|
Cognitive Impairments and the Application
of Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act January
26, 1996
National Council on Disability
1331 F Street NW, Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004-1107
(202) 272-2004 Voice
(202) 272-2074 TT
(202) 272-2022 Fax
The views contained in this report do not necessarily
represent those of the Administration, as this document has not
been subjected to the A-19 Executive Branch review process.
TRANSMITTAL LETTER
January 26, 1995
The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
In a continuing effort to provide you and Members
of Congress with advice and recommendations to further the goals
of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), I am pleased to provide
you with the National Council on Disability's (NCD) latest report,
Cognitive Impairments and the Application of Title I of the Americans
with Disabilities Act.
This report reflects NCD's commitment to and interest
in determining the relationships among ADA, select national policies
and program initiatives, and the career preparation and employment
status of individuals with cognitive impairments. The report provides
an analysis of relevant sections of ADA and related legislation,
a review of government-sponsored evaluations and professional research
in specific areas of labor and education, and a national survey
about individualization practices in transition and supported employment
programs.
NCD looks forward to working with you to ensure that
the promises of ADA are fully realized for all people with disabilities
and their families, including individuals with cognitive impairments.
Sincerely,
Marca Bristo
Chairperson
(This same letter was sent to the President Pro Tempore
of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.)
NATIONAL COUNCIL
ON DISABILITY
MEMBERS AND STAFF
Members
Marca Bristo, Chairperson
John A. Gannon, Vice Chairperson
Yerker Andersson, Ph.D.
Larry Brown, Jr.
John D. Kemp
Ela Yazzie-King
Audrey McCrimon
Bonnie O'Day
Lilliam R. Pollo
Debra Robinson
Shirley W. Ryan
Michael B. Unhjem
Rae E. Unzicker
Hughey Walker
Kate P. Wolters
Staff
Ethel D. Briggs, Executive Director
Speed Davis, Executive Assistant to the Chairperson
Billie Jean Hill, Program Specialist
Jamal Mazrui, Program Specialist
Mark S. Quigley, Public Affairs Specialist and Editor
Brenda Bratton, Executive Secretary
Stacey S. Brown, Staff Assistant
Janice Mack, Administrative Officer
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The National Council on Disability wishes to express
its sincere appreciation to Martin Gould, Ed.D. for his hard work
and valuable suggestions in preparing this report.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Introduction
Overview and Status of ADA
Reasonable Accommodations
Auxiliary Aids and Services
Undue Hardship
The Process of Individualization
Transition and Supported Employment:
A Review
Transition and Supported Employment:
Some Current Individualization Practices
Questionnaire Findings
Interplay Between ADA and Related Federal
Legislation and Initiatives
Conclusions and Recommendations for Action
Recommendations to Policymakers
Recommendations to Business and Industry Leaders
Recommendations to School System Personnel
Recommendations to the Disability Community
Appendix A: NCD Questionnaire
Appendix B: National Council on Disability:
A Brief Description
TABLE
Reasonable Accommodation Responses
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY The history of the United States
has been marked by a constant evolution to open more doors, break
down more barriers, and extend basic human rights to more and more
people. In 1863, a century after the Declaration of Independence,
Abraham Lincoln abolished slavery. Some 60 years later, in 1919,
women won the right to vote. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act said
"no" to discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex,
and religion. Just three years later, the Age Discrimination in
Employment Act (ADEA) barred workplace bias against older Americans.
It has been up to each generation in the United States
to make good the promises of our founders, to extend constitutional
rights to all Americans. In 1989, despite the fears, anxieties,
prejudices, and myths surrounding its development--much like the
misgivings surrounding the abolition of slavery, women's right to
vote, etc.--the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was introduced
in Congress. Preliminary discussions about the potential applicability
of ADA to all people with disabilities began during the 1989 legislative
debates.(1) In striving to eliminate
discrimination against all persons with disabilities, ADA's chief
sponsor made it clear that the Act's definition of an individual
with a disability was meant to be all-encompassing, including people
with developmental disabilities--such as mental retardation.(2)
After the Act's passage in 1990, professional discussion began to
address the potential and practical consequences of ADA's implementation,
particularly with regard to persons with mental disabilities.(3)
The National Council on Disability (NCD) has been
actively involved with ADA since its 1986 recommendation to Congress
for a comprehensive law requiring equal opportunity for individuals
with disabilities. In 1992, NCD sponsored an ADA Watch project to
monitor and evaluate the law's first year of implementation. This
project included the following activities: evaluating the progress
of federal agencies in issuing regulations, providing technical
assistance, and establishing and utilizing enforcement mechanisms;
assessing efforts of the nonprofit sector in furthering the goals
of ADA; tracking ADA litigation and complaints; and identifying
exemplary programs that enhance access, improve employment opportunities,
and otherwise guarantee the civil rights of people with disabilities.
NCD presented its report to the President and Congress in 1993.
Entitled ADA Watch--Year One, the report provided 22 findings,
posed questions for subsequent years' study, and offered 16 recommendations
for continued implementation of ADA.
Based on the findings in that report, NCD commissioned
a study to determine the status of implementation of ADA Title I
in relation to individuals with cognitive impairments. A major area
of focus involves ADA's Title I principle of "reasonable accommodation"
which appears to be currently applied by employers primarily by
removing or modifying structural barriers that confront people with
physical disabilities. Less emphasis, therefore, may be placed on
ADA's applicability to reasonable accommodations in relation to
structural and programmatic barriers that confront people
with cognitive impairments. One likely result of this imbalance
is that reasonable accommodations will not be provided for individuals
with cognitive impairments in their secondary education and employment
training programs, impeding their ability to achieve productivity,
independence, and empowerment during their most productive working
years.
This report reflects NCD's commitment to and interest
in determining the relationships among ADA, select national policies
and program initiatives, and the career preparation and employment
status of individuals with cognitive impairments. The report provides
an analysis of relevant sections of ADA and related legislation;
a review of government-sponsored evaluations and professional research
in specific areas of labor and education and a national survey about
individualization practices in transition and supported employment
programs. Based on the various activities that were conducted for
this report, the following general findings are made:
1. Overall, educational and employment preparation
program outcomes for individuals with disabilities in America are
not promising. For example,
- 36% of all students with disabilities drop out
of high school each year,
- 70% of Hispanics with disabilities drop out of
high school by their sophomore year,
- 43% of youth with disabilities remain unemployed
three to five years after high school, and
- 31% or fewer of Hispanics with disabilities are
actually working.
2. The majority of activity and efforts regarding
compliance with reasonable accommodation requirements of ADA Title
I have focused on architectural modifications made by business and
government for employees with disabilities. Other types of work
site modifications (e.g., programmatic) are less well understood
and applied.
3. There is a well-articulated process of individualization
that can be applied in worksites. In addition there is a bank of
useful accommodation practices that can be used by employers for
employees with cognitive impairments at minimal cost that meet the
reasonable accommodation requirements of ADA Title I.
4. Transition and supported employment programs that
involve individuals with cognitive impairments often incorporate
useful reasonable accommodation strategies at the worksite, including
the provision of
- job restructuring and task modifications;
- co-worker training and on-site problem solving;
- job rescheduling that may involve reduced or flexible
schedules;
- augmentative communication devices;
- assistive communication devices, services, or supports;
and
- systematic on-the-job instruction provided by a
job coach.
5. There are hundreds of federal education, career
preparation, and employment training programs, yet there is a lack
of coordination among those programs, and some citizens (e.g., people
with cognitive impairments) may not have access to them. However,
some of the most recent domestic program initiatives, such as Goals
2000, School-To-Work, and AmeriCorps, have been coordinated with
ADA and hold out the promise of expanding the range of career preparation
and employment opportunities for all youth and young adults with
disabilities.
6. As a civil rights law, ADA is more than just a
means of enforcing compliance with Congress' mandates. It also serves
as a means of coordinating relevant federal and state programs and
operates as a guidance and informational mechanism for business
and government entities that need assistance in providing reasonable
accommodations for people with cognitive impairments in work environments.
INTRODUCTION
Inadequate education and work preparation
for youth and young adults bear both individual and social costs.
The unprepared individual often forgoes significant earnings over
a lifetime while contributing to lagging national productivity growth
and increasing social welfare costs. For youth and young adults
with disabilities, this scenario is all too typical. Youth with
disabilities experience substantial difficulties in completing high
school programs, accessing post-secondary education programs, and
entering meaningful employment. Data from an annual report to Congress
reflected that students with disabilities had a higher dropout rate
(36%) than any other group of young people; fewer than 17% of youth
with disabilities had gained access to post-secondary vocational
programs three to five years following high school completion; approximately
43% of youth with disabilities remained unemployed three to five
years following high school. Many of those who were employed only
worked part-time and many received low wages, and the vast majority
of these receiving no medical insurance coverage or other fringe
benefits. For many youth with disabilities, the movement from school
to adult life has meant sitting idly at home, dependent on family
members for support well into adulthood.(4)
Minority youth with disabilities are particularly at risk. For example,
Hispanic youth were more likely to drop out of school (37%) and
had a higher absenteeism rate than African Americans and Caucasians--an
average of 22 days absent in the most recent year, compared to 17
and 13 days for African Americans and Caucasians, respectively.(5)
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, nearly 7 in 10 Hispanics with
disabilities drop out of high school--usually by sophomore year--compared
to 4 in 10 non-Hispanics with disabilities. Also, according to the
U.S. Census Bureau, fewer than half of Hispanic males with disabilities
and about 17% of Hispanic females with disabilities are in the labor
force, with only 31% of the men and 13% of the women actually working.
Unfortunately, the United States' secondary education
and employment training system has evolved into a multitrack system
that, according to many experts, increasingly fails to serve youth
effectively.(6) In general, current
federal grant programs supporting secondary education do not have
as their goal aiding comprehensive preparation of youth for work
at the state and local levels.(7)
Instead, the federal programs are fragmented and narrowly targeted,
mostly on specific populations of students--such as the poor, people
with disabilities, and those with limited English proficiency--and
vocational programs. Federal-state career training programs hold
out the promise for the inclusion, independence, and empowerment
of individuals in community life. However, unless the nation addresses
some of the inconsistencies and gaps in key human services legislation
and programs, historically disenfranchised classes of people with
disabilities (e.g., those with cognitive impairments) will continue
to be overlooked and underserved.(8)
If the intent of key pieces of intergovernmental
federal legislation (e.g., ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act [IDEA]) is not being fulfilled,
problems and barriers need to be directly addressed before the nation
can expect to see improvements in school dropout rates and decreased
levels of unemployment among young adults with disabilities. A report
involving a nationally representative sample of secondary school
students with disabilities indicates the following: as of 1990 (a)
44% of 12th graders and 67% of students not assigned to grades had
written transition plans; (b) 44.9% of students with mental retardation
had work experience program participation; (c) 56.2% of graduates
with mental retardation needed vocational assistance upon leaving
school; (d) 53.1% of students with mental retardation reported wanting
to become competitively employed and 30.9% to be in supported employment
as their primary transition planning goal; and (e) 74.6% of students
with mental retardation who were out of school less than two years
were unemployed, while 63% of students with mental retardation who
were out of school between two and three to five years were unemployed.(9)
According to a recent survey for the National Organization
on Disability (NOD), about 67% of individuals with disabilities
aged 15 to 64 in the United States are unemployed but want to work
(10) and that 60% of Americans
with disabilities are still not aware of ADA. Additionally, the
survey shows that (a) only 47% of people with disabilities believe
that others treat them as equals; (b) only 35% are satisfied with
their lives in general, compared with 55% of people without disabilities;
(c) the percentage of working-age Americans with disabilities who
are unemployed (67%) is unchanged since 1986, although 79% say that
they want to work; (d) 49% of students and employment trainees with
disabilities expect to encounter job discrimination; and (e) 66%
of students believe that their disability will have--or has had--a
strong negative or somewhat negative effect on their job opportunities.
Data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation
(SIPP) reflect that 30.8% of the reported sample of people aged
21 to 64 with mental retardation, are employed.(11)
Data from an empirical study of the impact of ADA's implementation
from 1990 to 1993 on the employment integration and economic opportunity
status of 4,000 adults with mental retardation suggest a mixed bag
of outcomes: (a) 59% of participants did not change employment,
25% were engaged in more integrated settings, and 16% regressed
into less integrated work settings; (b) average monthly gross incomes
of younger participants showed substantial increases while those
of older ones did not; and (c) almost 67% of participants who were
not employed or were employed in nonintegrated settings in 1990
remained in those settings in 1993.(12)
In short, the report and study results do not reflect the kinds
of positive outcomes America expects from its public education and
employment training systems for individuals with disabilities.
