Kelsey Bakken
With the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act in 1975 and eventually the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 1990 and 2004, the United States saw an increase in access to K-12 education for thousands of students with disabilities across the country. One of the key pillars of the IDEA (2004) was ensuring that to the maximum extent appropriate students with disabilities were to be educated with their nondisabled peers (IDEA, 2004). Establishing the norm that students with disabilities should be educated with their nondisabled peers paved the way to new educational opportunities for students.
Fast-forward 15 years later and we have an entire crop of students graduating who have the skills necessary and the will to continue their education. Specifically, students with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) who were systematically excluded from institutions of higher education for decades. We have more students than ever graduating high school with a diploma but do not have a program that will fit their needs and personal goals. The higher education system has not kept up with the pace of these changes leaving students stranded and unable to continue their educational trajectory after graduation like so many of their peers. What does that next step look like for these students? How do we ensure that their disability does not become a barrier to their next step in life?
Why College Needs to Be the Next Frontier for Disability Rights
Employment and Education Statistics for Individuals with a Disability
For a student with a disability, the transition from their K-12 education to their post- secondary pathway of choice can be especially difficult. The services offered to help students with disabilities enter a college program vary drastically across districts and can be scarce, creating a difficult transition for students and families. Students with IDD accessed some sort of college at a rate of less than 40% compared to about 80% of their peers (Zafft, et. al, 2004). Unfortunately, transition plans developed in high school rarely list post-secondary education as a possibility for students with IDD (Papay, Grigal, Hart, Kwan & Smith, 2011). The rate of individuals with a disability that have some college or associate degree was 29% compared to a person with no disability at 72% (NCES, 2017). As more and more states are focusing on increasing college attainment, they should shift their focus to ensure all students, no matter their ability level, have access to a high-quality postsecondary pathway.
Similarly, alarming statistics exist when looking 22 at post-school outcomes for individuals with disabilities. The unemployment rates for individuals with a disability (8%) was twice that of an individual with no disability (4%) in 2015 (NCES, 2017). Employment rates for adults with individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) aged 21-64 remain around 34% compared to 76% for adults without disabilities (Siperstein, Parker, & Drascher, 2013).
Of adults with IDD who were working, only 18% were competitively employed with the majority of the remaining individuals working in a sheltered setting (Siperstein et al., 2013). Many states have waitlists to receive employment services in the tens of thousands (National Report on Employment Data, 2018). Postsecondary education is often a pathway to higher employment rates and higher wages throughout a persons’ lifetime (NRC, 2015) yet we are not creating those same opportunities for individuals with disabilities.
Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 – New Pathways to Higher Education
The Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA) of 2008 created a pathway to new opportunities for individuals with IDD and their access to college. There are three policies within HEOA that drastically shifted post-secondary education (PSE) for individuals with IDD. It created new pathways to financial access, determined a definition of Comprehensive Transition Programs, and allocated funds to develop model Transition and Postsecondary Programs for Students with Intellectual Disabilities (TPSID) and a national coordinating center.
Found in Title VII, Part D, Section 760 of HEOA the term Comprehensive Transition Program (CTP) means:
A degree, certificate, or non-degree program that is-
· offered by an institution of higher education
· designed to support students with (intellectual disabilities) who are seeking to continue academic, career and technical, and independent living instruction at an IHE in order to prepare for gainful employment
· includes an advising and curriculum structure; and
· requires students with intellectual disabilities to participate on not less than a half-time basis, as determined by the institution, which such participation focusing on academic components.
This was the first time that the Federal government identified specific components that should be present in a post-secondary education program that serves students with IDD. The legislation indicated a focus on inclusive academic access with the end goal of competitive employment (Grigal, Papay, Smith, Hart, & Verbeck, 2019).
The second landmark component of the act allowed students with IDD to be eligible for Pell Grants, Supplemental Education Opportunity Grants, and the Federal Work Study Program. Students were previously excluded from this sort of financial aid due to the fact that some students lacked a regular high school diploma and did not meet an “ability to benefit” test (Lee, 2009). This was a huge win for students and awarded a new opportunity for learning to thousands of students (Grigal et. al, 2019). Despite the shifts in federal law, the variability in the costs of programs leaves many low-income students without an accessible option in their area.
