    Special Education: Federal Actions Can Assist States in Improving
    Postsecondary Outcomes for Youth (31-JUL-03, GAO-03-773).

    States receive federal funds under the Individuals with
    Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to help students with
    disabilities reach their postsecondary goals, and various federal
    programs offer services that can assist these youth. However,
    research has documented that youth with disabilities are less
    likely to transition into postsecondary education and employment.
    Congress requested that GAO provide information on (1) the
    proportion of IDEA students completing high school with a diploma
    or alternative credentials, and their postsecondary status; (2)
    the transition problems being reported and state and local
    actions to address them; and (3) the types of transition services
    provided by the vocational rehabilitation, the Workforce
    Investment Act youth, and the Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency
    programs, and the factors affecting participation of IDEA youth.
    -------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
    REPORTNUM:   GAO-03-773
        ACCNO:   A07329
      TITLE:     Special Education: Federal Actions Can Assist States in
    Improving Postsecondary Outcomes for Youth
         DATE:   07/31/2003
      SUBJECT:   Aid for the disabled
    	     Employment of the disabled
    	     Employment or training programs
    	     Federal aid to states
    	     Higher education
    	     Persons with disabilities
    	     Students

    ******************************************************************
    ** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
    ** GAO Product.                                                 **
    **                                                              **
    ** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
    ** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
    ** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
    **                                                              **
    ** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
    ** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
    ** document's contents.                                         **
    **                                                              **
    ******************************************************************
    GAO-03-773

    Report to the Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Health, Education,
    Labor and Pensions, U. S. Senate

    United States General Accounting Office

    GAO

    July 2003 SPECIAL EDUCATION

    Federal Actions Can Assist States in Improving Postsecondary Outcomes for
    Youth

    GAO- 03- 773

    Of all IDEA youth who left high school during the 2000- 01 school year, 57
    percent received a standard diploma and an additional 11 percent received
    an alternative credential. High school completion patterns of IDEA youth
    have remained stable over recent years despite concerns that states*
    increasing use of exit examinations would result in higher dropout rates.
    Students with some types of disabilities were much less likely, however,
    to complete high school with a standard diploma, receiving an alternative
    credential or dropping out instead. IDEA youth without a diploma have some
    options for entering employment or postsecondary education, but national
    data on their post- school status are over a decade old. Twenty- one
    states routinely track students* post- school status, but these data have
    some limitations. While most states used post- school data for program
    improvement purposes such as monitoring service delivery, some officials
    indicated that guidance was needed on how to best collect and use these
    data.

    A variety of transition problems, such as lack of vocational training and
    poor linkages between schools and service providers, have been
    consistently reported by students, parents, and others. While state and
    local educational agencies have taken actions to address some of the
    problems, other problems such as lack of transportation are less likely to
    be addressed at the state level. While state Directors of Special
    Education reported being generally satisfied with assistance provided to
    them by the Department of Education in addressing transition issues, some
    expressed concerns about the timeliness of the federal feedback on their
    state improvement plans and inconsistency in the quality of technical
    assistance provided by the six federal Regional Resource Centers.

    The vocational rehabilitation (VR) program, the Workforce Investment Act
    youth program (WIA), and the Ticket to Work and Self- Sufficiency (Ticket)
    program all offer an array of employment and education- related services
    that can aid some IDEA youth. However, several factors may impede
    participation by the IDEA populations that are eligible for services. The
    lack

    of participation may be explained in part by the insufficient capacity of
    the VR and WIA programs to serve eligible populations requesting services,
    and potential concerns of Ticket participants about losing public
    assistance because of employment income. A general lack of awareness by
    youth and families of these programs may also limit participation. States
    receive federal funds under the Individuals with Disabilities

    Education Act (IDEA) to help students with disabilities reach their
    postsecondary goals, and various federal programs offer

    services that can assist these youth. However, research has documented
    that youth with disabilities are less likely to transition into
    postsecondary

    education and employment. Congress requested that GAO provide information
    on (1) the proportion of IDEA students

    completing high school with a diploma or alternative credentials, and
    their postsecondary status; (2) the transition problems being

    reported and state and local actions to address them; and (3) the types of
    transition services provided by the vocational rehabilitation, the
    Workforce

    Investment Act youth, and the Ticket to Work and Self- Sufficiency
    programs, and the factors affecting participation of IDEA youth.

    GAO recommends that the Department of Education (1) gather and provide
    states with

    information on sound strategies to collect and use postsecondary data, (2)
    develop a plan to provide states with timely feedback and

    consistent quality of technical assistance, and (3) coordinate with other
    federal agencies to provide IDEA students and their families with
    information on federally funded transition services.

    www. gao. gov/ cgi- bin/ getrpt? GAO- 03- 773. To view the full product,
    including the scope and methodology, click on the link above. For more
    information, contact David Bellis at (415) 904- 2272 or bellisd@ gao. gov.
    Highlights of GAO- 03- 773, a report to the Ranking Minority Member,
    Committee on

    Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, U. S. Senate

    July 2003

    SPECIAL EDUCATION

    Federal Actions Can Assist States in Improving Postsecondary Outcomes for
    Youth

    Page i GAO- 03- 773 Special Education Letter 1 Results in Brief 3
    Background 5 A Majority of IDEA Youth Complete High School, but Data on
    Transitions Are Limited 8 Problems Impeding Transition of IDEA Youth into
    Postsecondary Education and Employment Remain Partially Addressed 17 The
    VR, WIA, and Ticket Programs Provide Transition Services, but

    Several Factors May Limit the Number of IDEA Youth Who Use Them 25
    Conclusions 32 Recommendations for Executive Action 33 Agency Comments and
    Our Evaluation 33 Appendix I Scope and Methodology 36

    Survey 36 State Telephone Interviews and Analysis of State Data 36 Site
    Visits 37 Review of National Studies on Transition 38 Analysis of Existing
    Data 38 Appendix II State Data Collection Efforts 40

    Appendix III State Waiting Lists for Vocational Rehabilitation Services in
    Fiscal Year 2001 49

    Appendix IV Youth Eligible to Participate in the Ticket Program as of June
    2003 50

    Appendix V Availability of Medicaid Buy- In to Working People with
    Disabilities as of May 2003 52 Contents

    Page ii GAO- 03- 773 Special Education Appendix VI Comments from the
    Department of Education 53

    Appendix VII Comments from the Department of Labor 55

    Appendix VIII Comments from the Social Security Administration 58

    Appendix IX GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 60 GAO Contacts 60
    Staff Acknowledgments 60 Tables

    Table 1: High School Completion and Dropout Rates by Disability Type,
    2000- 01 School Year 9 Table 2: Problems Reported by Stakeholders in the
    Transition

    Process 18 Table 3: Education*s Response Time as of March 26, 2003, to
    States Submitting Improvement Plans in 2002 23 Table 4: All Youth Ages 14
    to 21 Served by Selected Federal Programs 27 Table 5: Selected Services
    Provided to Youth through the VR Program in Fiscal Year 2001 28 Table 6:
    Selected Services Provided through WIA in Program Year 2001 28 Table 7:
    Site Visit States and Local School Systems 37 Table 8: State Approaches to
    Collecting Data on Postsecondary

    Employment and Education Status of IDEA Youth 40 Table 9: State Methods of
    Collecting Data on Postsecondary Employment and Education Status of IDEA
    Youth 43 Table 10: State Examples of Using Postsecondary Employment and
    Education Status Data 47

    Page iii GAO- 03- 773 Special Education Figures

    Figure 1: Disability Characteristics of IDEA Youth Leaving High School in
    School Year 2000- 01 6 Figure 2: Completion and Dropout Rates for IDEA
    Students from

    1997- 98 to 2000- 01 School Years 11 Figure 3: States That Collect Data on
    IDEA Youth Leaving High School 14 Figure 4: Types of Postsecondary
    Employment and Education Data Available in States 46 Abbreviations

    ADA Americans with Disabilities Act IDEA Individuals with Disabilities
    Education Act IEP individualized education program NCES National Center
    for Education Statistics NLTS National Longitudinal Transition Study NLTS2
    National Longitudinal Transition Study- 2 OSEP Office of Special Education
    Programs RSA Rehabilitation Services Administration SIG State Improvement
    Grant SLIDEA Study of State and Local Implementation and Impact of the

    Individuals with Disabilities Education Act SPeNSE the Study of Personnel
    Needs in Special Education SSA Social Security Administration SSDI Social
    Security Disability Insurance SSI Supplemental Security Income VR
    vocational rehabilitation WIA Workforce Investment Act youth program

    This is a work of the U. S. Government and is not subject to copyright
    protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
    its entirety without further permission from GAO. It may contain
    copyrighted graphics, images or other materials. Permission from the
    copyright holder may be necessary should you wish to reproduce copyrighted
    materials separately from GAO*s product.

    Page 1 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    July 31, 2003 The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy Ranking Minority Member
    Committee on Health, Education,

    Labor and Pensions United States Senate

    Dear Senator Kennedy: In 2003, states received nearly $9 billion for
    assuring that over 6 million children and youth identified as having a
    disability received a free appropriate public education, as required by
    the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). 1 Most youth had
    been identified as having learning disabilities such as dyslexia, with a
    smaller number having some type of emotional, mental, or physical
    impairment. Research has documented that youth with disabilities*
    especially those with some types of disabilities such as emotional
    disturbances* are less likely to transition into postsecondary education
    and employment once they leave high school. In the 1997 Amendments to
    IDEA, Congress required greater state and local accountability for
    improving graduation rates and postsecondary results for youth with
    disabilities. The law directed state education agencies to include youth
    with disabilities in statewide achievement assessments, and to begin
    including a statement of the transition service needs in students*
    individualized education program (IEP) at age 14, in addition to age 16.
    The Department of Education (Education) monitors states* compliance with
    these requirements, as well as provides technical assistance to enhance
    state and local capacity to improve graduation rates and the postsecondary
    employment and education status for youth with disabilities. In addition,
    other federal agencies fund programs that can assist youth with
    disabilities during their transition into the adult world.

    In an effort to better ensure that all students have the necessary
    academic preparation to successfully pursue postsecondary education or
    employment, many states are now requiring that students pass exit
    examinations to graduate from high school with a diploma. However,

    1 The data on the number of children covered under IDEA are for the 2001-
    02 school year, the latest year for which data are available.

    United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548

    Page 2 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    concerns have been raised that states* use of exit examinations will
    result in higher dropout rates for youth with disabilities or issuing
    alternative credentials 2 in lieu of diplomas that may limit youths*
    options for postsecondary education and employment. While federally funded
    transition services are available to help youth with disabilities pursue
    postsecondary options, there are also concerns that many may not be using
    these services. To address these concerns, you asked that we

    provide information on: (1) the proportion of IDEA students completing
    high school with a diploma or alternative credentials, and what is known
    about their postsecondary education and employment outcomes; (2) the types
    of transition problems that have been reported and actions taken by state
    and local education agencies to address them; and (3) the types of
    transition services provided by the vocational rehabilitation (VR)
    program, the Workforce Investment Act youth program (WIA), and the Ticket
    to Work and Self- Sufficiency (Ticket) program, and the factors affecting
    the number of IDEA youth using them.

    To provide this information, we administered and analyzed results from a
    survey to 50 state Directors of Special Education, as well as conducted
    phone interviews with state officials in the 21 states that reported
    routinely collecting data on IDEA students* postsecondary outcomes. We
    also visited 3 states and 6 school districts where we met with state and
    local officials, school administrators, teachers, parents, IDEA students,
    and service providers. 3 In addition, we synthesized the findings of
    nationally available studies on IDEA students* transition experiences,
    interviewed federal officials responsible for programs that can assist
    students during transition, and analyzed program data from federal
    agencies administering these programs. Appendix I explains our methodology
    in more detail.

    We performed our work in accordance with generally accepted government
    auditing standards between June 2002 and June 2003.