What is the guiding vision for improving the employment
status of America's most vulnerable and underemployed citizens--youth
and young adults with cognitive impairments? This report answers
that question, and others, providing (a) an overview and status
report on ADA; (b) a review of transition and supported employment
initiatives; (c) an analysis of some current individualization practices
in transition and supported employment programs; (d) an analysis
of ADA and related federal legislation and activities; (e) a list
of conclusions and recommendations for future action by NCD; and
(f) an appendix featuring the NCD questionnaire and results. A final
appendix briefly describes NCD.
OVERVIEW
AND STATUS OF ADA The spirit and intent
of ADA are to strike a fair and proper balance between the rights
of people with disabilities and the legitimate concerns of the business
community and other entities covered by the legislation. To strike
that balance, the conceptual framework and language of ADA emphasize
empowerment, independence, and inclusion of individuals with disabilities
in all aspects of community life. By design, ADA is expected to
interface with a host of existing and future laws.
In passing ADA (Public Law 101-336) in 1990, the
Congress estimated that there were 43 million Americans with disabilities
and found that these individuals had been isolated and segregated,
faced restrictions and limitations, occupied an inferior status,
and had been seriously disadvantaged. To remedy these problems,
ADA established a clear and comprehensive prohibition of discrimination
on the basis of disability. ADA defines disability as (a) a physical
or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the
major life activities; (b) a record of such an impairment; or (c)
being regarded as having such an impairment. The Act prohibits discrimination
in employment (Title I); public services including transportation
(Title II); public accommodations (Title III); and telecommunications
(Title IV). Title V covers miscellaneous areas such as technical
assistance.
A major type of discrimination occurs when protected
class members' access to goods and services offered by businesses
and federal and state government agencies is limited. For a number
of reasons--historical circumstances, conventionality of standards,
timing of ADA's phase-in of regulations, relevance to the largest
segment of the target population--the majority of applicable ADA
regulations concern accessibility, focusing on physical or architectural
barriers, such as the width of doorways, the slope of ramps, the
readability of signs, and the location of assistive listening devices.(13)
Sources of data about ADA as a compliance and enforcement
mechanism include (a) U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC) Complaint/Findings (1992-present) and (b) U.S. Department
of Justice (DOJ) Complaint/Findings (1992-present). As of June 30,
1995, EEOC had received 49,974 charges under Title I of ADA.(14)
Of the EEOC total, 173 of those charges have involved complaints
from people with mental retardation; none of the 49,974 charges
were complaints filed by people with autism or traumatic brain injury.
One-quarter of the charges (which were filed between July 26, 1992,
and June 30, 1995) involved reasonable accommodations, 14 of which
involved complaints by people with mental retardation. As of June
30, 1995, DOJ is investigating nearly 950 complaints against units
of state and local government under Title II; more than 1,050 complaints
against public accommodations and commercial facilities under Title
III; and a number of investigations under way under Title I against
public employers. The DOJ complaint/findings data base, however,
does not appear to report statistics disaggregated by disability
or by nature of complaint.
Studies and evaluations of the status of ADA's implementation
have typically involved architectural barriers commonly found in
places of public service and public accommodation.(15)
In these studies, target populations have primarily been individuals
with physical, sensory, or communication impairments. The U.S. Congress
Office of Technology Assessment commissioned two reports related
to psychiatric disabilities and ADA (16)
and published one itself on psychiatric disabilities, employment,
and ADA.(17) While these reports
focused on mental disabilities, disabilities such as mental retardation,
and other cognitive impairments (e.g., autism and traumatic brain
injury) were not considered within the scope of the studies.
Only a few surveys regarding the status of ADA Title
I implementation have focused on the types of accommodations in
America's business workplaces.(18)
In these surveys, accommodations included purchased/made devices;
modified work schedules; removed barriers; modified work stations;
restructured job duties; and provision of individual assistance.
Like the government-commissioned studies and evaluations of ADA
implementation, target populations have basically been people with
physical, sensory, or communication impairments.
From this analysis of federal agency data bases,
relevant studies, evaluations, and surveys, it seems that while
ADA is the broadest and most important piece of federal disability
rights legislation to date, people with cognitive impairments may
be the group least served under the law. A review of the legislative
history of ADA, together with an analysis of ADA studies and surveys,
reveals three related matters of concern.
First, of all ADA provisions that may affect people
with cognitive impairments, the most significant and least understood
involve employment issues, including the definition and application
of "reasonable accommodations," "auxiliary aids and services," and
"undue hardships." Second, there are many accommodations, particularly
in school and at work, that are useful and reasonable.(19)
The difficulty is that unlike many of the accommodations for people
with physical impairments that are quantifiable in inches or hardware,
accommodations for cognitive impairments are more abstract and have
yet to be quantified. Third, there is widespread confusion and unsubstantiated
concern that most reasonable accommodations may be costly.(20)
Despite the initial concerns among employers about
potential increases in the cost of doing business because accommodations
must be tailored to each employee with a disability, mounting evidence
suggests that such costs are minimal. In one study, half of the
accommodations cost little or nothing; another third cost less than
$500.(21) In a second study, 50%
of accommodations cost less than $50, 69% less than $500, and less
than 1% more than $5,000.(22) In
a third study, the cost of accommodations proved to be only $100
or less for 60% of business respondents; for an additional 25%,
the costs ran between $100 and $500, and the average cost of job
accommodations was less than $500.(23)
In addition, according to the Job Accommodation Network (JAN) of
the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities,
employers received an average return of $15 for every dollar they
spent in 1993 to accommodate persons with disabilities.(24)
These data are based on a survey of approximately 548 businesses
that contacted JAN about accommodating their employees. Some 37%
of the survey respondents stated that their organizations had received
benefits worth more than $10,000 from their accommodations, while
60% of the respondents claimed benefits ranging from $1 to $10,000.
People with disabilities are protected under ADA
Title I if they are otherwise qualified to perform the essential
functions of a job.(25) For people
with cognitive impairments, the primary impediments to performing
essential job functions--and thus to obtaining and maintaining employment--are
characteristics or symptoms that affect the ability to think, perceive,
act, or react. The key issue is whether the characteristics or symptoms
in question interfere with a person's ability to do the essential
job functions and, if they do, whether the interference can be managed
through reasonable accommodations, so that the potential for poor
job performance either does not materialize or, is relatively minor.
When such an impairment produces unacceptable job performance, solutions
may be suggested by the employee, a work supervisor, a coworker,
or some voluntary support system.
With respect to all types of cognitive impairments,
the meaning of "otherwise qualified" will depend on the situation
and the unique personal characteristics of the person and the disability.
For example, with people who have traumatic brain injury, which
may result in occasional memory lapses that vary in intensity, the
answer may be more difficult to ascertain or may change with the
circumstances. In any event, the determination of whether a particular
individual can--or will--carry out a job's essential functions must
be made on a case-by-case basis. Once it is determined that an individual
is otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions of a job--or
a work training program--it is then necessary to individualize the
job program.
Reasonable Accommodations
The legal phrase "reasonable accommodation" was first
used with regard to discrimination against people with disabilities
in 1977 in the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare's
regulations to implement Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973. At that time, the phrase reasonable accommodation applied
only to employment practices and was defined only by examples. The
U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) also used the phrase "reasonable
accommodation" in its regulations implementing Section 503 of the
Rehabilitation Act. In that context, reasonable accommodation was
part of the obligation of federal contractors to refrain from discrimination
and to take affirmative action to employ and promote qualified people
with disabilities. DOL regulations specified that contractors "must
make a reasonable accommodation to the physical and mental limitations
of an employee or applicant...." (26)
Section 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, passed a year after
the reasonable accommodation regulations went into effect, permitted
courts to consider the "reasonableness of the cost of any appropriate
alternatives." (27) In its original
sense, then, reasonable accommodation referred only to modifications
on the job that took into account disabilities of individual employees
and applicants in order to increase their opportunities.
Disability discrimination law has used comparable
phrases to convey some of the ideas (e.g., individualization of
programs and practices) that reasonable accommodation embodies.
Perhaps the most litigated of these is the meaning of "related services,"
a requirement in IDEA--formerly known as the Education for All Handicapped
Children Act. To provide free appropriate public education, school
systems receiving IDEA funds are required to provide special education
and related services which may include transportation, corrective
and other supportive services, and assistive technology devices
and services, to name a few. Historically, courts have often ordered,
under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, related services that
parents of children who have disabilities have requested both alone
(28) and in conjunction with IDEA.(29)
To reiterate, reasonable accommodation law has developed
different standards in different societal areas. Federal equal educational
opportunity rights (i.e., through IDEA) require public elementary
and secondary education systems to tailor their programs to the
needs of each student with special education and related service
requirements. In the area of employment, however, because the right
to equal employment opportunity is not the same as the right to
a job, individualization requirements (i.e., for accommodations)
are more limited.
ADA mandates that employers provide reasonable accommodations
to applicants and employees with disabilities.(30)
ADA also lists modifications and adjustments that fall within the
framework of reasonable accommodations.(31)
The phrase reasonable accommodation functionally means providing
or modifying devices, services, or facilities, or changing practices
or procedures in order to match a particular person with a program
or activity. The underlying goal is to identify aspects of the disability
that make it difficult or impossible for the person to perform certain
aspects of the job, and then determine if there are any modifications
or adjustments to the job environment or structure that will enable
the person to perform the job.
In what contexts, for whom, in what ways, and to
what extent should reasonable accommodations be made for youth and
young adults with cognitive impairments? ADA requires employers
to provide reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with
cognitive impairments--as for all other people with disabilities--in
three contexts: in the hiring process, on the job or at the work
site, and in terms of benefits and privileges of employment.(32)
Examples of pre-employment reasonable accommodations may include
(a) changing the timing of a job interview; (b) changing the interview
surroundings; or (c) changing a pre-employment test. Most accommodations
for people with cognitive impairments will occur on the job. Examples
of work site reasonable accommodations include (a) those to help
an employee deal better with stress, such as work environment restructuring,
flexible scheduling, and reasonable time off; (b) those to help
an individual concentrate on job tasks such as job duty restructuring,
providing a private or quiet space for work, and offering job assistance;
and (c) those to orient supervisors and coworkers to make all employees
more sensitive to the needs of people with cognitive impairments.
Concerning reasonable accommodations with respect
to benefits and privileges, ADA requires that employees with cognitive
disabilities receive the same benefits and privileges as other employees
in similar situations. These include health insurance (ADA does
not require a radical departure from standard insurance risk classification
practices, but does require actuarial justification of some exclusions),
vacation and leave policies (particularly as they relate to an employee's
on-the-job performance), salary, holidays, and pensions.
Auxiliary Aids and Services
Under ADA, protected individuals with disabilities
are entitled to certain auxiliary aids and services that would allow
them to participate in jobs or work training program activities
to the same extent as other people do. How this provision applies
to people with cognitive impairments is unclear. The statute divides
auxiliary aids and services into four categories: three categories
pertain to people with hearing and visual impairments, and a fourth
catch-all category includes "other similar services and actions"
but does not specify that they need to be related to hearing and
vision impairments.(33) These regulatory
provisions do not mention cognitive impairments that might affect
communication. While it may be more difficult to conceive of aids
and services that would specifically benefit such people, communication
is an area in which certain aids and services would be beneficial.
For example, people with mental retardation may need assistance
in reading a department store catalog, menus in a restaurant, or
court documents. As a second example, people with traumatic brain
injury may need help in recalling personally identifying information
at a motor vehicle registration center, a fast food counter, or
a local public library. Despite the unclear language of the statute,
the auxiliary aids and services regulatory provision would seem
to apply to all people with disabilities who experience communication
disorders, including certain people with cognitive impairments.
Undue Hardship
ADA's regulations do not make undue hardship a part of the definition
of reasonable accommodation, as Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act does. Instead, undue hardship is a defense to an accusation
that discrimination occurred because a reasonable accommodation
was not made. From ADA's regulations, the analysis used to determine
whether providing an accommodation would create an undue hardship
includes factors such as the size and financial resources of the
employer, the nature of the workplace, and the impact of the accommodation
on the employer's operations. Given the stigma society attaches
to people with cognitive impairments, it is important to note that
in deciding whether an undue hardship would be created employers,
may not rely on other employees' negative opinions about the proposed
accommodations. To deal with this kind of problem, the employer
may find it expedient to take steps to sensitize staff to the needs
of employees who have cognitive impairments. Because of the potential
costs involved, it is unlikely that highly intensive training would
be required for all staff; yet, at a minimum, some type of training
or orientation might be necessary in certain situations.