The last component of the HEOA was the funding and creation of the Transition and Postsecondary Programs for Students with Intellectual Disabilities (TPSID) in 2010. This policy enabled institutions of higher education (IHE) to create high-quality inclusive models of CTP (Grigal et al., 2019). Over a 5-year funding period, the TPSID offered funding to jumpstart programs at IHEs across the nation and it also created a Coordinating Center that provides technical assistance to institutions with transition programs (Department of Education, 2019). This grant created CTP programs at 58 college campuses in 23 states in the first wave of funding and an additional 23 more in the second funding period (Grigal et al., 2019). The aforementioned changes in legislation have opened pathways for individuals with IDD that were not possible before but many states have yet to ensure that every student who would benefit from a CTP program has access to one.
Comprehensive Transition Programs and Why They Work
Status of CTP Programs
Institutions of higher education (IHE) have offered transition programs for decades (VanBergeijk, 2011) but the passage of the HEOA in 2008 offered technical assistance and funding to establish stronger programs. They also focused on ensuring that programs were more inclusive and required students with IDD to participate in courses and activities with their non-disabled peers (VanBergeijk, 2011). The creation of these programs is pivotal in creating better post-school outcomes for individuals with disabilities. Individuals with IDD who participated in one of the CTP have experienced better post-school outcomes including higher levels of employment, increased wages, and extended social networks than peers who did not have a postsecondary education (Hart, 2006). Students who completed the program earned on average 73% in higher weekly income (Migliore, Butterworth, & Hart, 2009). Similarly, a higher total number of years attending a CTP was associated with higher odds of obtaining paid employment at some point (Grigal et al., 2019).
Students who received a non-degree credential have shown higher earnings than those who participated in a typical vocational rehabilitation program or had a high school diploma (Carnevale, Rose, & Hanson, as cited in Grigal et al, 2019). With the help of the HEOA, by 2013 48 out of the 52 TPSID programs offered some type of credential to students. Researchers found that earning a credential that was awarded by a TPSID program doubled the odds of gaining competitive employment at exit (Grigal et al., 2019). States should start to focus their attention on ensuring that more institutions of higher education are offering authorized credential to help create a pathway to a more financial independent life for individuals with disabilities.
Best Practices for Comprehensive Transition Programs
Researchers at Think College, the organization established by the HEOA to offer technical assistance to states and institutions, found five significant predictors of paid employment at the exit of the program (Grigal et al., 2019):
1. Earning a credential that was awarded by the IHE- Credentials that were awarded and recognized as an official credential by the IHE’s governance structure was a major predictor of employment at the exit. These credentials are more widely accepted by employers than program-specific certificates.
2. Attending a 4- year IHE- Students who attended a program housed in a 4-year IHE increased the odds of having a paid job compared to students who attended a program at a 2-year IHE.
3. Paid Work Experience- Students who obtained paid employment while enrolled in a CTP program were 15 times more likely to have a paid job at the exit. Of the students who held a job during the program, 60% continued working in that job after exiting the program.
4. Living in IHE Housing- Living on campus for part of the program had higher levels of participation in social activities, attending organized events, and attending sporting events suggesting that housing fosters socialization with peers. The study found that students living in IHE housing were less likely to have paid employment at exit. More research is needed to understand the reasons for this but researchers proposed the transition back to a student’s home community can create another hurdle for students obtaining a job.
5. Years Attended- Higher total number of years attending a program was associated with higher odds of obtaining paid employment. This often resulted in more extensive career support and community-based instruction over the extended time period.
It is obvious that enrollment in a CTP can have positive impacts on a person’s life as they age. These programs not only assist individuals with a path to paid employment but they also assist in helping individuals to gain access to a larger community. Since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990, there have been major strides for individuals with disabilities gaining access to new parts of the community. Individuals with disabilities are driving at higher rates than ever and are living independently at the same rate as the general population of youth ages 18-24 (NLTS2- Wave 2, 2006). Creating these pathways for students with IDD can help put them on a pathway to a more independent and financially stable life.
Current Obstacles for CTP Programs
Despite the increase in transition programming at institutions of higher education across the country the path to college continues to have seemingly endless obstacles for many students. Where a student lives is a major factor in determining if they have access to these programs. For example, there are currently 24 states that only have 1 or 2 programs for the entire state (Think College, 2019) making the possibility of attending one of these programs almost impossible if you are not lucky enough to live in a region with a program.
The pathway to alternative education programs for students with more significant needs can be even more tumultuous for low-income students, as there are very few CTPs and those that do exist, can be extremely expensive making them inaccessible to students from low-income backgrounds. Throughout the United States, there are currently 282 college programs for students with IDD but only 101 of them offer Federal Financial Aid. It is difficult to estimate the average cost of CTP programs but prices can range from $1,000 to upwards of $25.000. It is obvious that the max Pell Grant which is $5500 per semester will not be enough for many students. Many of the fees do not cover Room and Board, additional fees, textbooks, or travel. It is important to note that students enrolling in these programs are not eligible to receive student loans from the federal government making some programs largely inaccessible if a student’s families do not have the means to pay out of pocket.