    2 Alternative credentials may be issued based on various criteria,
    including completion of an IEP, attendance, or occupational skill
    attainment. 3 We conducted fieldwork in New York, Alabama, and California.
    We selected these states to obtain a mix based on differences in
    geographic location, the size of the IDEA

    population in the state, high school completion patterns, exit examination
    policies for IDEA youth, postsecondary data collection efforts, and state
    monitoring processes, as well as recommendations of experts in transition.

    Page 3 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    State data reported by Education show that in the 2000- 01 school year,
    about 70 percent of IDEA students completed high school with either a
    standard diploma or an alternative credential. However, completion rates
    ranged from 45 percent to 83 percent depending on disability type. The

    high school completion rate was the lowest for youth with emotional
    disturbances and the highest for youth with impairments affecting hearing
    or eyesight. Despite concerns that states* increasing use of exit
    examinations would result in more IDEA youth dropping out of high school,
    high school completion patterns have remained fairly stable, perhaps in
    part, because states have generally offered alternative routes to high
    school completion for youth with disabilities. However, what happens

    to IDEA youth after they leave high school is difficult to determine. Less
    than half of the states routinely collect data on students* employment or
    education status after graduation, and existing data collection efforts
    have limitations. Despite limitations of individual states* efforts, state
    studies taken together show that IDEA youth were much more likely to enter
    employment than postsecondary education or training programs. In
    Wisconsin, for example, 80 percent of IDEA youth reported being employed
    and 47 percent reported attending some type of postsecondary education
    institution 1 year out of high school. 4 While most state officials
    reported using data on IDEA youth postsecondary status for purposes such
    as monitoring service delivery or targeting schools for technical
    assistance, some officials indicated that guidance was needed on how to
    best collect and use these data. Education officials in 2 states, for
    example, were unsure whether their survey questions were appropriate to
    obtain the best information on outcomes, while another state official had
    concerns that local school systems did not have the expertise to use such

    data to improve transition outcomes for IDEA youth. During our site
    visits, students, parents, teachers, and others consistently reported a
    variety of problems that impede youth transition to postsecondary
    education and employment, including poor linkages between schools and
    youth service providers and a lack of community work experience while in
    high school. States and local education agencies have taken various steps
    to address some of the problems, including hiring transition coordinators
    and offering work preparation experiences, such

    as job shadowing opportunities. Some schools, however, have not yet
    benefited from these efforts and continue to experience problems. For 4
    Percentages do not add to 100 since some youth were both employed and in
    postsecondary school. Results in Brief

    Page 4 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    example, a number of schools still rely on special education teachers to
    develop linkages with community service providers according to the Study
    of State and Local Implementation and Impact of the Individuals with

    Disabilities Education Act (SLIIDEA), although teachers indicated during
    our site visits that they often do not have the time or training to do so.
    Further, while research has shown work experience and vocational education
    to be a significant factor in obtaining postsecondary employment with
    higher earnings, findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-
    2 (NLTS2) show that 60 percent of IDEA youth had paid work experience and
    about 24 percent received vocational services. Our

    survey of state Directors of Special Education shows that states have
    developed action plans to increase services such as vocational training,
    and community work experience for IDEA youth. Other significant problems,
    however, are less likely to be addressed because they are not considered
    by state officials to be within the purview of the education system. For
    example, the 3 states we visited did not include transportation problems
    for IDEA youth in their state improvement plans, although it was one of
    the most cited problems by parents and school and state officials.
    Education provides some assistance to states in their efforts to address
    transition problems, and most state Directors of Special Education found
    this assistance useful. For example, states can use Education*s Continuous
    Improvement Monitoring Process to obtain feedback on state improvement
    plans for addressing transition problems, and obtain related technical
    assistance from Education*s Regional Resource Centers for

    Special Education (Regional Resource Centers). State officials expressed
    some concerns, however, about the timeliness of Education*s feedback on
    their state plans and some inconsistency in the quality of assistance

    provided by the Regional Resource Centers. The VR, WIA, and Ticket
    programs all provide similar and complementary services that can ease
    youth transition from high school to postsecondary education and
    employment, but several factors may affect how many IDEA youth use them.
    Services include tutoring and study skills training, job coaching and
    placement, as well as necessary support services such as transportation
    and counseling. However, IDEA youth are not automatically eligible for
    these services. For example, available data

    suggest that about 29 percent of IDEA youth meet Workforce Investment
    Act*s low- income requirement, and about 13 percent of IDEA youth meet
    Ticket*s age and benefit requirements. While not all IDEA youth eligible
    for VR, WIA, or Ticket services may need or want to use them, several
    factors may impede those that do. For example, WIA officials from states
    we visited said that workforce centers often do not have the expertise to

    serve youth with disabilities, and may refer these youth to VR; Education

    Page 5 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    officials report that a number of states currently have waiting lists for
    VR services. The most recent data available from fiscal year 2001 show
    that VR agencies in 25 states had waiting lists for its services that may
    defer access for transitioning youth. Further, youth may not access
    services because they are concerned about losing access to public
    assistance, or are unaware that these federal resources exist. For
    example, while all youth aged 18 or older that qualify for Social Security
    disability benefits are eligible for transition services under the Ticket
    program, less than 1 percent participate, in part, due to concerns that
    employment income may jeopardize their eligibility for other federal and
    state services such as health insurance and subsidized housing according
    to parents and service providers we spoke with. Finally, students,
    parents, and teachers who are responsible for identifying transition
    service needs were generally unaware of the universe of available federal
    transition services and how to access them in the states we visited. While
    most people we talked with were aware of VR services, many were unaware of
    the Ticket program, and knowledge of the Workforce Investment Act
    assistance centers varied widely, even though these programs all serve
    overlapping populations.

    We are making recommendations to Education to help state and local
    education agencies improve transition outcomes for IDEA youth by
    disseminating information on best practices for collecting and using data
    on their postsecondary status, providing more timely and consistent
    services to states seeking assistance, and identifying strategies for
    informing students and families about federal transition resources.

    States that receive IDEA funding must comply with certain requirements for
    special education and related services. These requirements include the
    development of an IEP that spells out the specific special education,

    related services, and supplementary aids and services to be provided to
    each student based on the student*s needs, including transition services
    designed to help the student obtain the skills and experiences to reach
    desired postsecondary goals.

    During the 2000- 01 school year, over 300,000 IDEA youth left high school.
    5 Most youth had been identified as having learning disabilities such as 5
    This includes those students that graduated with a diploma or alternative
    credential, dropped out, died, or aged out. Background

    Page 6 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    dyslexia, with a smaller number having some type of emotional, mental, or
    physical impairment, as shown in figure 1.

    Figure 1: Disability Characteristics of IDEA Youth Leaving High School in
    School Year 2000- 01

    Note: Disability types included in the *other* category are speech or
    language impairments, multiple disabilities, hearing impairments,
    orthopedic impairments, visual impairments, autism, deaf- blindness,
    traumatic brain injury, and other health impairments. They have been
    combined into a single category because each of these disability groups
    represents less than 10 percent of IDEA youth population leaving high
    school.

    In an effort to raise expectations for IDEA youth and to make school
    systems accountable for their performance, IDEA Amendments of 1997
    required that these students be included in state and district
    assessments, to the extent possible. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
    also required school systems to establish annual assessments in order to
    demonstrate that all students, including those with disabilities, made
    academic progress. Although federal law does not mandate that school
    systems tie assessment results to graduation with a standard diploma,
    current law does provide states with the flexibility to implement exit
    examination policies that would require students to pass an exit
    examination in order to graduate with a diploma.

    Education*s Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) provides a number
    of resources to assist state and local education agencies in serving

    12% 13%

    14% 61% Learning disabilities

    Mental retardation Emotional disturbances

    Other Source: GAO analysis of data from the Department of Education,
    Office of Special Education Programs.

    Page 7 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    children and youth with disabilities. One such resource is OSEP*s
    Continuous Improvement Monitoring Process, whereby OSEP provides feedback
    to state education officials on state improvement plans they develop to
    address problems providing education and transition services to IDEA youth
    at the state and local level. Another resource is Education*s six Regional
    Resource Centers for Special Education through which OSEP

    facilitates networking and information sharing among states, and helps
    state and local areas improve education programs by providing technical
    assistance, consultation, and training. In addition, the federal
    government funds other services that may offer

    assistance to IDEA youth during their transition from high school into
    postsecondary education or employment through programs administered by
    agencies such as Education, the Department of Labor (Labor), and the
    Social Security Administration (SSA).

    The Department of Education. Education*s Rehabilitation Services
    Administration provides funds to state VR agencies to help persons with
    disabilities prepare for and engage in gainful employment. The regulations
    implementing the Rehabilitation Act require state VR programs to develop
    an individualized plan for employment for students eligible for vocational
    rehabilitation services before they leave school. Furthermore, for a
    student with a disability who is receiving special education services,
    this plan must be coordinated with the student*s IEP in terms of goals,
    objectives, and services. The Department of Labor. Labor*s Employment and
    Training

    Administration oversees the implementation of the Workforce Investment Act
    of 1998. The Workforce Investment Act promotes partnerships among diverse
    programs and community representatives, including educational
    institutions. For all youth, who are between 14 and 21 years of age, WIA
    includes provisions for preparing them for the transition from high school
    to employment and postsecondary education that may interrelate to the
    transition requirements under IDEA.

    The Social Security Administration. SSA implements the Ticket program,
    established under the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act
    of 1999. The goal of the Ticket program is to enable Social Security
    Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries and disabled or blind
    Supplemental Security Income (SSI) beneficiaries, who are between

    Page 8 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    18 and 64 years of age, to obtain the services necessary to find, enter,
    and retain employment. 6 During the 2000- 01 school year, almost 70
    percent of IDEA youth completed high school with a standard diploma or an
    alternative credential. 7 Completion rates for IDEA youth remained stable
    over recent years despite concerns that states* increasing use of high
    school exit examinations would result in higher dropout rates. IDEA youth
    who leave high school without a standard diploma have some options for
    entering employment or postsecondary education, but national data on their
    postsecondary status are over a decade old. Nearly half of the states
    routinely collect such data, but states* data collection systems are
    subject to a number of limitations. Most states used these data for
    purposes such as monitoring or improving programs that serve IDEA youth,
    but several officials involved with state data collection efforts had
    concerns about whether states were employing the best approaches to
    collecting and using these data.

    During the 2000- 01 school year, 57 percent of IDEA youth completed high
    school with a standard diploma and an additional 11 percent completed high
    school with an alternative credential. Students with some types of
    disabilities were much less likely to complete high school with a standard
    diploma, receiving alternative credentials or dropping out instead. (See

    table 1.) For example, in 2000- 01, about 28 percent of high school
    graduates with mental retardation received an alternative credential
    instead of a diploma, compared with about 11 percent for the overall
    population of IDEA youth. Dropout rates for youth with emotional
    disturbances were generally more than twice as high as for youth with
    other disabilities; more than half of these students dropped out during
    the 2000- 01 school year compared with about one- fourth or less of their
    peers with other disability types.

    6 SSDI is provided to workers who become disabled for as long as they
    cannot work due to their medical condition, and the amount of the benefit
    is based on past earnings. SSI is provided to individuals who can
    demonstrate financial need and have a disability affecting

    their ability to participate in any substantial gainful activity, whether
    or not they have worked in the past.

    7 An OSEP official said that students leaving high school without a
    standard diploma are still eligible to receive special education services
    until they receive a diploma or age out. A Majority of IDEA

    Youth Complete High School, but Data on Transitions Are Limited

    A Majority of IDEA Youth Complete High School with a Diploma, but
    Differences Exist among Disability Types

    Page 9 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    Table 1: High School Completion and Dropout Rates by Disability Type,
    2000- 01 School Year

    Completion rate Disability Diploma Alternative credential

    Total completion

    rate Dropout rate

    All IDEA students 57 11 68 29 Emotional disturbances 39 6 45 53

    Learning disabilities 64 8 71 27 Mental retardation 40 28 68 25 Other
    cognitive disabilities 57 20 77 13

    Speech/ language impairments 64 8 72 26

    Orthopedic impairments 64 11 76 18

    Sensory impairments 69 14 83 14 Other health impairments 68 7 75 23

    Multiple disabilities 48 20 68 17 Source: GAO analysis of data from the
    Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. Notes:
    Total completion rate may not equal the sum of diploma and alternative
    credential rates because of rounding errors.