For example, a Washington federal court held that
a Veterans Administration (VA) hospital failed to make adequate
accommodations for a laundry worker with mental retardation and
emotional problems. As a result, she was discharged due to intolerable
conditions.(34) The court found
that although the hospital made some efforts to accommodate her
interpersonal and emotional problems, they were inadequate. The
supervisor had not complied with the hospital's policy of taking
a "soft approach" to disciplining her, and the hospital had not
followed through on the planned sensitivity training for her coworkers.
These failures rendered attempted accommodations ineffective. The
court also found that the worker was discharged because of her disability.
The taunting from coworkers and the criticism and inappropriate
discipline by the supervisor were targeted at her disabilities.
The court reinstated the worker and ordered the VA hospital to pay
the reasonable costs of staff training, counseling, and rehabilitation.
Decisions about what is or is not an undue hardship will be made
on a case-by-case basis using the criteria set forth in ADA regulations.(35)
The Process of Individualization
The process of individualization involves making
reasonable accommodations, providing auxiliary aids and services,
and determining undue hardships. The process should proceed in a
rational and systematic fashion. If a qualified employee (or trainee)
with a disability identifies the need for an accommodation, the
employer (or trainer) should make a fair attempt to provide an accommodation
that will give the individual an opportunity to be equally effective
in performing a job's essential functions and to enjoy benefits
and privileges equal to those enjoyed by other employees.
Individuals with disabilities are themselves often
in the best position to suggest appropriate accommodations, as they
are most familiar with the strengths and weaknesses they present
with the best ways to adjust jobs, training situations, and environments
to address conditions related to their impairments. If a suitable
accommodation is not apparent, the employer and employee should
engage in what EEOC refers to as an "informal, interactive process"
to determine a reasonable accommodation. This process involves talking
to the individual with the disability about that person's particular
abilities and limitations as they pertain to a job's essential functions
or the benefits or privileges in question. The discussion should
identify the barriers to performance or participation in the benefit
or privilege, and should evaluate how an accommodation might overcome
these barriers. Also in consultation with the individual with the
disability, the employer should identify possible accommodations
and consider each one's effectiveness.
EEOC advises that if several effective accommodations
would provide equal employment opportunity, the employer should
consider the individual's preferences and select an accommodation
that in most suitable for both parties. While an employer should
consider an individual's preferences, EEOC notes that the employer
is free to choose among effective accommodations and to pick one
that is easier to provide or is less expensive. (Employees or trainees
with disabilities, however, need not accept accommodations they
did not request and that they consider unnecessary.) If rejecting
a proposed accommodation renders a person unable to perform a job's
essential functions, the person with the disability may no longer
be qualified for the position.
Ensuring that the process of individualization is
implemented with integrity is, perhaps, most important during periods
of (a) multifaceted post-high-school preparation of youth and young
adults with disabilities; and (b) work during which youth and young
adults with disabilities may require workplace support. In both
instances, success in postsecondary environments requires a "goodness-of-fit"
among the person with a disability, a demanding community environment,
and other participants in that setting (e.g., coworkers, college
instructors). Such a goodness-of-fit often may be achieved only
through a carefully planned, sequenced, and executed series of accommodations
among people, environments, and the interactions between them.
In recognition of this need for a goodness-of-fit,
federal and state service systems have designed two policy/program
initiatives to address the complex and demanding post-secondary
periods in the lives of youth and young adults with disabilities.
One policy/program initiative is called "transition"; the other
is termed "supported employment."
TRANSITION
AND SUPPORTED EMPLOYMENT: A REVIEW Historically,
transition problems that followed students' graduation were demonstrated
in the data on access to and results of services to adults with
severe disabilities. For example, in one follow-up study of high
school graduates before IDEA changed the configuration of special
education programs,(36) Stansfield
found that 40% of graduates were receiving no vocational services
and that 94% continued to live at home with their parents. In 1983,
the U.S. Department of Education (DOED), Office of Special Education
and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), identified the transition from
school to work as one of the major federal priorities of special
education programs across the nation.(37)
The decision to develop this school-to-work transition initiative
was prompted by numerous studies and reports conducted during the
early 1980s, which uniformly found high levels of unemployment,
economic instability and dependence, and social isolation among
young adults with disabilities.(38)
Since 1985, significant research and demonstration
activities have ensued for the explicit purpose of improving the
transition of youth with disabilities from school to work, post-secondary
education, and community living.(39)
For the approximately 250,000 to 300,000 students who exited their
public special education programs each year, the transition policy
initiative was an attempt to focus the nation's resources and vision
to help those students achieve valued adult lifestyles. Throughout
the 1980s, school-to-work transition services for youth with disabilities
expanded, principally emphasizing (a) state and local efforts to
improve the high school curriculum to address students' development
of functional skills for work and community living; (b) opportunities
for students to learn in real-world contexts (i.e., work sites and
other community-based settings); (c) increased student and family
participation in the development of transition plans focused on
a range of post-school outcomes in the areas of employment, post-secondary
education, and community living; and (d) concerted efforts to increase
the level and intensity of interagency cooperation among educators,
employers, and community service agencies in addressing the transition
needs of secondary students with disabilities.
The results of other post-school follow-up studies
suggest that students with disabilities have a very difficult time
adjusting to life after graduation from high school. During their
final years in school, these youth remain dependent on others to
make decisions, assess performance, and make linkages with service
agencies.(40) Rarely are they taught,
required, or invited to advocate their own interests.(41)
The unemployment, underemployment, undereducation, and continued
dependence on parents; social isolation; and lack of involvement
in community-oriented activities characteristic of many individuals
with disabilities are factors that foster continued dependence among
youth in transition.
Beginning in 1991, OSERS initiated a new grant system
for states to overhaul and expand transition services to youth with
disabilities. OSERS funded 12 states in the first year, 12 states
in 1992, and 6 more states in 1993. Statewide transition projects
are required to focus on six common elements: (a) individualized
education program (IEP)/transition planning; (b) assessment; (c)
student empowerment; (d) parent and family involvement; (e) curriculum
and instruction change; and (f) school-community coordination. These
statewide transition systems are funded on five-year cycles; states
also receive technical assistance and evaluation services from the
National Transition Network, a nationwide consortium of universities.
The past decade has also witnessed the evolution
of a vocational service technology for persons with severe disabilities
known as supported employment. Supported employment, which was a
complement to the OSERS 1983 policy/program school-to-work-and-adult-life
initiative, was instituted in 1986. Through the 1986 Title VI-C
program, Congress identified the potential value of supported employment's
"place and train" integrated, competitive employment model as a
critical part of the rehabilitation program for many individuals.
By Fiscal Year 1990, state vocational rehabilitation
systems were able to identify a total of 74,657 supported employment
participants, of whom 30,782 (41%) were receiving time-limited services
and 43,785 (59%) were receiving extended services.(42)
As of 1990, persons primarily with labels of mild mental retardation
were the primary participants involved in supported employment,
accounting for 64% and 66% of all supported employment participants
in either time-limited or extended services. As of 1990, persons
with traumatic brain injury represented 2% and .4% of the supported
employment participants in time-limited and extended services, respectively.
As of 1990, persons with autism were included in a cluster group
of supported employment participants that accounted for 6% of time-limited
services and 5% of extended services.
There can be no doubt that the progress made from
1986 to 1994 in implementing supported employment in the United
States has been dramatic. Indeed, in less than a decade, adults
and youth with disabilities have gone from virtually no participation
to a projected 90,000 people across 50 states. The presence of supported
employment as a community employment option has changed the standard
of acceptability by families and consumers. No longer is acceptance
into an adult activity center viewed as the best goal for a student
who is leaving special education; instead, the goal is to have a
competitive employment position.
Supported employment has shown signs of being a cost-effective
alternative to other vocational programs such as sheltered workshops
that are supported by many state governments across the country.
The benefits of supported employment are greater because gainfully
employed people pay taxes, depend less on public programs, and contribute
money to the state economy. Moreover, people who in the past were
segregated can enjoy the same community benefits as do people without
disabilities. Despite the potential advantages of supported employment,
however, as of 1994, the bulk of state funds for persons with disabilities
still go to sheltered workshops or day treatment centers. Unfortunately,
probably fewer than 1 in 10 individuals with cognitive impairments
are getting a fair opportunity to participate in supported employment
nationwide.
From its inception, the mission of supported employment
has been to facilitate integrated employment for those with the
most severe disabilities. However, of persons with mental retardation
in supported employment, the percentage of individuals with severe
or profound mental retardation remained at approximately 12% from
1986 to 1990. Although the 12% participation rate by those with
severe and profound mental retardation exceeds the prevalence rate
for this group, these individuals should be among the highest-served
target groups of the Title VI-C program. Similarly, other groups
with severe disabilities (e.g., autism and traumatic brain injury)
should be participating in supported employment programs at much
higher rates than they have been. A number of states, however, may
serve as models for inclusion of persons with more severe disabilities--specifically,
cognitive impairments--including Connecticut, Oregon, Vermont, and
Pennsylvania.
To address the continuing lack of individualized
opportunities for people with severe disabilities in supported employment,
the Title VI-C program of the 1992 Rehabilitation Act included (a)
changing the supported employment definition to reemphasize a program
focus on people with the most severe disabilities; (b) adding "intensive"
supported employment services to the definition; (c) providing for
extension of services beyond the 18-month time limit under certain
conditions; (d) adding "extended services" to the definition; and
(e) mandating increased choice (Section 105). The reauthorized Rehabilitation
Act of 1992 clearly set a federal policy in place to empower people
with disabilities in the rehabilitation process.
Disability laws in the United States such as ADA
and the Rehabilitation Act amendments, as well as related federal
laws and domestic policy initiatives, certainly appear to support
freedom of choice and equal opportunity for postsecondary education,
work training, and employment. Federal laws and policy/program initiatives,
such as transition and supported employment, should be part of a
coherent policy framework essential to assisting young Americans
with cognitive impairments in achieving meaningful post-school outcomes,
such as paid work. Collectively, these laws, policies, and programs
are intended to assist youth and young adults in preparing for both
work and lifelong learning pursuits, achieving higher academic standards
and occupational skills, integrating academic learning in applied
and community-based settings, involving youth with disabilities
in workplace learning and technical preparation programs, and actively
engaging employers and the business community in the planning and
design of school-to-work transition services.
Unfortunately, judging from reviews and evaluations
of school-to-work (43) and vocational
training programs,(44) the intended
outcomes are not yet being achieved. National criticism has also
been voiced in recent years in terms of individual federal employment
training programs such as vocational rehabilitation (45)
and the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA),(46)
as well as the group of 154 employment training programs funded
at $25 billion annually in the U.S. and run by 14 federal departments
and agencies.(47) Some professionals
have charged that until recently federal, state, and local governments
do not appear to have coordinated and targeted existing practices
and policies that could directly maximize the power of transition
and supported employment.(48)
From the data and analyses presented in this section,
it appears that at least three sets of interrelated conditions exist
related to poor outcomes for youth and young adults with disabilities.
First, many youths and young adults with disabilities apparently
do not learn and use the skills they need to achieve productivity,
empowerment, and independence. Second, service programs and environments
may not be providing the types of reasonable accommodations necessary
to support youths and young adults with disabilities in training
or employment situations. Third, the absence of a comprehensive
national policy and services system to help youths with disabilities
move into responsible adulthood may be a contributing factor to
these disappointing results. These conditions will be rectified,
it is hoped, by building on and redirecting attention to existing
practices and policy provisions and by the current Administration's
efforts involving intergovernmental education and labor reform.
What do transition and supported employment-related
programs do to individualize their services and supports for individuals
with disabilities, particularly people with cognitive impairments?
How are local programs adhering to the spirit of the reasonable
accommodations provision of the Americans with Disabilities Act?
The next section provides some insight.
TRANSITION
AND SUPPORTED EMPLOYMENT: SOME CURRENT INDIVIDUALIZATION PRACTICES
Public school officials, vocational specialists,
and employers are requesting information and becomingly increasingly
aware of the importance of being in compliance with applicable requirements
of the Americans with Disabilities Act.(49)
The nation's continued emphasis on school-to-work transitions and
supported employment for people with disabilities suggests that
human service systems, businesses, and industries must become proficient
with both ADA's technical compliance standards (e.g., reasonable
accommodations) and the means to achieve meaningful implementation
of those standards (e.g., through the process of individualization).