Next Steps for States
It will be important with the reauthorization of the HEOA that state work to take advantage of the grant process to develop additional programs. The state of California can be used as an example of how to respond to the current need and potential changes in HEOA by creating partnerships with Vocational Rehabilitation services and The California Community Colleges (CCC). California created the Community to Career (C2C) programs. They established five pilot C2C programs that would offer three-year programs aligned with the requirements of HEOA and met the following requirements: offered at a college, support students with IDD who are seeking PSE, include guidance and advising, including at least 50% focus on academic opportunities with students without disabilities, and led to competitive employment outcomes as indicated in the contract (Raynor et al., 2016). The state allocated $250,000 per year for four years and created a unique partnership that created a partnership with the Vocational Rehabilitation services that were offered in conjunction with the programming at the school. The CCC worked in conjunction with UCLA to serve as a consultant to provide both advice on program development and professional development (Raynor et al., 2016). The program saw great success with increased job skills (resume building, job searching skills, etc.), paid employment during the program, and an increase in wages for those who were working (Raynor et al., 2016). California’s C2C initiative can be used as a model for how to scale these programs nationwide.
Conclusion
As we continue the national discussion about college for all, we need to make sure that we are truly meaning all. Students with intellectual and developmental disabilities have a right to these educational opportunities. We have the framework and research to back these practices up but need to work to make sure that states and institutions of higher education are following suit and creating more CTP programs.
References
Disability Employment Statistics—Office of Disability Employment Policy—United States Department of Labor. (n.d.). Retrieved November 9, 2019, from https://www.dol.gov/odep/topics/ DisabilityEmploymentStatistics.htm
Grigal, M., Papay, C., Smith, F., Hart, D., & Verbeck, R. (2019). Experiences That Predict Employment for Students with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities in Federally Funded Higher Education Programs. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 42(1), 17–28. https://doi. org/10.1177/2165143418813358
Grigal, M., Migliore, A., & Hart, D. (2014). A State Comparison of Vocational Rehabilitation Support of Youth with Intellectual Disabilities’ Participation in Postsecondary Education. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 40(3), 185-194.
Lee, S. S., & Rozell, D. M. (2018). Addressing the policy tangle: Students with intellectual disability and the path to postsecondary education, employment, and community living. Inclusive Higher Education Committee. 39.
Lee, S. (2009). Overview of the Federal Higher Education Opportunity Act. Think College. Boston, MA: University of Massachusetts Boston, Institute for Community Inclusion.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2017). Disability Rates and Employment Status by Education Attainment. Retrieved on 12/01/2019 from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/coe_tad.pdf
NRC (National Research Council). 2015. Investing in the health and well-being of young adults. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Papay, C. K., & Grigal, M. (2019). A review of the literature on postsecondary education for students with intellectual disability 2010-2016: Examining the influence of federal funding and alignment with research in disability and postsecondary education. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 32(4), 427-443.
Papay, C., Grigal, M., Hart, D., Kwan, N., & Smith, F. A. (2018). Predictors of Inclusive Course Enrollments in Higher Education by Students with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities; Washington, 56(6), 458-470,495,498. http://dx.doi.org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard. edu/10.1352/1934-9556-56.6.458
Papay, C., Kelley, K., McClellan, M. (2019). Collecting Outcome Data for Student Success and Program Improvement. How To Think College, Issue No. 7. Boston, MA: University of Massachusetts Boston, Institute for Community Inclusion.
Raynor, O., Hayward, K., Francis, W., & Campisi, C. (2016). Changing Systems to Provide Inclusive Higher Education for Students with Intellectual Disabilities. Journal of Postsecondary Education & Disability, 29(3), 271–276.
Siperstein, G. N., Parker, R. C., & Drascher, M. (2013). National snapshot of adults with intellectual disabilities in the labor force. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 39(3), 157–165. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-130658
VanBergeijk, E. O. (2011). Changes in Federal Policy: Help Students with Intellectual Disabilities Gain Access to College. Exceptional Parent, 41(12), 38–39.
Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Levine, P., Garza, N., & Gonzalez, P. (n.d.). An Overview of Findings from Wave 2 of the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). 21.
Zafft, C., Hart, D., & Zimbrich, K. (2004). College Career Connection: A Study of Youth with Intellectual Disabilities and the Impact of Postsecondary Education.