    Total completion and dropout rates do not add to 100 because a small
    percentage of students aged out of high school or died.

    We found no data source that could be used to compare high school
    completion rates for IDEA and general education students. The National
    Center for Education Statistics (NCES) had data from 33 states on all
    youth who completed high school during the 1999- 2000 school year, as well
    as data from 36 states and the District of Columbia on all youth who
    dropped out during that year. These data show that among the 33 states,
    high school completion rates for all youth ranged from about 63 percent to

    Page 10 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    89 percent. Among 37 states, dropout rates ranged from about 3 percent to
    9 percent. 8 Completion and dropout rates for IDEA youth remained stable
    between the 1997- 98 and 2000- 01 school years. As figure 2 illustrates,
    the rate of IDEA students graduating from high school over that time
    period with a standard diploma or completing high school with an
    alternative credential fluctuated between 67 percent and 69 percent, while
    the dropout rate remained at 29 percent in the latter 3 school years.

    8 Officials from OSEP and NCES cautioned that there are large differences
    in the methodologies used by the two entities to calculate students*
    completion and dropout rates. For example, OSEP*s rate is based on the
    total number of students who left high school in a given year, while NCES*
    s rate is based on the total number of students enrolled in grades 9
    through 12 in a given year. In addition, NCES did not provide national
    totals for

    completion or dropout rates because not all states reported the number of
    dropouts to NCES. Graduation Rates

    Remained Stable Despite States* Use of High School Exit Examinations

    Page 11 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    Figure 2: Completion and Dropout Rates for IDEA Students from 1997- 98 to
    2000- 01 School Years

    Completion and dropout rates among IDEA youth remained stable despite
    states* increasing use of exit examinations for students to graduate from
    high school with a standard diploma. While states* use of exit
    examinations addressed concerns over whether students obtaining a diploma
    are able to demonstrate evidence of academic achievement, it also
    generated concerns that dropout rates will rise among youth unable to pass
    such examinations, particularly among youth with disabilities. A study of
    1998- 99 completion and dropout rates sponsored by Education did not show
    higher dropout rates in states with exit examinations, or among the
    various disability groups. 9 We updated that analysis using

    9 Berry, Hugh and William Halloran, Graduation Exam Requirements and
    Students with Disabilities: A Correlational Study of Disability, Race, and
    Outcomes (Washington, D. C: U. S. Department of Education, Office of
    Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,

    February 2003).

    Percent 0 10

    20 30

    40 50

    60 70

    1997- 1998 1998- 1999 1999- 2000 2000- 2001 School year

    56 11

    31 58

    11 29

    56 11

    29 57

    11 29

    Diploma rate Certificate rate Dropout rate Source: GAO analysis of data
    from the Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs.

    Page 12 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    states* completion and dropout rates from the 2000- 01 school year, and
    found similar results. 10 Despite these study results, the effect of exit
    examinations on IDEA

    graduation rates has not been fully tested because most states have been
    providing IDEA youth with different options, such as exempting them from
    the examinations, modifying the examinations to various extents, or
    offering alternative exit credentials that do not require students to pass
    the

    exit examinations. 11 For example, IDEA students in Georgia can petition
    for an exemption from the state*s exit examination and still receive a
    diploma. New York allows students with disabilities who are unable to pass
    state*s exit examinations to take a modified and less rigorous version.
    Other modifications available to IDEA youth in some states include using
    different scoring criteria or allowing IDEA students to retake the
    examination. In addition, more than half of the states with exit
    examinations also offered alternative credentials. For example, Alabama
    allows IDEA students to obtain an occupational diploma based on completion
    of courses incorporating certain career and technical education standards,
    such as Consumer Mathematics and Employment English in lieu of traditional
    Mathematics and English. A state official from Alabama stated that
    offering such alternative credentials assists the state in raising
    academic standards for all students without increasing IDEA youth*s
    dropout rate.

    IDEA youth completing high school with alternative credentials or dropping
    out do have some opportunities to immediately enter employment. State and
    local officials, as well as employer representatives in states we visited,
    indicated that some employers place higher value on the prospective
    applicant*s job skills, such as willingness to learn and ability to
    interact with others, than on a specific graduation document. For example,
    New York officials from the State Workforce Investment Board

    10 We updated Education*s analysis for all IDEA students, but not for
    individual disability groups. 11 Education*s analysis of 1998- 99
    completion rates showed that the percentage of IDEA youth receiving a
    certificate in states with exit examination requirements was approximately
    16 percent, compared with about 6 percent for states without such
    requirements. We updated that analysis for the 2000- 01 school year and
    found that about 14 percent of IDEA youth in states that have implemented
    the exit examination

    requirement received a certificate compared with about 9 percent of IDEA
    youth in states that did not have such requirement or have not fully
    implemented it. IDEA Youth Transitioning

    from High School without Standard Diplomas Have Some Options for Entering
    Employment or Postsecondary Education

    Page 13 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    and a local Employment and Training Center said that employers would be
    willing to hire youth with disabilities without a standard diploma and
    provide job related training as long as they had the necessary
    communication skills and basic work ethic.

    Options for pursuing postsecondary education include programs focusing on
    vocational education and skills training, as well as academic programs. In
    California, for example, IDEA youth can enter Regional Occupational
    Programs that lead to vocational certificates in a wide range of fields.
    While high school diplomas may not be necessary for such programs, other
    prerequisites, such as entrance examinations, may be required. Community
    colleges are another option for youth wishing to pursue a college degree.
    In many states, community colleges have an open enrollment policy,
    admitting students regardless of high school diploma status. Some
    community colleges, however, may require youth to pass an entrance
    examination to determine if they have the ability to benefit from the
    college*s academic programs. Youth who do not pass the entrance
    examination may enroll in remedial adult education courses to prepare for
    the examination or obtain a high school equivalency degree. Data from
    Education*s National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS),

    showing the proportion of IDEA youth who obtain jobs or pursue
    postsecondary education after high school, are over a decade old. 12
    Education is currently funding NLTS2, but information on the long- term

    transition outcomes of students included in the study is not yet available
    since they are only now beginning to complete high school. 13 These
    national studies are not representative at the state level. However,
    according to our national survey of state Directors of Special Education,
    nearly half of the states routinely collect data on students* transition
    for their own use. 14 (See fig. 3.)

    12 Education funded NLTS in the late 1980s and early 1990s, providing
    information on a nationally representative sample of students ages 13 to
    21 enrolled in special education programs in the 1985- 86 school year. 13
    Education plans to conduct the study until 2010 and release reports
    annually. The study involves a nationally representative sample of special
    education students who were 13 to 16 years old as of December 2000.

    14 In addition, state education officials from Kansas, Maine, and
    Minnesota reported to us that they are in the process of developing and
    implementing a routine data collection system. State Data Showing
    Transition of IDEA Youth

    into Employment and Postsecondary Education Have Limitations

    Page 14 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    Figure 3: States That Collect Data on IDEA Youth Leaving High School

    Costs and funding sources for the data collection efforts varied among
    states. (See app. II, table 8.) To fund their data collection efforts,
    most states used federal funds such as those provided under IDEA, and some

    Source: GAO survey data.

    N. H. Mass. R. I. Conn. N. J. Del. Md.

    Alaska Hawaii

    Vt. Ala. Ariz.

    Ark. Calif. Colo.

    Ga. Idaho

    Ill. Ind. Iowa

    Kans. La.

    Maine Mich. Minn.

    Mo. Mont.

    Nebr. Nev. N. Mex.

    N. Y. N. Dak.

    Okla. Oreg.

    Pa. S. C. S. Dak.

    Tenn. Tex. Utah

    Va. Wash.

    W. Va. Wisc.

    Wyo. Fla. Miss.

    N. C. Ohio

    Ky.

    States without routine data collection efforts States with routine data
    collection efforts

    Page 15 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    states also used state funding. 15 For example, New York is using IDEA
    discretionary funds for a $2.75 million 7- year follow- up study, while
    Florida is spending approximately $400,000 for the state fiscal year 2002-
    03 effort, using primarily general state revenues.

    Despite state efforts to collect information on the postsecondary
    employment and education status of IDEA youth, state methodologies have
    limitations that preclude using the data to represent the status of IDEA
    youth in the state, or decrease the usefulness of the data in other ways.
    (See app. II, table 9 and fig. 4 for information on state methodologies
    and type of data states have available.)

     Selection of students. Ten states did not design their follow- up
    efforts to include a representative sample of IDEA youth. For example,
    Alabama and California collected data only on students in those school
    districts participating in the states* model transition initiatives. In
    addition, approximately half of the states collecting data did not include
    IDEA youth who had dropped out of high school.  Adjusting for nonresponse
    bias. At least 8 states had a response rate of less than 50 percent. For
    example, Texas had a response rate of less than

    12 percent. Moreover, none of the states reported that they conducted
    analyses comparing the characteristics of respondents and nonrespondents
    to identify possible sources of bias in the results.

     Ability to disaggregate data. Six states did not collect information on
    IDEA students* disability type. In addition, 2 states collected
    information on the outcomes of all students without the ability to
    differentiate between outcomes for IDEA youth and their peers.

     Timing and number of student follow- ups. All but 1 state followed up
    within 2 years of students leaving high school to obtain information on
    their immediate transition outcomes. For example, Delaware conducted its
    follow- up after 6 months, while Alabama collected information 1 year

    15 IDEA funds included state discretionary grants and State Improvement
    Grants (SIG). Discretionary funds are awarded to states on the basis of a
    competitive review process. SIGs are provided by Education to assist state
    education agencies and their partners in reforming and improving systems
    for providing educational, early intervention, and transitional services,
    including systems for professional development, technical assistance, and
    dissemination of knowledge about best practices to improve results for
    children with disabilities.

    Page 16 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    after graduation. However, only 8 states collected data at more than one
    point in time to examine students* long- term transition outcomes.

     Type of data available. Only 6 states had data on how many students were
    both employed and attending postsecondary school. These data are necessary
    to determine the overall proportion of IDEA youth transitioning to these
    activities after high school. Only 11 states collected information on
    reasons why some students failed to successfully transition into
    employment or postsecondary education.

    While studies from most of the states with routine data collection
    efforts, by themselves, are of insufficient methodological quality to be
    cited alone, together they show that the majority of IDEA youth were
    working or going to school within a year of leaving high school, and that
    they were more likely to be employed than to be enrolled in postsecondary
    education programs. For example, in Wisconsin, a state with one of the
    more sound approaches to data collection and analysis, 88 percent of IDEA
    youth who left high school between December 1999 and 2000 participated in
    an employment or educational activity 1 year later. Of these youth, 80
    percent reported being employed and 47 percent reported attending some
    type of postsecondary education institution. 16 These results are
    consistent with the national survey findings from the early 1990s. Most
    states that collected data have been using them for purposes such as

    monitoring school districts or targeting schools for technical assistance.
    (See app. II, table 10 for examples of state uses of data.) For example,
    Idaho looked at the transition outcomes of students in order to select
    school districts for focused monitoring, and New York prioritized its
    technical assistance to school districts that appeared to be struggling
    with transition. Nearly one- third of these states, however, did not
    regularly share the results with local school systems.

    Finally, while more than half of the states do not routinely collect data
    on postsecondary employment and education status of IDEA youth, most
    expressed interest in doing so. However, officials familiar with state
    data collection efforts indicated that state and local school systems did
    not always have appropriate guidance on how data could be collected,
    analyzed, and used to improve programs and outcomes for youth with

    16 Percentages do not add to 100 since some youth may have been both
    employed and in school; the results are unweighted.