Seminal efforts to document attempts to achieve meaningful
implementation with select provisions of ADA Title I currently exist.(50)
However, much of this seminal information may not be readily available
to segments of the public (e.g., small business employers, secondary
school personnel, and individuals with cognitive impairments) that
could probably benefit, for example, from having direct access to
(a) the 20,000-plus barrier-solutions data--or case studies--maintained
by JAN; and (b) the 25,000-plus problem-solutions data maintained
by EEOC. To expand upon some of these seminal efforts regarding
the implementation of select ADA Title I provisions, NCD surveyed
(see Appendix A) secondary-school transition and post-secondary
vocational service programs.
Questionnaire Findings
Three hundred questionnaires were mailed in early summer of 1994
to various program providers who were identified as serving individuals
with cognitive impairments. Of that number, 73 completed questionnaires
(or almost 25%) were returned by late summer of 1994. Each questionnaire
consisted of 13 items involving type of worksite; number of workers
or trainees and their proportion by disability group; degree of
assistance required; level of inclusion of high school graduates
with disabilities and types of credentials required of them; incentives
for hiring individuals with disabilities; types of jobs people are
trained for and average number of hours provided for training; types
of reasonable accommodations provided for individuals with cognitive
impairments; and additional needs in terms of expanding reasonable
accommodations. The following data and discussion summarizes the
findings from those 73 questionnaires (see Appendix A for complete
findings).
The majority of the questionnaire respondents (52
of 73, or 71%) report that their work sites are run by nonprofit
agencies; 13 of the 73 respondents (18%) are university-based programs;
7 of the 73 respondents (10%) are high-school-based programs; and
1 of the 73 respondents (1%) operates a technical-college-based
program. In response to a different questionnaire item, about 37%
of the respondents indicate that they currently serve fewer than
25 persons at their work sites, compared with about 63% of respondents
that indicate that they serve over 25 persons at their work sites.
The majority of the questionnaire respondents also
indicate that their trainees work part-time (77%), at minimum wage
(67%), or above minimum wage (65%). Fewer than a majority of respondents
indicate that their trainees work as volunteers (43%), below minimum
wage (37%), seasonally (27%), or as high school student interns
(25%).
Two of the 73 respondents (or 2%) say that they serve
only one type of disability group, as compared with 71 of the 73
respondents (or 98%) who report that they serve individuals who
represent a variety of disability groups. More specifically, respondents
say they are serving a range of disability groups to varying degrees:
mental retardation (80%), multiple disabilities (65%), traumatic
brain injury (58%), autism (48%), learning disabilities (45%), emotional
disorders (42%), other health impairments (42%), visual impairments
(41%), hearing impairments (40%), orthopedic impairments (33%),
mental illness (30%), and deafness and blindness (18%). In response
to a different questionnaire item, the respondents indicate that
of all the people with disabilities they serve, 69% require a minimal
degree of assistance, 82% require a moderate degree of assistance,
and 68% require a major degree of assistance.
Approximately 60% of all respondents claim that their
work forces presently include high school graduates with disabilities,
and about 38% state that they do not. Some of the more common ways
in which respondents say that their work sites recruit students
with disabilities involve referrals and recommendations from school
systems, teachers, and families; advertisements, mailout notices,
and fliers; and contacts with local and state service agencies.
Some of the less common ways in which respondents say that their
work sites recruit students with disabilities involve direct outreach
to students through such means as job or career fairs; school transition
programs prior to graduation; and student self-referral. A number
of respondents whose work forces do include high school graduates
indicate that they require some credentials from those graduates:
high school diploma (15%); high school certificate (7%); high school
grade transcript (5%); previous job experience (13%); previous job
recommendation (13%); attendance record (8%); personal health insurance
(3%); personal transportation arrangements (10%); driver's license
(5%); evidence of citizenship (24%). Eleven respondents (15%) report
that they require no evidence or documentation from high school
graduates.
A majority of the respondents (77%) think that by
including people with disabilities a project builds a positive image;
73% of the respondents indicate that it enables persons with disabilities
to become taxpayers; 33% of the respondents indicate that a project
can qualify for targeted jobs tax credits; 33% list other consequences
of including people with disabilities--allowing people to achieve
community independence and building self-esteem, to name two; 7%
of respondents indicate that a project's image is not affected by
including people with disabilities; and 2% of the respondents report
that a project builds a negative image by including people with
disabilities.
According to a majority of respondents (61%), people
are being trained for jobs in the cluster areas of janitorial/maintenance,
food service, clerical, groundskeeping/ horticulture, and stockwork/warehousing.
Twenty percent of respondents generally indicated that they train
people for all kinds of jobs; 12% of respondents claim that they
train people based on their needs and interests; and 7% of the respondents
claim to train people strictly for entry-level jobs. For workers
being trained for entry-level positions, respondents report that:
(a) 16% provide less than 1 day of training; (b) 13% provide from
1 to 5 days of training; (c) 19% provide from 5 to 10 days of training;
and (d) 48% provide from 11 days to several months of training.
When asked about the types of reasonable accommodations
provided at work sites, 59 of the 73 respondents reported a total
of 136 individual responses within the areas of flexibility, supervision,
emotional support, physical accommodations at the workplace, wages
and benefits, dealing with coworker attitudes, and other resources.
A ranking of those 136 responses, in terms of frequency of citation,
yields the following: (a) supervision, with 38 responses, equal
to 28% of the total of 136 responses; (b) physical accommodations
at the workplace with 37 responses, or 27%; (c) flexibility, with
27 responses, or 20%; (d) other resources, with 18 responses, or
13%; (e) emotional support, with 8 responses, or 6%; (f) dealing
with coworkers' attitudes, with 6 responses, or 4%; and (g) wages
and benefits, with 2 responses, or 1% of the total of 136 responses.
The Table depicts a breakdown of the 136 individual responses regarding
reasonable accommodations; the table follows the format for reasonable
accommodations published by the President's Committee for the Employment
of People with Disabilities.
Fifty (50) individual responses were provided to
the questionnaire item asking about what respondents need to provide
effective reasonable accommodations to the people they serve at
their work sites. Of those 50 individual responses, two overwhelming
themes reflect that respondents need (a) more funding of any kind,
(e.g., federal or state dollars, or tax incentives) and (b) more
staff training of all kinds, from personnel in businesses and industries
to staff in regular education service systems. In addition, respondents
claim that to provide more effective reasonable accommodations they
need: good consistent models, more technology and equipment, more
structural accommodations, more modified equipment, more accessible
transportation, and greater availability of knowledge and information
about transition and supported employment to the community at large.
NCD's report continues with an examination of ADA's
relationship to: (a) the Vocational Rehabilitation Act; (b) the
School-to-Work Opportunities Act; (c) IDEA; (d) the Goals 2000:
Educate America Act; (e) the National Community Services Trust Act;
and (f) the National Performance Review-Reinventing Government Initiative.
Table
Reasonable Accommodation Responses Flexibility
- Providing self-paced workload and flexible hours
- Allowing people to work at home and providing
necessary equipment
- Providing more job-sharing responsibilities
- Modifying job responsibilities
- Providing supported employment opportunities
- Keeping the job open and providing a liberal leave
policy (e.g., granting up to two months of unpaid leave if it
does not cause an undue hardship on the employer)
- Providing backup coverage when the employee needs
special or extended leave
- Providing the opportunity to move laterally, change
jobs, or change supervisors within same organization so a person
can find a good job fit
- Providing time off for professional counseling
- Allowing exchange of work duties
- Providing conflict resolution mechanisms
Supervision
- Providing written job instructions
- Providing significant levels of structure and/or
one-on-one supervision dealing with content and interpersonal
skills
- Providing easy access to supervisor
- Providing guidelines for feedback on problem areas
and developing strategies to anticipate and deal with problems
before they arise
- Arranging for an individual to work with supportive,
understanding supervisor
- Providing individualized agreements
Emotional Support
- Providing praise and positive reinforcement
- Being tolerant of different behaviors
- Making counseling and employee assistance programs
available for employees
- Allowing phone calls during work to friends or
others for needed support
- Providing substance abuse recovery support groups
and one-on-one counseling
- Providing support for people in the hospital (e.g.,
visits, cards, and calls)
- Providing an advocate to advise and support employees
- Identifying employees willing to help employees
with psychiatric disabilities
- Providing on-site crisis intervention services
- Providing a 24-hour hotline for problems
- Providing natural supports
Physical Accommodations at the Workplace
- Modifying work area to minimize distractions
- Modifying work area for privacy
- Providing an environment that is smoke-free; has
reduced noise, natural light, and easy access to the outside;
and is well-ventilated
- Providing accommodations for any additional impairment
(e.g., an employee with a psychiatric disability may have a visual
or mobility impairment, calling for accommodation such as like
large print for written work, or a three-wheel scooter.)
Wages and Benefits
- Providing adequate wages and benefits
- Providing health insurance coverage that does
not exclude preexisting conditions, including psychiatric disabilities,
HIV, and cancer
- Permitting sick leave for emotional or physical
well-being
- Providing assistance with child care, transportation,
care for aging parents, housing, etc.
- Providing specialized training opportunities
Dealing with Coworkers' Attitudes
- Providing sensitivity training for coworkers
- Facilitating open discussions among workers with
and without disabilities, encouraging them to articulate feelings
and to develop strategies to deal with these issues
- Developing a system of rewards for coworkers without
disabilities based on their acceptance and support for their coworkers
with disabilities
Other Resources
- Ensuring the availability accessible transportation
- Providing assistive technology
INTERPLAY
BETWEEN ADA AND RELATED FEDERAL LEGISLATION AND INITIATIVES
Because of the broad nature of its coverage, ADA
leaves almost no aspect of life untouched. For example, ADA charges
the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) with the enforcement
of Title II. DOJ also has enforcement jurisdiction for Title II--which
bans employment discrimination by state and local governments--and
for Title III. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is responsible
for enforcement of Title IV. Because of the broad scope of ADA,
several federal authorities are responsible for the sometimes overlapping
provisions of ADA--including its nexus to the Rehabilitation Act.
For instance, the law charges EEOC, DOJ, and Office of Federal Contract
Compliance Programs (in DOL) to "establish such coordinating mechanisms...in
regulations implementing this title and the Rehabilitation Act of
1973 not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this
Act." (51)
As mentioned, specifically within ADA's breadth and
scope of coverage lies the Vocational Rehabilitation Act. Following
passage of ADA in 1990, many individuals with disabilities, and
their advocates and families, turned their focus to the Rehabilitation
Act as a major vehicle for achieving full participation in the social
and economic mainstream of our nation. Citing great dissatisfaction
with the existing system, the community sent a loud call to Congress
for significant change: rewrite the Vocational Rehabilitation Act
to ensure that the programs it authorizes empower persons with disabilities
with choice; assist them in finding and maintaining meaningful employment;
and promote independence, productivity, and full integration into
the work force and the community. In short, use the principles,
policies, and values of ADA as an overlay or "lens" through which
public policy is viewed and implemented. Congress and the President
responded in kind by passing and signing P.L. 102-569, the Rehabilitation
Act Amendments of 1992. Subsequent concerns about the effectiveness
of the federal rehabilitation program for people with severe disabilities
and for minorities with disabilities (52)
have heightened the nation's interest in the ADA-Rehabilitation
Act interface.
ADA overlay for the reauthorized Rehabilitation Act
required several critical amendments to ensure access to rehabilitation
services and supports. First, the reauthorized Act began with a
presumption of ability--that people can achieve employment and other
rehabilitation goals regardless of the severity of disability if
appropriate services and supports are made available. Second, the
Act indicated that any comprehensive assessment of an individual
with a disability should focus on the person's unique strengths,
resources, priorities, interests, and needs. Third, recognizing
that many students with disabilities exiting school systems may
require assistance from the rehabilitation system, the Act in Section
103 gave transition services a definition identical to that included
in IDEA--as described later in this section. Fourth, the Act stated
that the technology and/or the personal assistance needs of individuals
with disabilities must be addressed as needed in each person's individualized
written rehabilitation program.
Beyond its legislatively explicit relationship with
the Rehabilitation Act, through its role as an integrative and coordinative
mechanism for related federal and state laws and regulations, ADA
also applies to the School-to-Work Opportunities Act (STWO) (P.L.
