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. ***