    Page 17 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    disabilities. For example, officials in 2 states reported that they were
    not certain whether their surveys included appropriate questions related
    to students* postsecondary status. In another state, an official reported
    that local school systems did not have the necessary expertise to use data
    available to them for purposes such as improving programs for IDEA youth.

    A variety of problems that impede IDEA youth transition to postsecondary
    education and employment have been consistently reported by youth,
    parents, teachers, and others. States and local education agencies are
    addressing some of the reported problems related to education and work
    experiences youth receive while in school; however, transportation
    problems are less likely to be addressed at the state and local level.
    State Directors of Special Education are generally satisfied with
    assistance provided to them by Education in addressing transition issues
    at the state and local level, but some expressed concerns about the
    timeliness of federal feedback on their state improvement plans and
    inconsistency in the quality of technical assistance provided by federal
    Regional Resource Centers.

    Discussions with students, parents, teachers, and others during our site
    visits revealed that a variety of transition problems still remain that
    have been consistently reported by these groups in past surveys and
    published studies. Transition problems affecting IDEA youth include those
    related to self- advocacy training and insufficient information about the
    transition

    process. For example, youth responding to a national survey by a youth
    association, 17 reported problems identifying and learning how to ask for
    specific accommodations they need to succeed in school and the workplace.
    In addition, parents we interviewed said they did not have information
    about the spectrum of education and employment service providers that were
    available. Other problems included an absence of linkages to adult service
    providers, insufficient vocational education and work- related experiences
    obtained during high school, and lack of

    17 The survey was conducted by the National Youth Leadership Network
    during 2001- 02 and included responses from 202 youth with disabilities
    between the ages of 16 and 24. Survey respondents came from 34 states and
    the District of Columbia but were not randomly

    selected and survey results cannot be generalized to the national
    population of youth with disabilities. Problems Impeding Transition of
    IDEA

    Yout h i nt o Postsecondary Education and Employment Remain Partially
    Addressed

    Poor Linkages between Schools and Youth Service Providers and Other
    Problems Impeding IDEA Youth Transition Have Been Partially Addressed at
    the State and Local Level

    Page 18 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    transportation after high school to the job site or postsecondary school.
    (See table 2.)

    Table 2: Problems Reported by Stakeholders in the Transition Process
    Transition problem Stakeholders Lack of self- advocacy training Youth

    Insufficient information about transition process Parents Absence of
    linkages between school systems and service providers Teachers

    Lack of vocational education and community work experience Researchers
    Lack of transportation Federal, state, and local

    officials Source: National Youth Leadership Network 2001- 02 Youth Survey,
    site visits, Study of Personnel Needs in Special Education (SPeNSE),
    NLTS2, and our interviews.

    Self- advocacy training. Youth with disabilities responding to a national
    survey by a youth association, reported problems obtaining knowledge about
    their rights under laws like IDEA and the Americans with Disabilities Act
    (ADA) of 1990, 18 and identifying and learning how to ask for specific
    accommodations they need to succeed in school and the workplace. Research
    shows that many youth with disabilities have difficulties developing the
    necessary attitudes and skills to prepare for their lives after
    graduation, but suggest that youth who obtain selfdetermination skills are
    more likely to achieve positive education and employment outcomes. State
    Directors of Special Education in 24 states reported that less than half
    of IDEA students received self- advocacy training while in high school.

    Many states and local education agencies have taken various actions to
    provide and promote self- advocacy training. For example, 3 states passed
    legislation or developed regulations mandating self- advocacy curriculum
    in schools according to our survey of state Directors of Special
    Education, and 44 percent of local education agencies include self-
    advocacy training for IDEA youth in their curriculum according to a
    national survey by Education. 19 While a national survey of personnel
    serving students with

    18 The ADA prohibits discrimination in employment, public services, and
    public accommodations against qualified individuals with disabilities. 19
    SLIIDEA collected transition data in 1999- 2000 from the 50 states and a
    nationally representative sample of districts and schools that serve
    children with disabilities.

    Page 19 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    disabilities 20 shows that less than two thirds of special education
    teachers frequently teach self- determination skills, Directors of Special
    Education in about half of the 50 states we surveyed reported introducing
    programs to train teachers on how to teach self- advocacy skills.

    Transition process. Parents interviewed during our site visits reported
    problems helping their child navigate the transition process as students
    prepare to leave high school for the adult world. Research shows that when
    parents participate in their child*s education, their child improves
    academically and has higher aspirations for school and career development.
    However, parents from our site visits and family support groups said that
    they did not have the necessary information to adequately participate in
    their child*s transition from high school. Parents we interviewed said
    they did not have information about where to go for assistance after high
    school, the spectrum of education and employment service providers that
    were available, and the type and level of support that may be offered by
    providers. Moreover, they were unaware of the ADA or other laws protecting
    their children*s rights, and family support resources available to them in
    the community such as Parent Training and Information Centers. 21 States
    have taken some actions to provide this knowledge to parents.

    Eight states indicated in our survey that they have passed legislation or
    regulations to include parents or advocacy groups in transition planning
    while youth are in high school. 22 In addition, at least three- fourths of
    the states are funding parent centers or other family advocacy groups,
    establishing task forces and workgroups, and providing technical
    assistance to local school systems. Ongoing efforts also exist in over
    half

    20 SPeNSE surveyed personnel from a nationally representative sample of
    districts, intermediate education agencies, and state schools for students
    with vision and hearing impairments. 21 Parent centers are funded by
    Education and serve families of children and young adults with
    disabilities. The centers provide training and information to parents and
    connect children with disabilities to community resources that address
    their needs. Each state has at least one parent center, and states with
    large populations may have more. There are approximately 100 parent
    centers in the United States. 22 IDEA also requires that parents be given
    the opportunity to attend meetings discussing the child*s individualized
    education program, provide consent to any provision of services to the
    child when given the first time, and be informed of the child*s progress
    toward annual goals.

    Page 20 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    of the states to increase parent participation through developing
    culturally diverse transition materials.

    Linkages between schools and service providers. Teachers responding to a
    national survey by Education 23 reported that in the area of IDEA youth
    transition, more than half rarely, if ever, coordinate referrals to adult
    service providers. National data from NLTS show that more than 85 percent
    of IDEA youth received services that were sought after high school, and
    IDEA legislation requires that a student*s IEP include a statement of
    interagency responsibilities or any needed linkages, if appropriate, to
    ensure that IDEA youth will receive the services needed to achieve their
    postsecondary education or career goals. Twenty- one state

    Directors of Special Education reported in our survey that many local
    school systems do not have designated intermediaries to establish such
    linkages, and 18 Directors of Special Education said that their agency
    also had difficulty coordinating with other state agencies outside of the
    school system. Teachers from our site visits cited lack of time and
    knowledge about available service providers as part of the problem.

    All states are taking some action to provide direction and resources for
    improving linkages between schools and service providers. Ten states
    reported in our survey that they passed legislation or regulations
    providing for greater coordination between schools and service providers.
    In addition, according to Education*s survey of state and local education
    areas, while less than half of school districts reported having a
    transition coordinator at each high school, all but 3 states reported
    hiring state transition coordinators who can assist teachers in their
    efforts to link students with providers after high school. All states
    reported providing technical assistance or training to local education
    agencies on interagency coordination, with Connecticut also developing
    policies and procedures for students to access adult services, and Utah
    providing training to other

    state agencies on IDEA transition requirements.

    Vocational education and community work experience. Findings based on
    parent interviews from NLTS2 show that 24 percent of youth received
    vocational services and 60 percent had paid work experiences while in high
    school, despite findings from the SLIIDEA study that about 90 percent of
    high schools reported offering prevocational training and work experience
    to IDEA students. Past research has shown that IDEA 23 SPeNSE.

    Page 21 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    youth who received these services experienced higher rates of successful
    transition. For example, NLTS researchers reported that youth with
    disabilities obtaining vocational education and community work experience
    had been less likely to drop out of school, and achieved greater success
    in obtaining employment with higher earnings. 24 Those conducting more
    recent state and local studies reported similar results. State and local
    education officials from 3 states we visited indicated that school
    districts

    have difficulties offering an appropriate mix of vocational programs that
    reflect the job market demands as well as meet the students* career
    interests.

    States and local education agencies have taken various actions to provide
    and promote vocational education and career preparation opportunities for
    IDEA youth. Nine Directors of Special Education in our state survey said
    that their state had passed legislation or regulations requiring
    vocational education and career preparation for IDEA students, and most
    Directors of Special Education said that they disseminated best practices
    in the area of vocational education and career preparation. Other actions
    taken by half of the states included funding outreach and collaboration
    efforts of local education agencies to create vocational education and
    work opportunities.

    Transportation. Federal, state, and local officials in 3 states we visited
    all said that many youth may not have access to transportation they need
    to pursue employment and postsecondary education. In rural areas, public
    transportation may be very limited, or may not be available during the
    time needed to get to their job site or college. Availability of
    transportation is not always the only issue. One parent told us that using
    public transportation was not feasible because her child suffered from
    seizures. While private providers may be better prepared to serve youth
    with

    disabilities, parents and advocacy groups said that private providers were
    often unreliable and their services were not coordinated with public
    transportation systems. An advocacy official indicated that one reason why
    these providers are unreliable is because they generally operate on a
    priority system that gives medical needs a higher priority than employment
    needs.

    24 NLTS showed that vocational education has a positive impact on both
    education and employment outcomes for the majority of students, while work
    experience has a positive impact on education for all students with
    disabilities and on employment for students with orthopedic or health
    impairments.

    Page 22 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    The 3 states we visited had not addressed transition issues related to the
    lack of reliable transportation in their state improvement plans. 25 State
    education officials said these types of problems are outside their area of
    responsibility. In New York and California, however, some local areas are
    taking initiative to address this problem. In western New York, a
    collaborative endeavor involving 30 agencies provides transportation, as
    well as other services, to youth with disabilities to help them in career
    preparation activities. In California, youth workforce development centers
    work with the Sacramento Regional Transit District to provide

    complementary transit tickets to youth with disabilities so they can come
    to the centers for educational and employment services.

    Over half of state Directors of Special Education reported that federal
    assistance was very helpful in assisting states address transition
    problems, but some stated that the timeliness or consistency of assistance
    could be improved. One of the ways Education provides assistance to states
    is by

    providing feedback on state improvement plans that states develop and use
    to show how they plan to address areas of weakness in implementing IDEA,
    including transition requirements. 26 While 39 state Directors of Special
    Education found this feedback useful, some expressed dissatisfaction over
    Education*s timeliness in providing the feedback. For example, of 21 state
    plans submitted to Education in 2002, only one- fourth received feedback
    within 6 months, and at least another one- fifth did not

    receive formal written feedback for a year or more. (See table 3.) 25 We
    previously reported on federal, state and local actions needed to
    coordinate transportation services, U. S. General Accounting Office,
    Transportation - Disadvantaged Populations: Some Coordination Efforts
    Among Programs Providing Transportation Services, but Obstacles Persist,
    GAO- 03- 697 (Washington D. C.: June 30, 2003).

    26 For more information on Education*s oversight process, see U. S.
    General Accounting Office, Special Education: Clearer Guidance Would
    Enhance Implementation of Federal Disciplinary Provisions, GAO- 03- 550
    (Washington D. C.: May 20, 2003). Education Provides Some

    Assistance to States in Addressing Transition Problems, but Concerns
    Remain about Timeliness and Consistency of Assistance

    Page 23 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    Table 3: Education*s Response Time as of March 26, 2003, to States
    Submitting Improvement Plans in 2002

    State State submission date Federal

    response date Elapsed time in months

    Response received

    Minnesota February- 02 March- 03 14 Illinois January- 02 February- 03 14
    Connecticut February- 02 December- 02 10 Delaware February- 02 October- 02
    8 Idaho April- 02 December- 02 8 Nevada July- 02 January- 03 7 Oklahoma
    July- 02 January- 03 6 Wyoming May- 02 October- 02 4 Virginia October- 02
    February- 03 4 Michigan July- 02 October- 02 3 New Hampshire August- 02
    October- 02 2

    Response pending South Carolina February- 02 Pending 14+ Texas March- 02
    Pending 13+ Oregon June- 02 Pending 9+ North Carolina June- 02 Pending 9+
    Tennessee July- 02 Pending 9+ Rhode Island July- 02 Pending 9+ Kentucky
    July- 02 Pending 9+ Indiana July- 02 Pending 9+ Georgia September- 02
    Pending 7+ Iowa October- 02 Pending 6+ Source: Department of Education,
    Office of Special Education Programs.