103-239). Jointly administered by the departments of Education and
Labor, STWO authorizes federal venture capital to support the development
and implementation of state and local school-to-work systems. These
systems must have three main elements: work-based learning (providing
participating students with work experience and on-the-job training);
school-based learning (upgrading and integrating the academic and
occupational skills participating students learn in school); and
program coordination to aid the planning, implementation, and operation
of the program. States may apply for development grants to develop
school-to-work plans and five-year implementation grants to establish
their systems. Grant applicants are permitted considerable flexibility
to develop and implement systems congruent with particular state
and local needs and preferences but must incorporate certain common
elements such as the three previously mentioned. Federal support
under the Act is limited. States must show how they will use state,
local, private, and federal funds from programs such as JTPA and
the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education
Act to sustain their school-to-work programs. States can apply for
waivers from statutory and regulatory requirements for particular
education and training programs to aid them in coordinating programs
and to help ensure that other federal resources will be available.
The School-To-Work Opportunity Act is targeted to
all students. The definition of "all" means students from a broad
range of backgrounds, including students with disabilities.(53)
It is expected that local and state programs will be developed by
creating new programs and augmenting existing programs such as tech-prep
education, career academies, youth apprenticeship, cooperative education,
and business-education compacts. On July 18, 1994, Education Secretary
Richard Riley and Labor Secretary Robert Reich announced that the
Clinton Administration would award $43 million in grants to eight
states to implement systems that move young people from school to
work. The 1994 awards made under the STWO Act went to Kentucky,
Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, and
Wisconsin, in grants that range from $2 to $10 million. In 1995,
an additional set of 19 multiyear state STWO awards were made in
amounts equivalent to the previous year's awards. The 1995 awards,
sharing more than $74 million in funding, were made to Alaska, Arizona,
Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Nebraska,
New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Utah,
Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia. In May of 1995, a national
school-to-work snapshot survey was released which showed that 116,351
students, 2,730 schools, and 41,772 employers were involved in school-to-work
programs after just one year. It is not clear how many of those
students were individuals with disabilities.
Similarly, two federal education laws that involve
employment preparation are also impacted by ADA: (a) IDEA (with
its emphasis on secondary and transition services) and (b) the Goals
2000: Educate America Act (notably goal #foot2 and goal #foot5).
In 1990, Congress enacted IDEA (Public Law 101-476). Several sections
of the regulations published in the fall of 1992 specifically pertain
to the transition of students with disabilities from school to work
and adult life.(54) As stipulated
within the regulations, transition services means "a coordinated
set of activities for students, designed within an outcome-oriented
process which promotes movement from school to post-school activities,
including postsecondary education, vocational training, integrated
employment (including supported employment), continuing in adult
education, adult services, independent living, or community participation."
(55) The coordinated activities
are to be based upon the individual student's needs, taking into
account the student's preferences and interests, and are to include
instruction, community experiences, the development of employment
and other post-school adult living objectives, and, when appropriate,
acquisition of daily living skills and functional vocational evaluation.
In 1994, Congress passed the Goals 2000: Educate
America Act (Public Law 103-227). Similar to ADA's coordinative
role, Goals 2000 is the first step toward developing linkages between
federal initiatives and state and local systemic reforms. Goals
2000 is designed to serve all students. Title III of Goals 2000
authorizes formula grant assistance to support systemic education
reform undertaken by states and localities. Systemic reform calls
for establishment of educational goals and standards and alignment
of all elements in an educational system with those goals and standards.
Under this legislation, five years of support is authorized, with
states applying separately for first-year funding and for funding
for the second through fifth years of support. State educational
agencies (SEAs) use funds to develop and implement state improvement
plans, undertake authorized reform activities, and finance reform
activities by local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools. Among
required elements in the state plans is the development of curriculum
content standards (defining the broad knowledge and skills students
should acquire in different subject areas); student performance
standards (identifying the different levels of achievement of the
content standards that students should exhibit); and appropriate
assessments, as well as opportunity-to-learn standards or strategies
(defining the resources and services needed to give students an
opportunity to meet performance standards). The bulk of each state's
Goals 2000 funding is to be allocated to LEAs for development and
implementation of local improvement plans and for grants to individual
schools for reform activities or to LEAs and other recipients for
professional development activities.
Of the eight voluntary national goals of Goals 2000,
two highlight the need to improve outcomes for all secondary-age
students. National education goal #foot2 places a high priority
on improving school completion rates among all of America's secondary
students. Goal #foot2 calls for the elimination of the gap in high
school completion rates between American students with minority
backgrounds and their non-minority counterparts. Although not mentioned
explicitly, there is also a need to eliminate gaps that exist for
any group of American students, including students with disabilities.
Currently, estimates of school completion rates indicate that 83%
of all students complete school, 78% of students from African-American
backgrounds complete school, 60% of students from Hispanic backgrounds
complete school, and 56% of students with disabilities complete
school. The National Longitudinal Transition Study or NLTS (1988-1992),
commissioned by DOED, Office of Special Education Programs, has
verified that the national dropout rate for students with disabilities
is higher than other national rates typically reported.
National education goal #foot5 focuses on adult literacy
and lifelong learning. One of the objectives of goal #foot5 is to
ensure that all workers have the opportunity to acquire the skills,
from basic to highly technical, needed to adapt to emerging technologies,
work methods, and markets, through public and private educational,
vocational, technical, workplace, and other programs. National education
goal #foot5 also calls for a substantial increase in the proportion
of qualified students, especially minorities (and individuals with
disabilities) who enter college, who complete at least two years,
and who complete their degree programs. While this objective is
important, it must be recognized that minorities and students with
disabilities are entering post-secondary training institutions at
lower rates than other students, and that concerted efforts are
needed to increase these rates. NLTS (1988-1992) found dramatically
lower levels of participation among young adults with disabilities
in postsecondary education programs (fewer than 17% of these youth
enter formal post-secondary training upon completion of their high
school programs). States report that more emphasis must be placed
on extending to individuals with disabilities the types of supports
and accommodations that improve their likelihood of successfully
participating in and completing post-secondary education programs.
This support also includes full attention to the placement services
these individuals need to successfully achieve meaningful outcomes
in the work force.
The movement of youth with disabilities from school
to work is also supported and addressed through amendments to several
federal acts in the disciplines of vocational rehabilitation, vocational
education, and job training. School-to-work transition language
is specifically contained within the Carl D. Perkins Vocational
and Applied Technology Act of 1990 and the Job Training Reform Amendments
of 1992. The purpose of the Perkins Act is to improve overall vocational
education program quality and ensure access to vocational programs
for all students, including those from certain targeted groups,
such as students with disabilities. Perkins Act funding is the Federal
Government's primary form of assistance to states and local school
districts for vocational education, providing about $1 billion for
vocational education. While the Perkins Act provides only 10 % of
vocational education funding nationwide, many vocational education
experts view its provisions as a driving force in setting national
vocational education priorities. During the 1990-1991 school year,
the number of 10th-, 11th-, and 12th-grade vocational education
students with disabilities equaled 252,048 (out of a total of 3.5
million); during the 1991-1992 school year, the numbers were similar.(56)
Of the total number of high school vocational education students
with disabilities in 1990-1991, (a) 14,375--or 5.7% of the total--were
involved in tech-prep school-to-work transition activities; (b)
41,743--or 16.6% of the total--were involved in work-study/cooperative
education school-to-work transition activities; and (c) 3,187--or
1.3% of the total--were involved in apprenticeship school-to-work
transition activities.(57) Service
providers and services made available to vocational education students
with disabilities during the 1990-1991 school year included, but
were not limited to teachers' aides, interpreters, readers, counseling,
guidance, curriculum modifications, exposure to paid and unpaid
jobs, evaluations, assessments, special or modified equipment, career
counseling, job development, resume preparation, job-search assistance,
job coaching, mentoring, and support groups.(58)
Nationally, the participation rates of youth with
disabilities in JTPA or JTPA-sponsored programs are low and vary
extensively from state to state. For example, during the 1991 program
year, 271,391 adults were terminated from Title II-A programs. Of
this number, 29,715 were adults with disabilities. This represents
10.9% of all adult terminees from Title II-A programs. Also during
program year 1991, 234,758 youth were terminated from Title II-A
programs, of whom 38,021 were youth with disabilities, representing
14.9% of those served. A review of data from individual states shows
that several report high levels of participation among students
with disabilities in youth-supported JTPA programs (Hawaii, 36.7%;
New Hampshire, 41.7%; Vermont, 33.3%; and Virginia, 34.4%). These
trends also show slight increases over previous years in the participation
of youth with disabilities in JTPA programs.
Under the Job Training Reform Amendments of 1992
(Public Law 103-367) youth and adults with disabilities were extended
new opportunities. The amendments promote the importance and availability
of transition services under Title II, Part C, Youth Training Program
Provisions. In the statement of purpose (Section 261), the amendments
state, "It is the purpose of the program assisted under this part...to
assist youth in addressing problems that impair the ability of youth
to make successful transitions from school to work, apprenticeship,
the military, or postsecondary education and training."
In addition, ADA applies to education and work-related
federal legislation such as the National and Community Services
Trust Act (Public Law 103-82). This new law is intended to engage
Americans in meeting critical needs through direct community-based
service. Through this law, President Clinton created AmeriCorps,
a program funded at $153 million for 1994 which is expected to allow
young people to earn education benefits in exchange for grassroots
community service. Through the requirements of ADA, individuals
with disabilities are specifically included as part of this initiative.(59)
AmeriCorps focuses national service efforts on four priority issues
facing communities across the nation. These four priorities address
(a) education--school readiness, school success; (b) public safety--crime
prevention, crime control; (c) human needs--health, home; and (d)
environment--neighborhood environment, natural environment. In 1994,
in its first year of operation, AmeriCorps aimed to involve 20,000
service participants in making long-term commitments to national
service. Youths and young adults with disabilities were specifically
encouraged to participate in the program. The special needs of persons
with disabilities were taken into account in several ways. First,
individuals with physical or cognitive disabilities without a high
school diploma or a general equivalency diploma (GED) were eligible
participants in AmeriCorps' programs. Provisions also specify that
the program is to remain open to such persons up to 27 years of
age. Second, AmeriCorps allowed grant applicants to request additional
funds to provide reasonable accommodations for service participants
if needed. Third, the AmeriCorps program provided opportunities
for grantees to ensure that people with disabilities are involved
both as service providers (e.g., the 20,000 targeted service participants)
and as service recipients (e.g., individuals included in school
success community service programs). Overall, in its first year
of operation, 59 national and 296 state AmeriCorps grants were funded.
Additionally, a national training and technical assistance grant
on diversity--for disability issues--was funded to infuse AmeriCorps
with the guiding vision of ADA.
One final federal initiative deserves consideration
and comment. The National Performance Review--Reinventing Government
initiative is an effort by the Clinton Administration to redesign,
reinvent, and reinvigorate the entire national government.(60)
This initiative has four main goals: (a) cutting red tape; (b) putting
customers first; (c) empowering employees to get results; and (d)
cutting back to basics. The goal of putting customers first reflects
one expected change in how the Federal Government relates to the
American people and includes a set of action recommendations including
establishing customer service standards, conducting customer surveys,
and creating one-stop career development centers, to name a few.
Although these actions are presumably comprehensive in scope and
should fall within the purview of ADA, people with disabilities
do not appear to be among the targeted recipients for reinvented
government. For example, in the chapter entitled "Putting Customers
First," the 1993 Gore report on the initiative calls for the following
action:
"Create a system of competitive, one-stop
career management centers across the country, open to all Americans--regardless
of race, gender, age, income, employment experience, or skills"
(p. 49, last paragraph).
Consistent with this recommendation, DOL has issued
a $50 million grant announcement regarding one-stop career centers.(61)
Whether, and to what degree, students with disabilities are customers
who will be put first by these one-stop grants remains to be seen.
CONCLUSIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION The United
States' social and human service systems are undergoing rapid and
immense changes, in part because of the series of work and educational
reforms promoted by the Clinton Administration and by the 103rd
Congress. The common programmatic themes that will drive these reforms
include
- motivating students to learn and teachers to teach;
- emphasizing the importance of educational productivity;
- reconceptualizing transition to recognize the
reality and importance of both paid and unpaid work, the classroom
as a workplace, the student as a worker, and the teacher as a
worker;
- acquiring a desire to work as a means of increasing
self-esteem and contributing to society;
- providing career awareness, career exploration,
and career decision-making assistance to youth; and
- establishing and operating truly collaborative
working relationships between the education system and the broader
community.
The federal and state governments have a prominent
role to play vis-a-vis these reforms and with respect to ADA's prohibition
on exclusion of individuals with cognitive impairments from American
life. Achieving inclusion, as viewed through ADA's values and civil
rights lens, requires federal monitoring and enforcement, technical
assistance, research, guidance, and long-term follow-up. While some
headway has been made at the federal level in this regard, it is
certainly too soon to tell whether and to what degree states and
local communities will adhere to the mandates and the spirit of
ADA Title I as they also begin to implement newly enacted work and
education reforms.
