the Committee to
make sure that any pre-employment transition services and all other VR supports include all youth and young
adults with significant disabilities through the age of 26. State VR agencies currently provide transition supports
in many cases through age 26, and as such any decrease in the age of eligibility for services within Title V of the
WIA reauthorization appears regressive to the status quo. This is a particularly important policy concern for
individuals with significant disabilities who continued to participate in secondary education until the age of 22
and then entered a post-secondary education program utilizing VR funds, because any reduced age limitations
on the use of pre-employment transition services or other VR a supports earlier than age 26 could put many of
CPSD Recommendations to Senate HELP Committee on Transition Legislation (2012)
2
these individuals at great risk of inadvertently being pushed out of integrated outcomes where they are thriving.
In summary, CPSD believes that all youth through age 26 should be presumed to be eligible to receive and have
access to all pre-employment transition services, post-secondary education opportunities and supported
employment services (for a minimum of 24 months).
There were also some technical recommendations that CPSD made last summer that may still have relevance to the
transition legislative package you are currently working on, and we have included a shortened list of these technical
suggestions in the Appendix at the end of this letter.
Why Not Consider the TEAM Legislation – A Worthy Model of Comprehensive Transition
Reform
To address several of the systemic barriers impeding progress for youth and young adults with significant disabilities
transitioning to adulthood, a trio of bills called the Transitioning towards Excellence in Achievement and Mobility
(TEAM) legislation was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on February 10, 2011. Each of the three bills
(including the TEAM-Education Act, H.R. 602; TEAM-Empowerment Act, H.R. 603; and TEAM-Employment Act, H.R. 604)
would strengthen accountability, clarify expectations, expand flexibility and align systems to ensure that publicallyfunded assistance is effectively utilized to support one uniform goal -- ensuring that every youth with a significant
disability has the opportunity, encouragement and support to become gainfully employed in an integrated setting,
pursue a post-secondary education, and contribute to and engage in meaningful ways in typical community settings
once they leave high school.

The TEAM-Education Act (H.R. 602) would amend the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act by requiring
transition components to be included in Individual Education Plans (IEPs) for all IDEA-eligible students at the age of
14, expands the definition of transition services to include customized employment strategies and selfdetermination activities, and clarifies that Local Education Authorities can use discretionary dollars to bring in
transition expertise or contract out transition services.

The TEAM-Empowerment Act (H.R. 603) would amend the Developmental Disabilities Act to establish Transition
Planning and Service Divisions within the State Developmental Disability Authorities, as well as Individual Transition
Plans to advance best outcomes and self-determination. Additionally the bill would increase accountability of these
authorities by providing the Secretary of DHHS through the Commissioner of the Administration on developmental
Disabilities (ADD) the authority to disburse assistance to states which agree to participate.