    Education does not have a standard response period and has not set a
    performance goal for providing feedback to states on their improvement
    plans. While Education officials stated that they provide extensive
    informal feedback to states prior to issuing a formal written response,
    they also stated that they are taking action to try and expedite the
    agency*s formal written responses. To preclude delays on the formal
    written feedback resulting from the agency*s internal review process,
    Education has developed standard language and written review procedures to
    be used in preparing feedback. According to Education officials, having
    standard language and review procedures will decrease the time necessary

    Page 24 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    to write and review the feedback report. They also hope these actions will
    reduce the response time to states.

    Another way Education provides assistance to states is by funding 6
    Regional Resource Centers that states can use to obtain technical
    assistance for addressing transition issues. 27 Services provided to
    states by the centers include guidance, training, information
    dissemination, assistance with state development of training materials,
    and facilitation of meetings states convene to address problems. Directors
    of Special

    Education in 29 states reported in our survey that assistance obtained
    from the centers was very helpful, but there are some concerns that the
    quality of services was sometimes inconsistent among the centers. One
    center, for example, consistently received high marks from the states in
    that region, while the remaining 5 centers received mixed reviews.

    State and center officials attributed the inconsistent quality of services
    to variation in the expertise available at each center, an observation
    also reported in a previous performance evaluation of the centers. 28 This
    evaluation recommended that Education provide training to alleviate the
    disparity in staff expertise, particularly with regard to transition
    issues. In response to this issue, Education officials said that the
    agency offers periodic professional development opportunities and
    encourages the centers to operate as a network by sharing knowledge and
    expertise. Despite these efforts, however, some states still have concerns
    about service quality and are turning to private consultants to obtain
    help with transition issues.

    27 Education also funds the National Center on Secondary Education and
    Transition to coordinate national resources, offer technical assistance,
    and disseminate information related to secondary education and transition
    for youth with disabilities in order to create opportunities for youth to
    achieve successful futures.

    28 The performance evaluation of the Regional Resource Centers was
    conducted by Education*s Federal Resource Center of Special Education*
    June 2001.

    Page 25 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    The VR, WIA, and Ticket programs all offer services that can aid some IDEA
    youth in their transition to postsecondary education or employment. While
    the federal agencies administering these programs are not required to
    track how many IDEA youth use them, several factors may impede

    participation by the IDEA populations that are eligible for services. One
    factor limiting services under VR and WIA is insufficient program capacity
    to serve all eligible populations requesting services. Another factor
    affecting participation under the Ticket program is family concerns about
    whether finding employment would result in youth losing public assistance.
    A factor that may affect IDEA youth participation in all programs to
    various extents is a general lack of awareness by youth and families that
    these federal resources are available for transition assistance.

    The VR, WIA, and Ticket programs all offer an array of similar and
    complementary education, employment, and support services for certain
    population groups.

    Education services. These services can support youth who are trying to
    complete their high school education as well as those youth furthering
    their education in postsecondary institutions, such as community colleges.
    Services for youth at all education levels can include those that prepare
    them for learning by providing tutoring and study skills training as well
    as providing access to educational programs through tuition support.

    Education services support both out of school youth, as well as those at
    risk of dropping out. We observed a tutoring program in an Alabama school
    district, for example, that used WIA funds to assist high school youth who
    are struggling academically.

    Employment services. These services can assist IDEA youth that are trying
    to obtain a job or obtain job skills necessary to increase potential
    wages. Services for youth in either situation can include those that
    prepare

    them for employment by providing job coaching and training, as well as
    direct placement with an employer. A service provider under the Ticket
    program in New York, for example, said that in addition to employment
    preparation services, they help find jobs for enrollees.

    Support services. These services can assist IDEA youth pursue their
    education and employment goals as well as achieve goals for independent
    living. These services can include mentoring and counseling, childcare,
    and transportation, as well as any other services that might be needed. In

    California, for example, the VR agency has cooperative agreements with
    education agencies to provide support services to youth with disabilities,
    The VR, WIA, and

    Ticket Programs Provide Transition Services, but Several Factors May Limit
    the Number of IDEA Youth Who Use Them The VR, WIA, and Ticket

    Programs Provide a Variety of Education and Employment Transition Services

    Page 26 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    including financial assistance for assistive technology, such as
    wheelchairs and adapted computers, conducting vocational assessments for
    students, and providing information on options for both independent and
    supported living facilities.

    IDEA youth are not automatically eligible for these education, employment,
    and support services, and the VR, WIA, and Ticket programs serve
    populations that are both different and overlapping. Of the approximately
    2 million IDEA youth ages 14 to 21, only some of these youth are eligible
    for these federally funded services.

     Under the VR program, all people with a physical or mental impairment
    are potentially eligible for services, but states may only serve those
    with the most significant disabilities in times of funding constraint. The
    former administrator of Oregon*s VR program said that in the past the
    state was unable to serve some youth with psychiatric disorders due to
    funding constraints.

     WIA primarily limits services to low- income youth that have some type
    of barrier to employment. 29 While disabilities under IDEA may qualify as
    barriers for WIA purposes, available data suggest that only about 29
    percent of IDEA youth meet WIA*s low- income requirement. 30  To qualify
    for the Ticket program, individuals must be at least 18 years old,

    and qualify for disability benefits from SSA. 31 Available data suggest
    that about 13 percent of the IDEA youth population meets Ticket*s age and
    benefit requirements. 32 Education, Labor, and SSA are not required to
    track the number of IDEA

    youth who are enrolled and obtaining transition services provided through
    29 Under WIA, youth are eligible for services if they fall within one or
    more of the following categories: deficit in basic skills, school dropout,
    homeless, runaway, or foster child, pregnant or parent, has disability,
    offender, or requires additional assistance to obtain employment. Income
    qualification can be waived for up to 5 percent of youth in a local area.

    30 To estimate the percentage of IDEA youth eligible for WIA programs, we
    used data reported in the NLTS2 survey on income of IDEA youth*s families.
    31 Benefits are provided under the SSI program and the SSDI program. 32 We
    determined the percentage of IDEA youth eligible for the Ticket program by
    using data provided by SSA on the number of youth ages 18 to 21 receiving
    Social Security and SSI disability benefits.

    Page 27 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    the VR, WIA, and Ticket programs. 33 However, available data for all youth
    show that over 550,000 were enrolled and received services during the time
    frames outlined in table 4.

    Table 4: All Youth Ages 14 to 21 Served by Selected Federal Programs
    Program Time frame Youth served

    VR 10/ 1/ 01- 9/ 30/ 02 175,000 a WIA 7/ 1/ 01- 6/ 31/ 02 376,014 Ticket
    2/ 02- 11/ 02 b 496

    Total 551,510

    Source: The Department of Education*s Rehabilitation Services
    Administration, the Council for State Administrators of Vocational
    Rehabilitation, the Department of Labor*s Employment and Training
    Administration, and the Social Security Administration.

    a The estimate of the number of youth served is based on the proportion of
    youth (ages 14- 21) who exited the VR program in fiscal year 2001. b This
    time period reflects the first 9 months that Ticket was implemented in 13
    states. While federal agencies are not required to collect data on the
    type of

    education, employment, and support services actually provided to IDEA
    youth under the VR, WIA, and Ticket programs, Education and Labor do
    collect information on services provided to all youth ages 14 to 21. 34
    Education data on the approximately 94,000 youth who received services

    and exited the VR program in fiscal year 2001 show that three- fourths of
    youth obtained vocational, medical, and social counseling, and more youth
    obtained employment services than services to further their education or
    training. (See table 5.)

    33 In fiscal year 2002, Education began collecting data on IDEA youth. 34
    SSA does not collect data on services provided to participants in the
    Ticket program.

    Page 28 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    Table 5: Selected Services Provided to Youth through the VR Program in
    Fiscal Year 2001

    Type of service Percent of youth ages 14 to 21 served

    Employment services Job finding services 36 Job placement services 29

    Training services

    Business/ vocational training 12 On- the- job training 8

    Educational services

    Postsecondary educational training 21 Educational training below
    postsecondary level 19

    Support services

    Counseling and guidance a 74 Transportation services 23 Source: GAO
    analysis of data provided by the Department of Education, Rehabilitation
    Services Administration. a Counseling and guidance includes personal
    adjustment counseling, counseling that addresses

    medical, family, or social issues, vocational counseling, and any other
    form of counseling necessary for an individual to achieve an employment
    outcome.

    Labor data on the approximately 80,000 youth who received services and
    exited the WIA program in fiscal year 2001 show that about 40 percent of
    youth obtained employment and education services, but less than onefourth
    received support services. (See table 6.) 35 Table 6: Selected Services
    Provided through WIA in Program Year 2001

    Type of service Percent of youth ages14 to 21 served

    Employment services 41 Summer employment opportunities 50 Educational
    services 38 Support services 18 Leadership development opportunities 15
    Source: GAO analysis of data provided by the Department of Labor. 35 These
    data may be incomplete as the data set had a number of missing records.

    Page 29 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    While IDEA youth vary in their need and desire to use federal transition
    services, there are several factors that may impede their access to them.
    Three factors that may limit IDEA youth participation include (1)
    limitations in program capacity to serve the eligible population seeking
    services, (2) youth and family fears that employment income may jeopardize
    access to other public assistance, and (3) a lack of awareness about the
    availability of the transition resources.

    Program capacity. In regard to program capacity, the VR, WIA, and Ticket
    programs face different issues in serving IDEA youth eligible for their
    services. These problems include a lack of expertise to serve youth with
    disabilities, a lack of resources to serve all those seeking services, and
    unavailability of services in some states. For example:

     Under the VR program, IDEA youth compete with all adults and youth with
    disabilities for services. Education officials report that a number of
    states have waiting lists for VR services. At the end of fiscal year 2001,
    for example, VR agencies had more people seeking services than resources
    to serve them, and about 30,000 people in 25 states were on waiting lists
    for services. (See app. III.) 36 Of this total, Education reported that
    about 20 percent, or about 6,000 individuals, were on a waiting list for
    VR services in Washington state.

     Under WIA, IDEA youth compete with all youth facing some type of barrier
    to employment, and older youth also compete with adults for services under
    the WIA adult program. 37 WIA officials told us that WIA providers
    generally do not have the expertise to serve youth with disabilities, 38
    and in some cases facilities do not have the appropriate physical
    accommodations. In light of these deficiencies, WIA officials told us that
    this population is often referred to VR agencies for assessment and
    services.

     The Ticket program has resources to serve all eligible youth seeking
    services; however, this new program has not yet been implemented in all

    36 Moreover, Education officials informed us that the presence of waiting
    lists might keep additional individuals from seeking VR services. 37 WIA
    does allow local areas to waive income qualification criteria for up to 5
    percent of youth served.

    38 SSA has partnered with Labor to place disability navigators at all WIA
    assistance facilities. The navigators will have expertise in Social
    Security disability programs, disability law, and other relevant issues.
    Lack of Awareness and

    Other Factors May Impede IDEA Youth Participation in Federally Funded
    Transition Services

    Page 30 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    states. SSA plans to complete its rollout of the program to the final 17
    states and the U. S. territories by 2004, which will increase access to
    the program for over half of the approximately 257,000 youth receiving
    assistance from SSA. 39 (See app. IV.)