Judging from the nation's progress so far in relation
to ADA Title I implementation and individuals with disabilities,
there is considerable work to be done. ADA awareness and access
among people with disabilities, generally, is low; among individuals
with cognitive impairments it is relatively lower. On the one hand,
there is little published information regarding the scope of effective
ADA Title I implementation by school systems and businesses that
are involved with individuals with cognitive impairments. On the
other hand, the availability and utility of reasonable accommodations
provided by select transition and supported employment programs
is being documented. Most of these programs purportedly need an
infusion of fiscal resources and claim that schools and businesses
require ongoing training about fundamental ADA mandates (reasonable
accommodation, undue hardship, and auxiliary aids and services).
However, the bulk of the federal, state, and local ADA implementation
activity seems to be geared primarily toward people with physical,
sensory, or communication disabilities.
Not surprisingly, the overall long-term prospects
for all people with disabilities do not look favorable at this point
in time. The nation is without an integrated policy or comprehensive
plan toward disability, ADA, and the current network of education
and work reforms. Laws, regulations, programs, and services at the
federal, state, and local levels are not reviewed regularly to ensure
that they are philosophically and programmatically in tune with
the spirit and letter of ADA.
As part of America's ongoing commitment to furthering
the goals of ADA, two national agencies recently conducted consensus
conferences designed to initiate dialogue on furthering the goals
of ADA through disability policy research; identifying resources
and infrastructures available to enhance the ADA implementation
process; and articulating steps that can be taken to monitor the
implementation of the Act.(62)
Consistent with the findings and recommendations of those conference
efforts and based on the findings of NCD's present study, recommendations
are now offered related to the following three themes: (a) steps
for building infrastructures (e.g., greater coordination among federal
agencies concerned with ADA Title I and related social policy);
(b) steps in establishing priorities that could yield short-term
impact (e.g., establishing a set of policy-oriented implementation
indicators); and (c) steps in establishing priorities that could
yield impact over the long term (e.g., developing functional data
bases of reasonable accommodations).
Recommendations to Policymakers
- Actively resist the temptation to judge ADA as
strictly a compliance and enforcement mechanism. Assess ADA in
terms of its function both as a coordinative or integrative mechanism
for all related social policy legislation and as a technical assistance
and guidance/information mechanism for those entities that implement
its provisions.
- Review, revise, and refine current and future legislation,
funding streams, and programs to comport with the spirit, intent,
and language of ADA Title I, for all persons with disabilities,
particularly for individuals with cognitive impairments.
- Promote the infusion of knowledge about ADA (e.g.,
what works regarding reasonable accommodations for individuals
with cognitive impairments) within and across all areas of federal,
state, and local governments, public-private partnerships focusing
on school and workplace improvements, and among all of America's
citizens.
- Build and reinforce data- and information-sharing
crosswalks within and across executive, legislative, and judicial
branch agencies regarding the implementation of ADA Title I.
Recommendations to Business and Industry
Leaders
- Comply with the spirit and intent of ADA Title
I principles such as reasonable accommodation, undue hardship,
and auxiliary aids and services, particularly as they apply to
individuals with cognitive impairments.
- Encourage the development of transition and supported
employment programs between schools and businesses that realistically
incorporate expectations of educational and industrial productivity
among participating individuals with cognitive impairments.
- Expect timely and useful data and information about
successful and unsuccessful accommodation strategies for individuals
with cognitive impairments in workplace settings.
Recommendations to School System
Personnel
- Teach students with cognitive impairments about
the spirit, intent, and individual utility of ADA Title I, as
well as the process of individualization, through meaningful life
experiences.
- Document successful and unsuccessful examples of
ADA Title I implementation, and share those examples with other
educators, students, parents, and so on.
- Infuse ADA information throughout school systems'
K-12 grade curricula.
- Develop and implement reasonable accommodation
plans, per ADA Title I, for all students who have individualized
education programs or individual transition plans.
Recommendations to the Disability
Community
- Ensure that all people with disabilities, especially
individuals with cognitive impairments, are empowered with functional
knowledge about ADA Title I.
- Expect that schooling and employment service systems
will fully and faithfully comply, through the process of individualization,
with fundamental ADA Title I mandates regarding reasonable accommodation,
undue hardship, and auxiliary aids and services.
- Build coalitions both with other disenfranchised
populations, as well as majority groups, to promote the full inclusion
of individuals with cognitive impairments into the educational/employment
mainstream of American society.
APPENDIX
A NCD QUESTIONNAIRE
ADA AND INDIVIDUALS WITH COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENTS
1. What type of work site do you
operate? (Please check one)
18% University-based
1% Technical college-based
10% High-school-based
71% Other (Please specify)
2. Approximately how many persons do you currently
serve in your work site?
37% Under 25
63% Over 25
3. Do any of your trainees work?
(Please check all that apply)
37% Below minimum wage
67% At minimum wage
65% Above minimum wage
77% Part-time
27% Seasonally
43% As volunteers
25% As high school student interns
4. What percent of the people you serve might
be labeled with...? (Estimate percentage
by disability label)
41% Visual impairments
80% Mental retardation
42% Emotional disorders
45% Learning disabilities
65% Multiple disabilities
58% Traumatic brain injury
42% Other health impairments
40% Hearing impairments
48% Autism
30% Mental illness
18% Deafness-blindness
31% Deafness
33% Orthopedic impairments
5. On average, what degree of assistance do
the people you serve require? (Estimate
by percent)
69% Minimal
82% Moderate
68% Major
6. How does your worksite recruit students with
disabilities?
- Referral of students to the demonstration grant/program
by school system
- Internal selection, teacher referral, individual
education plan (IEP);
- Via school personnel
- Referral from school systems
- Through work experiences provided as part of individuals'
IEP
- Self, agency, family
- Direct mail, vocational rehabilitation, posters,
fliers
- Through references from school for supported employment
services, and educating parents about supported employment's availability
- From a vendor of supported employment
- Referrals from high school counselors, transition
specialists, teachers, etc.
- Advertisements
- Automatic referrals of people exiting school system
- Through employer-sponsored training and internships
- Advertising on campus, and through department
faculty, counselors, rehabilitation department
- Provision of printed information
- Ongoing instruction and collaboration with public
school departments of special education and vocational education
- Through the state department of mental retardation;
- Teacher referral, IEP team recommendation;
- By referral;
- Word of mouth;
- Teacher and family recommendation or request
- Newspaper releases, fliers in the community, contact
with special education staff/student/parent at each IEP meeting
- Through cooperative agreements between school
districts in the state;
- Referral process with area developmental disabilities
services and vocational rehabilitation
- Through high school vocational rehabilitation
and employment specialists in process, through fliers and personal
contacts with university center for students with disabilities
- School transition programs prior to graduation
- Referral from special school district
- Through case management at the "point of entry"
agency
- Social service network, vocational agency, word
of mouth, families, community
- Via local support agencies
- Through high school special education teachers
and programs
- Mailouts, referrals from other agencies, word
of mouth
- Classified ads and referrals
- Via local schools
- Through linkages with the local school system
- Via contacts with medical facilities, schools,
colleges, government agencies, employment training centers, employers,
former customers, families
- Referrals from schools and state agencies
- From division of mental retardation, division
of mental health, mental retardation center
- Networking with staff
- Via state rehabilitation and community-centered
board
- Through university-based self-advocacy program
- Networking with schools and vocational rehabilitation
counselors, and advertising to schools and parents
- Via mailroom, summer interns
- Through school visits
- Advertising and word of mouth
- Department of rehabilitation services referrals,
career fairs, direct mail
- For students with moderate and severe disabilities,
through transition planning process
- Transition from school
- Through case management outreach
- Service coordination with local referral agencies
(i.e., department of rehabilitation, community services board)
on individual basis
- Referrals by department of rehabilitation services,
community services board, and the public school system
- Job announcements, articles in the newspaper,
word of mouth, vocational rehabilitation
- Collaborative personnel preparation program (graduate
trainees develop/implement community-based vocational education,
recruit students from local schools and collaborate with school
personnel)
- Job fairs, word of mouth, college vocational offices,
voc rehab referrals
- Through contacts with teachers, probation officers,
public health nurse, social workers, and mental health agencies;
students self-referral
- Direct employer contact, client advocacy
- IEPs; teacher and family education
- Through the school districts
- Via public agencies
7. Does your work site presently include high
school graduates with disabilities?
60% Yes
38% No
If "yes," how many graduates with a disability are
currently included in your work site?
8. If your work site includes high school graduates,
what credentials do you require? (Check
all that apply)
15% high school diploma
7% high school certificate
5% high school grade transcript
13% previous job experience(s)
13% previous job recommendation(s)
8% attendance record
3% personal health insurance
10% personal transportation arrangements
5% driver's license
24% evidence of citizenship
15% other (Please specify)
16% no evidence or documentation required
9. By including persons with disabilities, do
you think that a project...? (Please check
all that apply)
77% Builds a positive image
2% Builds a negative image
7% Image is not affected
33% Can qualify for targeted jobs tax credits
(TJTC)
73% Enables persons with disabilities to become
taxpayers
33% Other (Please specify)
10. What kind of jobs do you train
people for? (Please explain briefly)
- Entry-level service positions
- Maintenance and repair of buildings, clerical
support
- Landscaping, custodial/housekeeping
- All kinds
- Job sampling opportunities provided in a variety
of areas (i.e., retail, customer service, janitorial, housekeeping,
horticulture, fast foods, etc.)
- Hospital jobs, environmental services, food services,
print shop, warehouse
- More than 30 different vocational programs (community
college response)
- Various--tailored to individuals' strengths and
interests--from janitorial to secretarial, from libraries to veterinarian
clinics
- Custodial crews, food service, beverage container
redemption, tomato processing, clerical work
- Hospital laundry, fast food, lawn maintenance
- Management and volunteerism
- Shelf stocker, custodian, warehouse person, packaging,
assembly, fabrication, food services, grounds maintenance
- Housecleaning/janitorial, assembly, bulk mailing,
microfilming
- Food service, hospital stockroom, maintenance
of lawns
- Office, info and referral counseling
- Varies--from minimum-wage positions (dishwashers,
food prep, retail sales) to jobs requiring basic technical skills
- Industrial assembly, horticulture
- Clerical, custodial, dietary/food service, assembly/manufacturing,
grounds maintenance, print/bindery
- Based on job market
- Their choice
- Professional skilled allied health disciplines--clerical,
technicians
- Needs-driven training for all individuals served
- Wide range of jobs
- Commercial office, residential cleaning, floor
care
- Clerical (banks, credit unions, insurance), retail,
food service
- Across wide range of industries and occupations...entry
level is common denominator
- Housekeeping
- People trained in the job that meets their interest
and qualifications
- Medical records, messenger, lab assistant, receptionist,
food services, environmental services, stock
- Any job that meets students' skills and abilities
and labor market needs
- Entry-level jobs in professional, technical, managerial,
and clerical areas
- Clerical and computer positions, food service
and janitorial work
- Competitive placements in areas of interest
- Professional
- What they can and prefer to do, via on-the-job
training or internships
- How to advocate for themselves, what their rights
are, and what to do if their rights are violated
- All types, large number in service sector and
assembly
- Clerical, professional
- 50 plus diplomas and degree occupations (e.g.,
mechanics, graphics, heating and air conditioning, paramedics,
building operations, machine shop, TV production, office occupations,
dental assistant, dental labs, dental hygiene, etc.)
- Service industry, clerical/computers, physical
labor
- Varies--train on-site in community settings
- Custodial/maid services, mailing/bindery, electronic
assembly, micrographics
- Food, laundry, mailroom, custodial, groundskeeping,
assembly packaging
- Industrial (janitorial), clerical, food service
- Mailroom, delivery services, computer word processing
and data processing, home resource workers
- Dental assistant, emergency medical technician,
med records technician, occupational therapist, assistant licensed
practical nurse, accounting technician and assistant, microcomputer,
etc.,
- Everything found on college campus, unskilled--skilled--managerial
- Printing, graphic arts, office/computer applications
- Jobs similar to pre-morbid placements
- Manufacturing, production, entry-level
- Training in self-advocacy skills
- Office, custodial, housekeeping, food services,
retail, clerical, customer service
11. What is the average number of
hours provided for training a new worker in an entry-level position?
(Please check one)
16% Less than 1 day
13% 1 to 5 days
19% 5 to 10 days
48% Other (Please specify)
12. What type(s) of reasonable accommodations do your
provide for people with cognitive impairments (i.e., mental retardation,
autism, and traumatic brain injury)?