The TEAM-Employment Act (H.R. 604) would amend the Rehabilitation Act to realign preferred outcomes for
individuals with significant disabilities, and streamlines public funding by requiring the VR systems to actively engage
with other state entities. Additionally, the bill would promote innovation and accountability through demonstration
grants focused on systems reform.
Collectively, these bills represent more than two years of deep policy analysis and thoughtful legislative work in the area
of systems change and comprehensive transition policy reform. Thousands of advocates and leading experts weighed in
and provided feedback that helped shape this monumental legislative package. It seems curious to the CPSD that the
Senate HELP Committee would not consider the many important aspects of these three bills as part of its work in 2012.
CPSD Recommendations to Senate HELP Committee on Transition Legislation (2012)
3
We respectfully request that the Committee consider looking at the TEAM legislative package and try to include as many
of TEAM’s legislative proposals in the Committee’s own package as possible.
Citizens with significant disabilities deserve more in the way of opportunities to live productive, economically selfsufficient, fulfilling lives in fully integrated community settings. We as a country can do better to help support this vision.
The next generation deserves this focused and strong approach and desire a system of supports that promote the
highest expectations of all individuals, regardless of impact of disability. We commend the Committee’s leadership for its
tireless commitment to improving the transition outcomes of youth with disabilities, and we offer our assistance in
supporting your efforts as you move forward in your deliberations.
Sincerely,
APSE
Center for Self-Determination
Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, Inc. (COPAA)
Jay Nolan Community Services
National Association of State Directors of Developmental Disabilities Services
National Disability Institute
National Down Syndrome Congress
National Down Syndrome Society
National Fragile X Foundation
Physician Parent Caregivers
TASH
CPSD Recommendations to Senate HELP Committee on Transition Legislation (2012)
4
APPENDIX
REITERATION OF RECOMMENDED LEGISLATIVE LANGUAGE CHANGES FROM
2011 SENATE DRAFT WIA REAUTHORIZATION THAT MAY BE RELEVANT TO
SENATE HELP COMMITTEE’S TRANSITION LEGISLATIVE PACKAGE
Definition of
Customized
Employment
Services
(Sect. 504 (7))
Definition lacks reference to
process of discovery, a vital
component of customized
employment. Also lacks a
distinction of customized
employment as developing jobs
as a result of identifying unmet
needs of employers, as opposed
to jobs that are already on the
open market that individuals
compete for competitively.
Definition of PreEmployment
Transition Services
(Sect. 504 (30)(a))
CPSD suggests a couple of small
technical edits
Age Restrictions
on Transition
Services
Senate draft limits the age
eligibility around the provision of
pre-employment transition
services (Sect. 114), the
demonstration and training
grants (Sect. 303), subminimum
wage placement (Sect 511) and
availability of SES (Sect 623)
Include within the definition a distinction that customized
employment involves, “a negotiated relationship with an
employer that focuses on unmet needs and other specific
value-added services that could be completed by a specific
individual with significant disabilities as opposed to having the
individual compete for an open job in-demand”, and also
make sure to include the “process of discovery” as part of the
eligible activities considered a part of customized
employment”.
Also make sure that Title I of the WIA references this
definition.
Pg. 13, Line 23: Include ‘and customized employment” after
the words “supported employment”
Pg, 13, Line 24: strike “or” and replace with “and”
Needs to clarify that pre-employment transition services do
not include sheltered workshops and segregated facilities.
Draft should be revised to allow all youth with significant
disabilities through age 26 to access and exhaust all preemployment transition services, VR services (including but not
limited to at least 24 months of customized or supported
employment), and access to the demonstration grant.
CPSD Recommendations to Senate HELP Committee on Transition Legislation (2012)
5
Eligibility and
Individualized
Employment Plan
(Sect. 102)
Senate language tweaks existing
provision around presumption of
eligibility; CPSD believes that (1)(4) should all include the
strongest language possible
presuming eligibility without
exception. Only in (5) –
Determination of Ineligibility
should reference to the criteria
used in determining ineligibility
be discussed (and in this
provision, there must include the
phrase (with clear and convincing
evidence).
In 102 (a) (2) (B), strike “Prior to determining under this
subsection that an application described in subparagraph (a) is
unable to benefit due to the severity of the individual’s
disability or that the individual is ineligible for vocational
rehabilitation services.” Also add “and customized
employment” after the term “supported employment”.
Must also include in the language that other options other
than trial work experience (internships, volunteerism, after
school work experiences, testimonials of outside supporters,
etc.) can be used to assess the needs and capabilities of an
individual who has applied for eligibility for VR services.
Must also include a Prohibition section that prohibits any
individuals from being deemed ineligible for VR services based
upon diagnosis or perceived severity of disability (again,
without exception)
In 102(a)(3)(a)(ii), strike everything after “individual)”.
State Plans
Sect. 512
Vocational
Rehabilitation
Services (Section
514)
Under (G) Cooperative
Agreement regarding Individuals
eligible for Home and
Community-Based Waiver
Programs (pg. 43, lines 10-19),
last year’s Senate draft WIA
reauthorization included state DD
Councils but not the State I/DD
Authorities (who are responsible
for managing 75% of the $34
billion in waiver funding every
year on behalf of State Medicaid
programs).
Contains list of VR services
In 102(a)(5), after the phrase “is determined not to be eligible
for the services”, add “by clear and convincing evidence”.
Any cooperative agreement initiatives intended to promote
cross-agency systems reform in the provision of transition
supports to youth with significant disabilities should also
include State I/DD Authorities in this memorandum of
understanding.
Add “financial literacy activities” under eligible VR services.
CPSD Recommendations to Senate HELP Committee on Transition Legislation (2012)
6