    Fear of losing public assistance. A second contributing factor may be that
    some youth and families that receive public assistance are afraid that
    employment income will jeopardize their access to other federal and state
    public assistance benefits such as health insurance and subsidized
    housing. SSA reports that less than 1 percent of eligible youth had signed
    up for the Ticket program to increase self- sufficiency. In the 3 states
    we

    visited, SSA officials, school administrators, teachers, advocacy groups,
    and others involved in the transition process said that fear of losing
    federal and state benefits is a common reason why individuals are hesitant
    to participate in federal work incentive programs such as the Ticket
    program. While some of these fears may be unfounded, others are not, and
    working and receiving income can affect youth*s ability to retain services
    such as health insurance benefits through Medicaid. 40 For example, while
    SSA has encouraged states to offer beneficiaries the opportunity to retain
    Medicaid benefits while earning wages, only about half of the states have

    established such policies. (See app. V.) While some programs allow youth
    to earn a certain amount of income and retain benefits, amounts allowed
    under the various assistance programs can differ, and many families are
    not aware of the contingencies. Although youth unable to sustain
    employment can re- enroll in public assistance programs, parents we spoke
    with stated that enrollment in the various programs is a lengthy and
    difficult process that they do not want to repeat. Lack of awareness of
    available federal services. Finally, a third factor

    that may limit IDEA youth participation in federal programs is that many
    youth and families are unaware that they exist. While IDEA legislation
    requires schools to provide youth with transition services and information
    about available transition resources, students, parents, and teachers we
    spoke with in the 3 states visited were generally uninformed about the
    continuum of available federal transition services and how to access them.
    Most of those we talked with were familiar with the VR program and the

    39 As of December 2002, about 244,000 youth between ages 18 to 21 were SSI
    recipients and about 13,000 youth 21 and under were SSDI recipients. 40
    Medicaid is a jointly funded, federal- state entitlement program that
    finances health care coverage for low- income individuals.

    Page 31 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    types of services it provides. 41 However, many were unfamiliar with the
    Ticket program, and familiarity with the services provided through the
    Workforce Investment Act assistance centers varied dramatically within and
    among states. In one California suburban community, a high school we
    visited had a close working relationship with the local assistance center,
    and school administrators, teachers, and students were aware of the
    services available there. However, teachers, parents, and students we
    talked to at an urban New York school were unfamiliar with the assistance
    centers that provide WIA services, even though a center was located only a
    few miles away.

    Education, Labor, and SSA recognize that action is needed to reach out to
    youth and families and tell them about federal resources such as the VR,
    WIA, and Ticket programs. While these agencies have several efforts
    underway to publicize or increase awareness of available resources, these
    efforts may not include information on all federal transition resources,
    or reach youth, families, and teachers involved in developing transition
    plans for youth leaving high school. For example:

     Education*s Regional Resource Center in the Southeast developed a guide
    to inform students and families about available resources, but this guide
    does not include information about WIA services. The guide is available on
    the Web, but there is no consistent distribution process to provide the
    guide to all youth and families in all states served by the center.

     Labor partnered with SSA and other federal agencies to identify more
    than 200 federal programs among 12 federal agencies that serve persons
    with disabilities. A Labor official said that once the report is
    finalized, it will be available to the public, including IDEA youth and
    families; however, this report is primarily targeted to policymakers and
    program officials.

     SSA has several efforts underway to increase awareness of the Ticket
    program among other federal and state agencies, service providers, and
    advocacy groups. While the agency is conducting local outreach using
    benefits planning, assistance, and outreach centers as well as protection

    41 VR agencies are required by law to conduct outreach to special
    education students while they are in high school.

    Page 32 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    and advocacy partners, these efforts do not consistently target youth and
    families through high schools. 42 Youth served under IDEA are not a
    homogeneous population, and

    graduation patterns and postsecondary education and employment status can
    differ significantly among those with physical, sensory, emotional, or
    cognitive disabilities. IDEA requires individualized education programs
    that address needed transition services that recognize the unique
    challenges each youth with a disability must face. These programs can best
    be developed when states and schools have the necessary information to
    evaluate how well existing programs are working to assist youth during and
    after graduation. State education officials increasingly show interest in
    collecting data on what happens to IDEA youth after they leave high
    school, and nearly half of the states voluntarily collect such data. Many
    states, however, are still searching for ways to develop cost- effective
    and sound data collection systems and there is no central information
    point to share alternative methodologies that may be most useful for
    identifying which groups of IDEA youth are behind their peers and whether
    programmatic changes are needed to eliminate performance gaps. In the
    absence of guidance and information on how to collect and use
    postsecondary data, state and local education agencies and schools will
    continue to experience difficulties in evaluating the effectiveness of
    existing programs for students with disabilities, initiating program
    improvements, and targeting resources to areas or groups that need them
    most.

    Although state and local education agencies are taking steps to minimize
    transition problems for youth with disabilities, challenges such as
    developing linkages between schools and community youth service providers
    still remain that need to be addressed both inside and outside of the
    education system. While Education provides some federal resources to help
    state and local education agencies address these problems, the usefulness
    of the assistance may be compromised because of delays and inconsistent
    quality of some services. Some transition challenges are likely to remain
    unless federal assistance is strengthened and used to help states take a
    more holistic approach to dealing with transition issues.

    42 Under the Benefits Planning, Assistance, and Outreach Program, SSA has
    established cooperative agreements with entities across the nation to
    provide benefits counseling and assistance, and conduct ongoing outreach
    efforts to inform beneficiaries of available work

    incentives. SSA also established the Protection and Advocacy for
    Beneficiaries of Social Security Program to serve SSI and SSDI
    beneficiaries who want to work. Conclusions

    Page 33 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    Federal assistance provided under the VR, WIA, and Ticket programs can
    help augment transition services provided by state and local education
    agencies, or fund transportation or other services that are otherwise
    unavailable. While these services are intended to help youth overcome
    barriers to a successful transition, this assistance cannot be provided if

    youth, parents, and education officials are unaware that these services
    exist. In the absence of improved coordination among federal agencies to
    provide these customers with information on the array of available federal
    resources, youth eligible for such services will not be able to use them
    in

    their efforts to achieve a successful education or employment outcome. To
    expand the availability and use of data on the postsecondary employment
    and education status of IDEA youth, we are recommending that Education
    collect and disseminate information to states on sound strategies for
    collecting these data and appropriately using these data for program
    improvement.

    To enhance federal assistance provided to states to help them address
    existing transition problems, we are recommending that Education develop
    an action plan with specific time frames to

     provide states with feedback on state improvement plans to address
    education and transition problems of IDEA youth and

     ensure consistency in the quality of technical assistance provided to
    states by its regional resource centers.

    Finally, to increase awareness of available federal transition services,
    we are recommending that Education take the lead in working with other
    federal agencies to develop strategies for using the federally mandated
    high school transition planning process to provide IDEA youth and their
    families with information about the full complement of federally funded
    transition services.

    We provided a draft of this report to Education, Labor, and SSA officials
    for their review and comment. Agency comments are reprinted in appendixes
    VI, VII, and VIII, respectively. While we made specific recommendations to
    the Department of Education, all agencies agreed with the recommendations
    for executive action and discussed their plans to address them.
    Recommendations for

    Executive Action Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

    Page 34 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    Education plans to take steps to implement our recommendations to provide
    information to states on sound data collection strategies, improve
    feedback and technical assistance to states, and work with other federal
    agencies to provide IDEA youth with information about federal transition
    services. Education noted that its plans and actions will depend on
    legislative changes made to the IDEA and the Rehabilitation Act, and that
    action to implement our recommendations will be taken after
    reauthorization of these laws is completed. Education also cautioned that

    because of variations in the collection and reporting of state data on
    student graduation, dropouts, and exit examination policies, it is
    difficult to draw valid conclusions about high school completion outcomes
    and the effect of exit examinations.

    Labor stated that our findings and recommendations substantiated the
    issues and concerns that it has with regard to transition challenges for
    youth with disabilities. Labor also described the steps it has taken to
    address WIA youth program concerns related to program capacity, lack of
    awareness, and eligibility.

    SSA noted that it would continue to work with Education to provide IDEA
    youth and their families with information about SSA programs, work
    incentives, and employment supports. SSA also cited its planning efforts
    that are aimed at promoting employment and economic self- sufficiency
    involving youth with disabilities.

    Education and SSA also provided technical comments, which we incorporated
    where appropriate.

    We will send copies of this report to the Secretaries of Education and
    Labor, SSA, relevant congressional committees, and other interested
    parties. Copies will be made available to others upon request. In
    addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at
    http:// www. gao. gov.

    Page 35 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    Please contact me at (415) 904- 2272 if you or your staff has any
    questions about this report. Other major contributors to this report are
    listed in appendix IX. Sincerely yours,

    David D. Bellis Director, Education, Workforce,

    and Income Security Issues

    Appendix I: Scope and Methodology Page 36 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    In conducting our work, we administered a mail survey to state Directors
    of Special Education in all states, conducted telephone interviews with
    state officials, and visited 3 states. We also reviewed the findings of
    nationally available studies on transition experiences of students covered
    under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), interviewed
    officials from the U. S. Department of Education (Education), U. S.
    Department of Labor (Labor), and the Social Security Administration (SSA),
    who are responsible for programs that can assist students during
    transition, and analyzed data from these programs. In addition, we
    interviewed disability advocates and national experts from organizations
    such as the National Organization on Disability, Parent Advocacy Coalition
    for Educational Rights, and Council for Exceptional Children, National
    Center on Secondary Education and Transition, and National Association of
    State Directors of Special Education. We performed our work in accordance
    with generally accepted government auditing standards between June 2002
    and June 2003.

    To document state graduation and examination policies pertaining to IDEA
    youth, challenges experienced by these youth during transition, actions
    taken by the states to address these challenges, states* assessments of
    federal resources, as well as to obtain information on state efforts to
    routinely collect data on these students* postsecondary status, we
    conducted a mail survey, sending questionnaires to state Directors of
    Special Education in 50 states. All 50 states responded to our survey. In
    many states, Directors of Special Education forwarded the survey to other
    individuals, such as state transition coordinators or education
    specialists, that they believed to be most knowledgeable about the issues
    covered in the survey. We analyzed the survey data by calculating
    descriptive statistics, as well as performing content analysis of the
    responses to openended survey questions. To obtain information on states*
    efforts to collect data on postsecondary

    employment and education status of IDEA students, we conducted telephone
    interviews with state officials from 21 states who indicated on our survey
    that their states routinely collected these data. We contacted

    individuals in those states that the survey respondents identified as
    being most knowledgeable about data collection efforts in their states,
    such as state education officials or university researchers responsible
    for data collection in the state. To obtain additional information on the
    data collection methodologies used by the states, as well as to learn
    about postsecondary status of IDEA students in those states, we also
    requested Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

    Survey State Telephone Interviews and Analysis of State Data

    Appendix I: Scope and Methodology Page 37 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    all states participating in the telephone interviews provide their survey
    instruments and any published materials or other available information
    reporting students* outcomes.

    To obtain information on states* utilization and assessment of federal
    resources available to assist them in addressing transition problems
    experienced by IDEA youth, we conducted telephone interviews with state
    officials in 11 states. We used our survey results to select states that
    had opposing views on how helpful they believed federal resources were in
    providing assistance to address transition problems.

    To obtain in- depth information on transition experiences of IDEA youth,
    the challenges they are facing in the course of their transition, the
    extent to which federal and other programs are available to serve them,
    and

    actions taken at the state and local level to address existing transition
    challenges, we made site visits to 3 states* Alabama, California, and New
    York. We selected these states to obtain a mix based on differences in
    geographic location, the size of the IDEA population in the state, high
    school completion patterns, exit examination policies for IDEA youth in

    the state, postsecondary data collection efforts, and state monitoring
    processes, as well as recommendations of experts in transition. We visited
    2 local school systems in each state, representing a combination of urban,
    suburban, and rural areas. (See table 7.) In addition, we consulted with
    state officials in helping us select local school systems with exemplary
    transition practices, as well as those that appeared to be struggling in
    the transition area.