(Please list and/or explain each accommodation briefly;
if you need additional space use the back of this page)
- Picture cues of job duties, coworker support/supervision,
job-task sharing, identification of jobs with only one to two
job duties, specific systematic instruction from the job trainer,
teaching individual a consistent pattern of job performance
- Longer time span to complete projects, transportation
if public transportation is undesirable
- Job restructuring and task modifications, communication
book/picture card cues
- Job coach, coworker training, troubleshooting
- Modified workstations
- Job coach--to provide ongoing support, transportation
(accessible)--to be as independent as possible on the way to work,
augmentative/alternative modes of communication and other assistive
technology as needed
- Job/task sequence cards and labels, job sharing,
work scheduling consideration for persons using public transportation
and special needs transportation
- Accommodations is defined by the person--we try
to not only accommodate but educate, barriers to space, support
needs to people, employment assistant programs--circles of support--natural
support of employees
- Most accommodations in training and supervision,
writing instructions, break down tasks, ask employee to repeat
instructions, lots of feedback
- Job coaching, jigs, natural supports, alternate
transportation
- Transportation, traditional therapies (physical
therapy, occupational therapy, speech), as well as recreation,
green therapy (horticulture), pet therapy with puppies, nursing
services, residential training, job coaching, vocational training,
etc.
- Learning style--make sure you use communication
methods that work depending upon style (written memos not verbal
directions), buy the necessary computer equipment for a person
with multiple disabilities
- Job restructuring and rescheduling, systematic
instruction
- Reduced or flexible schedules, job coaches, adaptive
equipment
- Frequent supervision and prompts, assistance with
life problems, consultation for whole office on interactional
issues, assistance regarding plan to self-support, emotional support
- Helping people to use picture schedules and timers,
using computerized flow charts, rearranging the order with which
tasks must be accomplished
- We have very few and attempt to provide a good
work environment and experience to gain confidence, training or
retraining to provide skills
- Have allowed extra time and other accommodations
as requested
- Ensure that our meetings and support services
are accessible to all interested individuals, we limit our activities
to traumatic brain injury
- Provide staff assistance for people who need help
with personal needs--eating and bathrooming, modified restrooms
- Direct staff supervision and training of individuals
from ratio of 1:2 to 1:10, periods of 1:1 supervision of training,
wheelchair-lift equipped van for one site, consultation with occupational
therapist, physical therapist, speech/language pathologist, and
behavioral psychologist, completely accessible sites, subcontracted
procurement services in community and in sheltered workshops,
supported employment placement/job development, individual service
plans for each person
- Job/task restructuring, coworker/natural supports,
flexible scheduling, equipment modifications
- Rest periods
- To work with behaviors takes time, we sure have
a lot of problems to solve
- Individualizations
- Rearranging the job, altering work hours, providing
support (coworkers), job sharing, physical alteration of tasks
- Cue cards, assistive technology, wheelchair control
templates
- On an individual basis examples are--diagrams,
checklists, photo reminders, flip charts, buddy
- Have assistive technology department
- Job adaptation/alteration, ongoing support from
an employment specialist, self-management devices/strategies,
prosthetic devices as needed
- Compensatory strategy development--i.e., notebooks,
calendars, checklists, assistive technology--i.e., screen magnifiers,
reach/handling devices, tape recorders, shoes, etc., lighting
in a room (lamps vs. overhead), voice amplifiers, scheduling (due
to transportation), workplace environment modifications
- Work task analysis and breakdown, work task adaptations,
supervision prompting/job coach, identified employee contact for
assistance, employee assistance program, alternative formats of
instruction sheets/details
- Individual assistance--one-on-one, personal choice--then
programming, shorten work hours to suit the needs of the individual,
specific skills training for their desired position, wheelchair
accessibility, staff training in the areas of disabilities of
the people we serve
- All accommodations are provided by the employer;
we assist employers with identifying accommodations and adaptive
needs of each student
- Carved job duties, provision of extra training,
shorter hours, lowered production requirements
- Downscale and increase training, time and materials,
add additional staff
- Jobs carved according to person's skills/interests,
flexible scheduling, materials/equipment modification, procedural
changes to enable person to perform tasks, job coaching and coworker
assistance
- Most accommodations focus on communication/training
processes with emphasis on being creative without compromising
the employer's production and quality standards
- Checkoff lists, assistance with travel arrangements,
retraining as needed
- Supported employment--trained professional goes
on the job site to recommend adaptations and compensatory strategies;
provides individual instruction too, changes in work schedules,
various assistive technology devices
- Work site modification including rehab engineering
and work task modifications
- Memory notebook, instruction cards, job coaches
to teach and reinforce cognitive strategies
- Job coaches, assistive technology including sensory
aids and computers, job restructuring, job placement follow-up/follow-along
services including disability awareness training and technical
assistance during employee's orientation and adjustment on the
job
- Flexible schedule, task analysis, assistive technology
- Reduced hours, additional staffing, jigs/fixtures/adaptive
equipment, visual and verbal prompting
- More supervision, adjust work hours, adjust job
duties, lighting adjustment, staff/coworker training, computer,
visual enhancements, work space
- Problem-solving systems/contracts (pictorial/words/auditory),
job task checklists (pictorial/words/auditory), mentoring, positive
reinforcement strategies, preference and "can I do the job" forms
- Accessible office space, access to phones, access
to limited and conference room space, access to some office supplies
- Physical support, worksite adaptations--lights/tactile
sensors/jigs to adapt work to physical limits, interpreters, readers
- All types of environmental and assistive technologies
- Large computer screens, office space, summarized
information
- Extra training
- Tutoring, modified work tasks, extended learning
times, modified curriculum, developmental classes, interpreters
for hearing impaired, readers, notebooks
- Whatever it takes, whatever technology offers
at this time
- Minimized reading and written language requirements;
accentuation of hands on tasks
- Neuro-page--alpha, numeric paging device for on-task
behaviors and directions, task sequencing--written and visual
and verbal, on-site behavioral interventions, job counseling,
educational strategies for cognitive impairments
- Job coaching, visual cues, natural supports in
workplace and community
- Job assistants who drive, take notes, meet personal
needs
- Job coach, assistive technology for communications,
task analyses or restructuring of job tasks
13. Is there anything that you or your work site program
needs that could improve your program's impact, particularly in
terms of expanding reasonable accommodations for individuals with
disabilities whom you serve?
- Systematic observations and accommodations, job
sites need technical assistants, picture cues for placement of
supplies
- More staffing and training for employees who are
not impaired
- Regular education staff training and orientation
to programs and procedures
- Habilitation funding for persons with traumatic
brain injury...living support
- Good consistent models, expectations that are
clear for all parties, time to always continue to train and educate
- On-line computer access to accommodation resources
such as Job Accommodation Network, that are tailored to local
accommodation resources....Also assistance for applicants with
disabilities to negotiate for reasonable accommodations
- More staff, more money to train staff, marketing
tools
- More industry-staff training and orientation toward
people with disabilities
- More opportunities to educate others about the
potential of supported employment, less emphasis/reliance on legal
system to enforce
- More money for technology and equipment
- Site is too new to know
- Modify entry doors to open automatically, install
light emergency signalling, renovate additional bathrooms, install
several more wheelchair ramps, change heavy (internal) doors to
ones that open easier
- More flexibility in state contracts, coordination
of state licensing contracts and regulations, state funding to
support stated philosophical goals, state support for long-term
follow-up, more money
- Industry orientation to disability issues (myths,
stereotypes, potential)
- Long-term supports for more involved individuals
- Funding
- Continued staff training to train people with
disabilities to be leaders
- Access to regular educational vocational training
sites
- Education tools
- Staffing dollars--without staff support, the accommodations
are meaningless
- All accommodations are identified by employers,
we help with identification and adaptation of accommodations
- Additional staff allocations
- Tax incentives to the business clientele, waiver
of union scale and descriptions, increase in public relations
regarding the value of work for people with disabilities, incentives
to manufacturers to develop equipment that can be adapted at reasonable
prices
- Probably...but so far we've been doing okay
- Money for additional staff and training, an expanding
economy, further entré to the workplace
- Telecommunication device for the deaf (TDD), more
funding for supported employment/job coaches
- Better access to technology, quicker access to
technology and rehab engineers
- Probably not
- More info sent to employers specifically regarding
the low-to-no-cost of the majority of all reasonable accommodations
- Yes...business needs to know more
- More available/accessible transportation--nights/weekends/broader
coverage, more realistic job experiences in high school
- More accessible restrooms, wider bathroom stalls,
elevators
- Funding, more creative consultation with low-tech
alternatives
- More state and federal funds
- TDD/teletypewriter (TTY)
- Expanded training resources, money for subsidized
employment
- Fire alarms for hearing impaired, TDD for compliance,
automatic doors on front entrance, more restrooms with accommodations,
more professionally trained tutors
- Transportation, money, personnel, technology
- More community awareness...by sensitizing citizens
to the needs of people with disabilities...at an early age in
educational systems
- Funding, availability of a rehab engineer to evaluate
the work site when accommodations are needed
- Better communication with employers/coworkers,
use and adaptation ongoing training/ed. and support mechanisms
- Adaptive computers--a newer/better voice synthesizer,
etc., specific to disability, more trained staff for learning
lab sites to provide assistance in basic skills
- More money, time, and staff
- This work site is lacking in space, we are too
crowded to accommodate those with physical disabilities
- We need funding to continue our grant project
which will be up in 10/95
- Knowledge, resources (money)
- Money
- A less cumbersome and more productive system of
job coach recruitment (currently) when students reach a high degree
of independence, job coaches lose their position
- More comfortable work environment
APPENDIX
B NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITY:
A BRIEF DESCRIPTION
Overview and Purpose
The National Council on Disability is an independent
federal agency led by 15 members appointed by the President of the
United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. NCD was initially
established in 1978 as an advisory board within the Department of
Education (Public Law 95-602). The Rehabilitation Act Amendments
of 1984 (Public Law 98-221) transformed NCD into an independent
agency. The overall purpose of NCD is to promote policies, programs,
practices, and procedures that guarantee equal opportunity for all
individuals with disabilities, regardless of the nature or severity
of the disability; and to empower individuals with disabilities
to achieve economic self-sufficiency, independent living, and inclusion
and integration into all aspects of society.
Specific Duties
The current statutory mandate of NCD includes the
following:
- Reviewing and evaluating, on a continuing basis,
policies, programs, practices, and procedures concerning individuals
with disabilities conducted or assisted by federal departments
and agencies, including programs established or assisted under
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, or under the Developmental
Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act, as well as all
statutes and regulations pertaining to federal programs that assist
such individuals with disabilities, in order to assess the effectiveness
of such policies, programs, practices, procedures, statutes, and
regulations in meeting the needs of individuals with disabilities.
- Reviewing and evaluating, on a continuing basis,
new and emerging disability policy issues affecting individuals
with disabilities at the federal, state, and local levels and
in the private sector, including the need for and coordination
of adult services, access to personal assistance services, school
reform efforts and the impact of such efforts on individuals with
disabilities, access to health care, and policies that operate
as disincentives for the individuals to seek and retain employment.
- Making recommendations to the President, the Congress,
the Secretary of Education, the Director of the National Institute
on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, and other officials
of federal agencies; respecting ways to better promote equal opportunity,
economic self-sufficiency, independent living, and inclusion and
integration into all aspects of society for Americans with disabilities.
- Providing the Congress, on a continuing basis,
advice, recommendations, legislative proposals, and any additional
information that the Council or the Congress deems appropriate.
- Gathering information about the implementation,
effectiveness, and impact of the Americans with Disabilities Act
of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.).
- Advising the President, the Congress, the Commissioner
of the Rehabilitation Services Administration, the Assistant Secretary
for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services within the Department
of Education, and the Director of the National Institute on Disability
and Rehabilitation Research on the development of the programs
to be carried out under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.
- Providing advice to the Commissioner with respect
to the policies and conduct of the Rehabilitation Services Administration.
- Making recommendations to the Director of the
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research on
ways to improve research, service, administration, and the collection,
dissemination, and implementation of research findings affecting
persons with disabilities.
- Providing advice regarding priorities for the
activities of the Interagency Disability Coordinating Council
and reviewing the recommendations of such Council for legislative
and administrative changes to ensure that such recommendations
are consistent with the purposes of the Council to promote the
full integration, independence, and productivity of individuals
with disabilities.
- Preparing and submitting to the President and
the Congress an annual report entitled National Disability
Policy: A Progress Report.
- Preparing and submitting to the Congress and the
President an annual report containing a summary of the activities
and accomplishments of the Council.