    Table 7: Site Visit States and Local School Systems State Local school
    systems

    Alabama Jefferson Auburn

    California Elk GroveSan Francisco Unified

    New York Gowanda Buffalo City

    Source: GAO data.

    On each visit, we interviewed various stakeholders in the transition
    process at the state and local levels. At the state level, we typically
    interviewed Special Education, vocational rehabilitation (VR), and Labor
    officials, as well as members of the state Steering Committees established
    Site Visits

    Appendix I: Scope and Methodology Page 38 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    as part of the federal Continuous Improvement Monitoring Process. 1 At the
    local level, we interviewed school district officials responsible for
    special education services, school administrators and special education
    teachers, transition- age IDEA students and parents, community service
    providers and advocates, and VR, Workforce Investment Act youth program
    (WIA), and SSA officials responsible for local- level implementation of
    the VR program, WIA, and the Ticket to Work and Self- Sufficiency (Ticket)
    program, respectively.

    To obtain information on transition problems as well as state and local
    efforts to address them, we reviewed and summarized the findings of
    nationally available studies that addressed these issues, including the
    Study of State and Local Implementation and Impact of the IDEA, the Study
    of Personnel Needs in Special Education (SPeNSE), the National
    Longitudinal Transition Study- 2, and the National Youth Leadership
    Network 2001- 02 Youth Survey. We used a statistician to evaluate these
    studies for methodological rigor, as well as to determine the extent to
    which these data could be used to offer a nationwide perspective on
    transition problems experienced by IDEA youth and on the actions taken by
    state and local education agencies to address these problems. We
    determined that the results from SPeNSE might be subject to bias since the
    nonresponse evaluation for this study was not available at the time of our
    request. The results of the youth survey presented the views of over 200
    youth but did not reflect a nationally representative perspective because
    respondents were not randomly selected. We included the youth survey in
    our review because it was reported as the only data collection effort in
    the country designed and implemented by youth with disabilities. To
    determine high school completion rates for IDEA students, we

    obtained data collected from the states by the Office of Special Education
    Programs (OSEP) and summarized in Education*s Annual Reports to Congress.
    We used the 22nd and 23rd Annual Reports to obtain data for 1997- 98 and
    1998- 99 school years. We used OSEP- administered Web site (http:// www.
    ideadata. org) to obtain data for 1999- 2000 and 2000- 01 school years. In
    calculating graduation and dropout rates for IDEA youth, we

    relied on the method in use by OSEP. Specifically, OSEP reports what 1 We
    did not interview Steering Committee representatives in California because
    California did not fully participate in the federal monitoring process.
    Review of National Studies on Transition

    Analysis of Existing Data

    Appendix I: Scope and Methodology Page 39 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    percentage of IDEA students leave high school with a standard diploma or
    drop out during a given school year out of the total number of IDEA
    students who leave high school with a standard diploma or a certificate,
    drop out, age out, or die during that year. OSEP does not report the

    certificate rate, but using OSEP*s data, we calculated the rate of youth
    completing with a certificate in the same manner.

    To determine high school completion and dropout rates for all students, we
    looked at an August 2002 published report from the National Center for
    Education Statistics (NCES), presenting rates of students completing
    public school with a standard diploma or an alternative credential and
    dropping out (among states that reported dropouts) for school year 1999-

    2000. These data were collected by NCES for public school completers and
    dropouts through its Common Core of Data system.

    We obtained information on states* exit examination policies from the
    National Center on Secondary Education and Transition and the National
    Center on Education Outcomes. We used that information to update
    Education*s analysis of completion and dropout rates for IDEA students in
    states with and without exit examinations. Education*s analysis did not
    differentiate between states that had exit examination policies in general
    and those that had fully implemented those policies by requiring all
    graduating seniors to participate in the examination in order to graduate.
    When we repeated Education*s analysis, we defined exit examination states
    only as those that had required all graduating seniors to fully
    participate in the exit examination by 2000- 01. These states were:
    Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota,
    Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Ohio, South Carolina, and
    Texas.

    To determine how many youth participated in the VR, WIA, and Ticket
    programs, we analyzed data provided by Education*s Rehabilitation Services
    Administration (RSA), Labor*s Employment and Training Administration, and
    SSA. Because VR participation data only reflected the number of youth
    exited, we obtained from RSA and the Council for State Administrators of
    Vocational Rehabilitation an estimated number of youth enrolled for
    services. We also analyzed data from RSA on types of services

    provided to youth.

    Appendix II: State Data Collection Efforts Page 40 GAO- 03- 773 Special
    Education

    Table 8 shows various entities responsible for collecting data, costs of
    data collection efforts, and funding sources used by 21 states that
    routinely collected data on postsecondary employment and education status
    of IDEA youth.

    Table 8: State Approaches to Collecting Data on Postsecondary Employment
    and Education Status of IDEA Youth Data collectors Cost of effort

    State State or

    local school systems

    Regional Resource Center University

    partner Nonprofit agency Private contractor

    Cost of data collection and analysis Funding source

    Alabama   Respondent did not know Federal State

    Improvement Grant (SIG) funding until 2002; state and Auburn University
    funds

    California  Respondent did not know IDEA and state funds

    Delaware  $5 per student follow- up survey sent (approx.

    $4,020 total cost for following up with the class of

    1999) SIG funds initially; state

    funds beginning in 2003 Florida  Approximately

    $400,000 for the 2002- 03 effort to track about 6 million individuals

    State funds Georgia  Respondent did not

    know Local school system funds used for data

    collection; IDEA funds used for state- level data analysis

    Idaho  Less than $10 per student for 5 years of follow- up ($ 7,900 total
    for following up with the class of 2002)

    IDEA funds Indiana  Approximately

    $75,000 annually for state and district efforts

    IDEA funds Kentucky  Planned Respondent did not

    know State funds

    Appendix II: State Data Collection Efforts

    Appendix II: State Data Collection Efforts Page 41 GAO- 03- 773 Special
    Education

    Data collectors Cost of effort State

    State or local school systems

    Regional Resource Center University

    partner Nonprofit agency Private contractor

    Cost of data collection and analysis Funding source

    Maryland  Respondent did not know Future funding source

    not yet determined Michigan   Estimated $35,000

    for one- time followup with students graduating between December 2000 and
    November 2001 SIG funds

    Missouri  Respondent did not know State and federal

    (IDEA, Vocational, and Title I) funds

    Nebraska  Districts receive $40 per student from the state for

    follow- up IDEA funds

    New York   Approximately $75 per student for each follow- up cycle ($
    2.75 million for a 7- year contract)

    IDEA funds North Dakota  $30,000 annually IDEA funds Ohio    Estimated

    $150,000 annually if the effort is extended to the entire state

    Federal and state funds, and in- kind university contributions

    Texas  $220,000 annually for 4- year study IDEA funds

    Utah  $80,000 for followup with the classes of 1997 and 2000

    IDEA funds Vermont  Respondent did not

    know IDEA and state funds Virginia  $93,000 for onetime follow- up with

    the class of 1999 SIG funds

    Washington   Approximately $71,000 per year IDEA funds

    Appendix II: State Data Collection Efforts Page 42 GAO- 03- 773 Special
    Education

    Data collectors Cost of effort State

    State or local school systems

    Regional Resource Center University

    partner Nonprofit agency Private contractor

    Cost of data collection and analysis Funding source

    Wisconsin   First year of the 5- year contract: $50,000 (for followup
    with one group of students)

    3rd year: $82,000 (for follow- up with two groups of students). The 5 th
    year will also

    include two groups of students.

    IDEA funds for followup during 1 st , 3 rd , and 5 th year of the
    contract.

    State funds provided to districts for one additional follow- up during
    *off years.* Districts must use their own funds for any additional follow-
    ups.

    Source: Information provided by state officials, December 2002 through
    April 2003.

    Table 9 presents various methods used by 21 states to routinely collect
    data on postsecondary employment and education status of IDEA youth. The
    table provides information on characteristics of students and school
    systems that states included in their data collection efforts and the time
    periods at which data were collected.

    Appendix II: State Data Collection Efforts Page 43 GAO- 03- 773 Special
    Education

    Table 9: State Methods of Collecting Data on Postsecondary Employment and
    Education Status of IDEA Youth Students included Data collection times

    State All students IDEA

    youth Includes dropouts

    Includes information on students* disability type School system

    or district participation In- school information

    Number of posthigh

    school followups Points in time when information

    on students* postsecondary status is collected

    Alabama    (Selfidentification) Local school

    systems participating in state transition program (approximately 38
    percent of

    school systems) Information

    from 11 th grade student survey

    One 1 year California   Some districts in Workability

    Program (covering approximately 75 percent of special education students)

    Information from student survey

    Two 1 year 2 years

    Delaware    Full district participation One 6 months

    Florida a    Participation of all students who remain in state after
    they leave school

    N/ A Annually Georgia   Full district

    participation One February/ March after exit

    Idaho  Full district participation Information

    from student exit survey

    Three 1 years 3 years 5 years

    Indiana    Voluntary district participation (approximately 72 percent
    of

    planning districts)

    Information from student exit survey

    One 4 years Kentucky  Planned

    after 2004

    Full district participation Information

    from student exit survey

    One October/ November after exit

    Maryland b  (Until 2003)

     Voluntary district participation Information

    from student exit survey

    One 1 year

    Appendix II: State Data Collection Efforts Page 44 GAO- 03- 773 Special
    Education

    Students included Data collection times State All

    students IDEA youth Includes

    dropouts Includes

    information on students* disability type School system

    or district participation In- school information

    Number of posthigh

    school followups Points in time when information

    on students* postsecondary status is collected

    Michigan    Full district participation One 1 to 2 years

    Missouri c   Full district participation One 6 months

    Nebraska    Voluntary district participation One 1 to 1.5 years

    New York d    Stratified cluster sample; 2000 sample from 74 school
    districts, 2001 sample from 141 school

    districts Information

    from student exit survey

    Three 1 year 3 years 5 years

    North Dakota e    Voluntary district

    participation; full participation beginning in 2003

    Information from student exit survey

    Three 1 year 3 years 5 years

    Ohio f   6 samples in districts served by 1 of the state*s 16 Special
    Education Regional Resource Centers

    Information from student records

    One for each student sample (6 samples total)

    1st study year: 1 and 3 years

    2nd study year: 3 and 5 years

    3rd study year: 1 and 3 years Texas g   Voluntary district

    participation One For class of 1999 (3 years)

    For class of 2001 (1 year)

    Utah    3 representative samples of students drawn from districts

    across the state One or

    two, depending on study

    1st study: class of 1991 at 1 year 2nd study: class of

    1997 at 1 year 3rd study: class of 1997 at 5 years and class of 2001 at 1
    year

    Appendix II: State Data Collection Efforts Page 45 GAO- 03- 773 Special
    Education

    Students included Data collection times State All

    students IDEA youth Includes

    dropouts Includes

    information on students* disability type School system

    or district participation In- school information

    Number of posthigh

    school followups Points in time when information

    on students* postsecondary status is collected

    Vermont  Full district participation Information

    from student exit survey

    One 1 year Virginia    Weighted stratified random

    sample from participating schools (29 percent of schools participate)

    One Class of 1999 at 2 years

    Washington h   Voluntary district participation (approximately 90
    percent of

    districts) Exit

    information from student records

    One 6 months Wisconsin   Representative sample of

    students (20 percent of IDEA students) Exit

    information from student records

    Two (studies conducted every other year)

    1 year 3 years

    Source: Information provided by state officials, December 2002 through
    April 2003. a Florida does not collect data through surveying. Data are
    matched across several administrative

    databases, including: state departments of Education, Corrections,
    Children and Families; state Agency for Workforce Innovation; and the U.
    S. Department of Defense, U. S. Office of Personnel Management, and U. S.
    Postal Service. The follow- up effort does not include students who leave
    the state. b Maryland collects data on all students, not specifically on
    students with disabilities, although it was possible to identify students
    with disabilities for the class of 2002. Beginning with the class of 2003,

    only IDEA students will be included in the follow- up effort. In addition,
    an Anticipated Services Survey is administered to all special education
    students when they leave high school. c Missouri adds the total numbers of
    students who are working and who are attending postsecondary school
    without accounting for those who may be participating in both activities,
    potentially overestimating the successful transition rate. In addition,
    nonresponses are often put into the "other" category, thus boosting the
    response rate. d New York Post School Indicators study is scheduled to
    last for 7 years. Thereafter, some aspects of

    the effort may continue. e North Dakota is planning to drop the 5th year
    of data collection because of a low response rate.

    f Ohio*s current effort is seen as a pilot project. The Ohio Board of
    Education has called for statewide surveying of IDEA students beginning in
    2004. g Texas*s follow- up survey effort in 2002 included both the class
    of 1999 and 2001. The state used

    three different survey versions to shorten the length of each and
    encourage student participation.

    Appendix II: State Data Collection Efforts Page 46 GAO- 03- 773 Special
    Education

    h Washington encourages districts to participate by requiring them to
    submit information on students* postsecondary status in order to quality
    for Local Education Area grants.

    Figure 4 presents the types of data on IDEA youth*s postsecondary
    employment and education status available in 21 states with routine data
    collection efforts.

    Figure 4: Types of Postsecondary Employment and Education Data Available
    in States Other areas

    4- year college/ university Adult services

    Quality of life Sheltered workshop

    Adult education Living situation Employed part- time

    Military Employed

    Employed full- time Tr

    a nsition planning experience

    High school work experience High school experience

    Why not employed or not in postsecondary education

    Employed and enrolled in postsecondary education Other postsecondary
    education Vocational or technical training 2- year college/ community
    college

    Enrolled in college or university Enrolled in postsecondary education

    Overall Education Employment New York

    Source: Information provided by state officials, December 2002 through
    April 2003.

    State Alabama California Delaware Florida Georgia Idaho Indiana Kentucky
    Maryland Michigan Missouri Nebraska

    Texas Ohio

    North Dakota Vermont Utah

    Wisconsin Washington

    Virginia

    Completed postsecondary education program

    Appendix II: State Data Collection Efforts Page 47 GAO- 03- 773 Special
    Education

    Table 10 identifies possible uses of data on IDEA students* postsecondary
    employment and education status, and provides examples from state
    education officials on how data are being used at the state and local
    levels for each data use category identified. Table 10: State Examples of
    Using Postsecondary Employment and Education Status Data

    Type of data use State example Providing regular reports on students*
    outcomes to school systems Washington*s postsecondary outcome survey is
    conducted by a university contractor

    who sends 2 page outcome summaries to each school district participating
    in the student follow- up effort. The summaries include comparisons
    between student outcomes in the district and in the state, as well as
    results disaggregated by gender, race, and disability type.

    Providing feedback to school systems on their performance Florida produces
    annual reports of students* outcomes that are then used to provide

    feedback to school districts and schools on the success of their programs.
    The reports are also used by parents and students in helping them choose
    local programs that show the greatest success.

    Setting baseline for future transition efforts Missouri*s improvement plan
    places a priority on improving postsecondary outcomes for

    students with disabilities. As a consequence, the state will use current
    postsecondary data to set a baseline to measure future progress.

    Monitoring compliance with IDEA requirements and delivery of special
    education services in the state Alabama uses postsecondary outcome data
    for conducing self- assessment and

    developing self- improvement plan as part of the state*s monitoring
    effort. A statewide task force of transition experts and transition
    stakeholders was created to use the outcome data for identifying areas for
    further improvement and implementing the improvement

    plan. Conducting program planning or budgeting at the state level
    Indiana*s Director of the Division of Exceptional Learners uses
    postsecondary outcome data when negotiating the state budget and
    determining state appropriations.

    Rewarding local school systems Kentucky holds schools accountable for
    students* transition from high school, and schools with high rates of
    students experiencing a successful transition outcome may receive
    financial rewards.

    Targeting technical assistance to school districts or schools New York
    redesigned the technical assistance provided by its seven Transition

    Coordination Sites, based in part on data from its postsecondary outcome
    survey. As a result, technical assistance activities were shifted from
    training conferences to more individualized strategic planning with teams
    from individual schools. Data are used to identify struggling school
    districts in order to direct assistance to them.

    Assessing or improving transition programs Virginia has incorporated
    postsecondary outcome data into a study aimed at assessing transition
    services across the state. When completed, the study will include
    responses

    from consumers of transition services (both parents and students),
    transition specialists, and adult service providers. Outcome data will
    also be used in a statewide evaluation of middle and secondary education
    programs for students with disabilities with the goal of improving their
    academic achievement and postsecondary outcomes.

    Conducting monitoring or program planning at the local school system level

    Wisconsin began collecting postsecondary outcome data in response to a
    state statute requiring the reporting of student outcomes. By collecting
    data, school districts not only are able to fulfill this requirement, but
    also identify specific needs and develop their special education plans to
    address those needs.

    Appendix II: State Data Collection Efforts Page 48 GAO- 03- 773 Special
    Education

    Type of data use State example Adding, sustaining, or improving programs
    at the local school system level

    Maryland*s postsecondary follow- up study helps local school systems
    develop more effective transition services that are targeted to addressing
    students* needs. For example, one county found that few students were
    connected with postsecondary education institutions. In response, county
    officials established a transition program that emphasizes linkages with
    community colleges for students while they are still in high school. As a
    result, students ages 18 to 21 who are still attending high school are
    able to attend community college computer and physical education courses
    to help prepare for employment.

    Establishing linkages with adult service providers California*s transition
    program staff are able to reconnect with former students while

    following- up to collect data on their postsecondary status. Students who
    are not participating in productive work or learning activities or who
    report other problems are provided with information on potentially
    beneficial services in the course of the follow- up process.

    Source: GAO analysis of data from interviews with state officials,
    December 2002 through April 2003.

    Appendix III: State Waiting Lists for Vocational Rehabilitation Services
    in Fiscal Year 2001

    Page 49 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    The table below lists the states that, at the end of fiscal year 2001, had
    waiting lists for vocational rehabilitation services because the state did
    not have sufficient funds to serve all individuals who were determined
    eligible for the program.

    State Number of individuals

    Washington 6,245 Wisconsin 5,098 California 3,602 Tennessee 3,166
    Pennsylvania 2,949 Kansas 2,855 Louisiana 2,127 Ohio 1,578 New Jersey
    1,498 Oklahoma 298 Maine 276 Nebraska 135 Kentucky 132 Illinois 51
    Maryland 43 Rhode Island 41 Minnesota 39 Oregon 34 Arkansas 33 Connecticut
    16 Georgia 4 Delaware 4 Michigan 3 Mississippi 1 Idaho 1

    Total 30,229

    Source: GAO analysis of data provided by the Department of Education,
    Rehabilitation Services Administration.

    Appendix III: State Waiting Lists for Vocational Rehabilitation Services
    in Fiscal Year 2001

    Appendix IV: Youth Eligible to Participate in the Ticket Program as of
    June 2003

    Page 50 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    The table below shows the number of youth ages 18 to 21 eligible to
    participate in the first two phases of the Ticket program*s
    implementation. State Number

    Phase one states: February 2002 Arizona 3,480 Colorado 1,837 Delaware 541
    Florida 11,265 Illinois 10,096 Iowa 2,261 Massachusetts 4,427 New York
    12,184 Oklahoma 2,868 Oregon 2,240 South Carolina 2,951 Vermont 516
    Wisconsin 3,999

    Phase one total 58,665 Phase two states: November 2002

    Alaska 417 Arkansas 2,499 Connecticut 1,949 Georgia 5,612 Indiana 4,017
    Kansas 1,847 Kentucky 4,540 Louisiana 5,179 Michigan 7,505 Mississippi
    3,143 Missouri 4,346 Montana 602 Nevada 1,023 New Hampshire 719 New Jersey
    4,187 New Mexico 1,466 North Dakota 341 South Dakota 569

    Appendix IV: Youth Eligible to Participate in the Ticket Program as of
    June 2003

    Appendix IV: Youth Eligible to Participate in the Ticket Program as of
    June 2003

    Page 51 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    State Number

    Tennessee 4,290 Virginia 4,382 District of Columbia 519

    Phase two total 59,152

    Source: GAO analysis of data provided by the Social Security
    Administration. Note: The Social Security Administration plans to
    implement the program in the remaining 17 states and the U. S. territories
    by 2004.

    Appendix V: Availability of Medicaid Buy- In to Working People with
    Disabilities as of May 2003

    Page 52 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    The map below shows which states offer working people with disabilities
    the opportunity to maintain Medicaid benefits while receiving income from
    work. Appendix V: Availability of Medicaid Buy- In

    to Working People with Disabilities as of May 2003

    Source: Social Security Administration.

    N. H. Mass. R. I. Conn. N. J. Del. Md. D. C.

    Alaska Hawaii

    Vt. Ala. Ariz.

    Ark. Calif. Colo.

    Ga. Idaho

    Ill. Ind. Iowa

    Kans. La.

    Maine Mich. Minn.

    Mo. Mont.

    Nebr. Nev. N. Mex.

    N. Y. N. Dak.

    Okla. Oreg.

    Pa. S. C. S. Dak.

    Tenn. Tex. Utah

    Va. Wash.

    W. Va. Wisc.

    Wyo. Fla. Miss.

    N. C. Ohio

    Ky.

    Available Not Available

    Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Education

    Page 53 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education Appendix VI: Comments from the
    Department of Education

    Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Education Page 54 GAO- 03-
    773 Special Education

    Appendix VII: Comments from the Department of Labor

    Page 55 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education Appendix VII: Comments from the
    Department of Labor

    Appendix VII: Comments from the Department of Labor Page 56 GAO- 03- 773
    Special Education

    Appendix VII: Comments from the Department of Labor Page 57 GAO- 03- 773
    Special Education

    Appendix VIII: Comments from the Social Security Administration Page 58
    GAO- 03- 773 Special Education Appendix VIII: Comments from the Social
    Security Administration

    Appendix VIII: Comments from the Social Security Administration Page 59
    GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    Appendix IX: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

    Page 60 GAO- 03- 773 Special Education

    Lacinda Ayers (206) 654- 5591 Tranchau Nguyen (202) 512- 2660

    In addition to those named above, Natalya Bolshun, Julianne Hartman Cutts,
    Molly Laster, and Adam Roye made key contributions to this report. Barbara
    Alsip, Carl Barden, Carolyn Boyce, Stefanie Bzdusek, Patrick DiBattista,
    Behn Kelly, and John Smale also provided key technical assistance.
    Appendix IX: GAO Contacts and Staff

    Acknowledgments GAO Contacts Staff Acknowledgments

    (130158)

    The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm
    of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
    responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of
    the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of
    public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
    analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
    informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO*s commitment to
    good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
    integrity, and reliability.

    The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
    is through the Internet. GAO*s Web site (www. gao. gov) contains abstracts
    and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding
    archive of older products. The Web site features a search engine to help
    you locate documents using key words and phrases. You can print these
    documents in their entirety, including charts and other graphics.

    Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
    correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as *Today*s Reports,* on its
    Web site daily. The list contains links to the full- text document files.
    To have GAO e- mail

    this list to you every afternoon, go to www. gao. gov and select
    *Subscribe to e- mail alerts* under the *Order GAO Products* heading.

    The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
    each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
    Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
    copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
    be sent to: U. S. General Accounting Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM
    Washington, D. C. 20548 To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512- 6000

    TDD: (202) 512- 2537 Fax: (202) 512- 6061

    Contact: Web site: www. gao. gov/ fraudnet/ fraudnet. htm E- mail:
    fraudnet@ gao. gov Automated answering system: (800) 424- 5454 or (202)
    512- 7470 Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@ gao. gov (202) 512-
    4800

    U. S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.
    C. 20548 GAO*s Mission Obtaining Copies of

    GAO Reports and Testimony

    Order by Mail or Phone To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal
    Programs Public Affairs
    *** End of document. ***