Population Served and Current Activities
While many government agencies deal with issues and
programs affecting people with disabilities, NCD is the only federal
agency charged with addressing, analyzing, and making recommendations
on issues of public policy that affect people with disabilities
regardless of age, disability type, perceived employment potential,
economic need, specific functional ability, status as a veteran,
or other individual circumstance. NCD recognizes its unique opportunity
to facilitate independent living, community integration, and employment
opportunities for people with disabilities by assuring an informed
and coordinated approach to addressing the concerns of persons with
disabilities and eliminating barriers to their active participation
in community and family life.
NCD plays a major role in developing disability policy
in America. In fact, it was the Council that originally proposed
what eventually became the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
of 1990. NCD's present list of key issues includes improving personal
assistance services, promoting health care reform, including students
with disabilities in high-quality programs in typical neighborhood
schools, promoting equal employment and community housing opportunities,
monitoring the implementation of ADA, improving assistive technology,
and ensuring that persons with disabilities who are members of minority
groups fully participate in society.
1 Senate Committee on
Labor and Human Resources Report. The Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1989. S. Rep. 101-116. Washington,
DC: Author.
2 Senate Committee on
Labor and Human Resources Report. The Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1989. S. Rep. 101-116. Washington,
DC: Author.
3 Baffuto, T., &
Boggs, E.M. (1991). What ADA has meant and what it can mean for people
with mental retardation. American Rehabilitation, 16(4),
10-14. Herr, S. (1993). The ADA in International
and Developmental Disabilities Perspectives. In: Gostin, L.O., &
Beyer, H.A. (Eds.). Implementing the Americans
with Disabilities Act. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing
Co., 229-250.
Parry, J. (1994). Mental Disabilities
and the Americans with Disabilities Act: A Practitioner's Guide
to Employment, Insurance, Treatment, Public Access, and Housing.
Washington, DC: The American Bar Association.
The Arc and Great Lakes DBTAC (1994). The
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Working: An Easy-to-Read
Book for People with Disabilities. Arlington, TX: The Arc
Publications.
4 Office of Special Education
Programs (1994). Fifteenth Annual Report to the
U.S. Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
5 Peters-Rivera, V.,
and Paulino, E. (1993). Disabilities in the Hispanic
Community. Washington, DC: Center for Health Promotion, National
Council of La Raza.
6 United States General
Accounting Office (1994). Testimony for the Committee on Government
Operations, House of Representatives. Multiple
Employment Training Programs: Major Overhaul Is Needed. (GAO/T-HEHS-94-109).
Washington, DC: Author.
7 United States General
Accounting Office (1993). Testimony for the Committee on Labor and
Human Relations, U.S. Senate. Transition From
School to Work: S. 1361 Addresses Components of Comprehensive Strategy.
(GAO/T-HRD-93-31). Washington, DC: Author.
8 United States General
Accounting Office (1993). Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on
Select Education and Civil Rights. Vocational
Rehabilitation: Evidence for Federal Program's Effectiveness Is
Mixed. (GAO/PEMD-93-19). Washington, DC: Author.
9 SRI International (1993).
The Transition Experiences of Young People with
Disabilities: Implications for Policy and Programs. (Contract
No. 300-87-0054). Washington, DC: Office of Special Education Programs,
U.S. Department of Education.
10 Lou Harris and Associates,
Inc. (1994). NOD/Harris Survey of Americans with
Disabilities. New York, NY: Author.
11 U.S. Department of
Commerce (1993). Americans with Disabilities:
1991-92. Data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation,
Current Population Reports, P70-33, Household Economic Studies.
Washington, DC: Author, p.63.
12 Blanck, P.D. (1994).
Empirical Study of the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990-1993).
Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 4(3), 211-223.
13 42 U.S.C. 126, Secs.
12101-12213.
14 EEOC Tops 33,000
Charges. Disability Compliance Bulletin (September 28, 1994), 5
(10), 5. Horsham, PA: LRP Publications, Inc.
15 U.S. General Accounting
Office (1993). Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Select Education
and Civil Rights, House of Representatives. Americans
with Disabilities Act: Initial Accessibility Good but Important
Barriers Remain. (GAO/PEMD-93-16). Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. General Accounting Office (1994). Report to the
Chairman, Subcommittee on Select Education and Civil Rights, House
of Representatives. Americans with Disabilities
Act: Effects of the Law on Access to Goods and Services.
(GAO/PEMD-94-14). Washington, DC: Author.
16 Emery, B.D., &
Mancuso, L.L. (1993). The ADA and Psychiatric
Disabilities: Human Resources to Assist in Implementing Title I.
(NTIS PB 94-140902). Springfield, VA: Author.
Tanasichuk, K.A., & Kirchner, K.A. (1993). Psychological
Testing, the ADA, and Mental Illness. Washington, DC: Washington
Business Group on Health.
17 U.S. Congress Office
of Technology Assessment (1994). Psychiatric Disabilities,
Employment, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. (OTA-BP-BBS-124).
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
18 United Cerebral Palsy
Associations (1992). National Survey Results Look
t Readiness for ADA Access. Washington, DC: Author.
United Cerebral Palsy Associations (1993). ADA
Report Card on America: Report on ADA in American Businesses.
Washington, DC: Author.
United Cerebral Palsy Associations (1994). ADA
Report Card on America. Washington, DC: Author.
19 The President's Committee
on Employment of People with Disabilities (1994). Worksite
Accommodations for People with Cognitive Disabilities. Morgantown,
WV: The Job Accommodation Network.
20 Burkhauser, R.V.
(1990). Morality on the Cheap: The Americans with Disabilities Act.
Regulation, 3, 47- 56.
21 Berkeley Planning
Associates (1982). A Study of Accommodations Provided
to Handicapped Employees by Federal Contractors. Oakland,
CA: Berkeley Planning Associates.
22 Job Accommodation
Network (1987). Evaluation Survey, April 1987.
Washington, DC: President's Committee on Employment of People with
Disabilities.
23 United Cerebral Palsy
Associations (1992). National Survey Results Look
at Readiness for ADA Access. Washington, DC; Author.
24 Job Accommodation
Network (1994). Accommodations Cost/Benefit Analysis.
Morgantown, WV: The Job Accommodation Network.
25 29 C.F.R. 1630.2(m).
26 See 41 C.F.R. 60.741.6(d)
(1982). The regulations used the term reasonable accommodation to
cover such workplace modifications as including special equipment,
changing the physical layout of the job, eliminating certain duties
relating to the job, or providing other accommodations.
27 29 U.S.C. 794a(a)(1)(Supp.
V 1981).
28 New Mexico Association
for Retarded Citizens v. New Mexico, 678 F.2d 847, 852-55 (10th
Cir. 1982).
29 Irving Independent
School District v. Tatro, 104 S. Ct. 3371 (1984).
30 The Americans with
Disabilities Act, Section 102(b)(5)(A).
31 See Statement of
Rep. Edwards, 136 Cong.Rec. H.4624 (July 12, 1990); See also Statement
of Rep. Owens, 136 Cong.Rec. H.4623 (July 12, 1990). Americans with
Disabilities Act, Section 101(9). A reasonable accommodation could
also include providing an attendant.
32 EEOC & DOJ, 1991,
p. I-59, Regulation 1630.9.
EEOC (1992). A Technical Assistance
Manual on the Employment Provisions (Title I) of the Americans with
Disabilities Act. Washington, DC: Author.
EEOC & DOJ (1991). The Americans
with Disabilities Act Handbook. Washington, DC: Author.
33 42 U.S.C. 12102.
34 Kent v. Derwinski,
790 F. Supp. 1032 (E.D. Wash. 1991), 16 MPDLR 519.
35 29 C.F.R. 1630.2(p)(2)(i-v).
36 Stansfield, J.S.
(1976). Graduation: What happens to the retarded child when he grows
up? Exceptional Children, 39, 548.
37 Will, M. (1983).
OSERS Programming for the Transition of Youth
with Severe Disabilities: Bridges From School to Work Life.
Washington, DC: OSERS.
38 Mithaug, D.E., Horiuchi,
C.N., & Fanning, P.N. (1985). A report on the Colorado statewide
follow-up survey of special education students. Exceptional Children,
51(6), 397-404.
Schalock, R.L., Wolzen, B., Feis, P., Werbel, G.,
& Peterson, K. (1984). Post-secondary committee placement of
individuals with mental retardation: A five-year follow-up analysis.
Paper presented at the American Association on Mental Deficiency.
Annual Convention, Minneapolis, MN.
39 Leach, L.N., &
Harmon, A.S. (1993). Annotated Bibliography on
Secondary Special Education and Transitional Services, v.8.
(H158T00001). By the Transition Research Institute of Illinois,
for the U.S. Department of Education. Champaign, IL: Author.
40 Chadsky-Rusch, J.,
Rusch, F., & O'Reilly, M.F. (1991). Transition from school to
integrated communities. Remedial and Special Education, 12(6),
23-33.
41 Mithaug, D.E., Martin,
J.E., Agran, M., & Rusch, F. (1988). Why Special
Education Graduates Fail: How To Teach Them To Succeed. Colorado
Springs, CO: Ascent Publications.
42 Wehman, P. (1992).
Achievements and Challenges: A Five-Year Report
on the Status of the National Supported Employment Initiative.
Virginia Commonwealth University (Cooperative Agreement #footH133B8005291),
U.S. Department of Education, National Institute on Disability and
Rehabilitation Research. Richmond, VA: Author.
43 Kazdis, R. and Barton,
P. (1993). Improving the Transition from School
to Work in the United States. Washington, DC: American Youth
Policy Forum.
44 Office of Research
(1994). National Assessment of Vocational Education:
Interim Report to Congress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
United States General Accounting Office (1993). Report
to Congressional Requesters, U.S. Senate. Vocational
Education: Status in 2-Year Colleges in 1990-91 and Early Signs
of Change. (GAO/HRD-93-89). Washington, DC: Author.
45 United States General
Accounting Office (1993). Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on
Select Education and Civil Rights. Vocational
Rehabilitation: Evidence for Federal Program's Effectiveness Is
Mixed. (GA/PEMD-93-19). Washington, DC: Author.
46 United States General
Accounting Office (1993). The Job Training Partnership
Act: Potential for Program Improvements but National Job Training
Strategy Needed. (GAO/T-HRD-93-18). Washington, DC: Author.
47 United States General
Accounting Office (1994). Testimony Before the Committee on Government
Operations, House of Representatives. Multiple
Employment Training Programs: Major Overhaul Is Needed. (GAO/T-HEHS-94-109).
Washington, DC: Author.
48 Mank, D. (1994).
The underachievement of supported employment: A call for reinvestment.
Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 5(2), 13-17.
49 Zirkel, P.A. (1994).
New section 504/ADA checklist. The Special Educator, 10,
33-38.
50 The President's Committee
on Employment of People with Disabilities (1994). Worksite
Accommodations for People with Cognitive Disabilities. Morgantown,
WV: The Job Accommodation Network.
Hagner, D., and Abdow, E. (1994). A Closer Look at
Workplace Support. Presentation at the American Association on Mental
Retardation Annual Conference, Boston, MA.
Abt Associates, Inc. (1994). The
Second Year (FY-1993) of the NIDRR ADA Technical Assistance Initiative:
Promoting Implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act
of 1990. (Contract No. HN91041001). Cambridge, MA: Author.
51 42 U.S.C. 12117(b).
52 National Council
on Disability (1993). Meeting the Unique Needs
of Minorities with Disabilities. Washington, DC: Author.
53 Federal Register
(March 9, 1994) v 59 (46) 11155.
54 House Report 101-544,
pp. 10-11.
55 34 C.F.R. 300.18(b)(2)(i).
56 United States General
Accounting Office (1993). Report to Congressional Requesters, U.S.
Senate. Vocational Education: Status in School
Year 1990-91 and Early Signs of Change at Secondary Level.
(GAO/HRD-93-71: 63). Washington, DC: Author.
57 Ibid. 67.
58 Ibid. 70-71.
59 45 C.F.R. 2522.210(b)(1)(C).
60 Gore, A. (1993).
Creating a Government That Works Better and Costs
Less: Report of the National Performance Review. (ISBN:0-8129-2365-0),
1. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
61 Federal Register
(July 15, 1994) v 59(135) 36225.
62 National Council
on Disability (1993). Furthering the Goals of
the Americans with Disabilities Act Through Disability Policy Research
in the 1990s. Washington, DC: Author.
President's Committee on Employment of People with
Disabilities (1993). Operation People First: Towards
a National Disability Policy. Washington, DC: Author.
|