1Department of Education

REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Fiscal Year 2014 Budget Request

CONTENTS

Page

Appropriations Language ........................................................................................................K-1

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes.......................................................................K-3

Appropriation Adjustments and Transfers ...............................................................................K-5

Summary of Changes .............................................................................................................K-6

Authorizing Legislation............................................................................................................K-7

Appropriations History.............................................................................................................K-9

Significant Items in FY 2013 Appropriations Reports.............................................................K-10

Summary of Request ............................................................................................................K-10

Activities:

Vocational rehabilitation State grants ..............................................................................K-14

Client assistance State grants .........................................................................................K-31

Supported employment State grants ...............................................................................K-36

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers..................................................................................K-45

Training...........................................................................................................................K-49

Demonstration and training programs .............................................................................K-57

Independent living ...........................................................................................................K-61

Protection and advocacy of individual rights....................................................................K-72

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research ............................................K-77

Helen Keller National Center...........................................................................................K-91

Assistive technology......................................................................................................K-101

State Tables*

*State tables reflecting final 2013 allocations and 2014 estimates will be posted on the Department’s Web page at: 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/statetables/index.html#update
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-1

Appropriations Language

For carrying out, to the extent not otherwise provided, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the 

Assistive Technology Act of 1998, and the Helen Keller National Center Act, $3,655,577,000, 

of which $3,302,053,000 shall be for grants for vocational rehabilitation services under Title I 

of the Rehabilitation Act:

1 Provided, That, funds available for the Vocational Rehabilitation 

State Grants program may be used to pay the continuation costs of grants awarded under 

section 304 of the Rehabilitation Act:

2 Provided further, That no State's allocation under the 

Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants program shall be less than the total amount allocated to 

the State in fiscal year 2013 under sections 110(a) and 622(a) of the Rehabilitation Act: 3

Provided further, That section 302(g)(3) of the Rehabilitation Act shall not apply to funds 

provided under section 302 of such Act:4 Provided further, That the Secretary may use 

amounts provided in this Act that remain available subsequent to the reallotment of funds to 

States pursuant to section 110(b) of the Rehabilitation Act for innovative activities aimed at 

improving the outcomes of individuals with disabilities as defined in section 7(20)(B) of the 

Rehabilitation Act, including activities aimed at improving the education, and post-school 

outcomes of children receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and their families that 

may result in long-term improvement in the SSI child recipient's economic status and selfsufficiency:5

 Provided further, That States may award subgrants for a portion of the funds to 

other public and private, non-profit entities: Provided further, That any funds made available 

subsequent to reallotment for innovative activities aimed at improving the outcomes of

individuals with disabilities shall remain available until September 30, 2015:

6 Provided further, 

That not to exceed $20,000,000 of the amounts made available in the fourth proviso may be 

used for performance-based awards for Pay for Success projects:7 Provided further, That, with 

respect to the previous proviso, any funds obligated for such projects shall remain available for 

disbursement until expended, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1552(a):8 Provided further, That, with 
K-2

respect to the sixth proviso, any deobligated funds from such projects shall immediately be 

available for programs authorized under the Rehabilitation Act9.

NOTE

A full-year 2013 appropriation for this account had not been enacted at the time the budget was prepared; 

therefore, this account is operating under a continuing resolution (P.L. 112-175). The amounts included for 2013 

reflect the annualized level provided by the continuing resolution.

Each language provision that is followed by a footnote reference is explained in the Analysis of Language 

Provisions and Changes document which follows the appropriation language.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-3

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

Language Provision Explanation

1 ...of which $3,302,053,000 shall be for 

grants for vocational rehabilitation services 

under Title I of the Rehabilitation Act:

This proposed language earmarks funds 

provided for Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) 

State Grants program.

2 Provided, That, funds available for the 

Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants 

program may be used to pay the continuation 

costs of grants awarded under section 304 of 

the Rehabilitation Act:

This proposed language would allow the 

Secretary to reserve the amount needed to 

pay the continuation costs of grants awarded 

under the Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker 

program from the VR State Grants program.

3 Provided further, That no State's allocation 

under the Vocational Rehabilitation State 

Grants program shall be less than the total 

amount allocated to the State in fiscal year 

2013 under sections 110(a) and 622(a) of the 

Rehabilitation Act:

This proposed language would ensure that a 

State’s allocation under the Vocational 

Rehabilitation State Grants program would not 

be less than the total amount allocated to the 

State in fiscal year 2013 for both the VR State 

Grants and the Supported Employment State 

Grants programs. 

4 Provided further, That section 302(g)(3) of 

the Rehabilitation Act shall not apply to funds 

provided under section 302 of such Act:

This proposed language overrides the 

requirement that 15 percent of the Training 

program must be spent for in-service training 

of agency personnel. VR State agencies may 

use VR State grant funds for this purpose.

5 Provided further, That the Secretary may 

use amounts provided in this Act that remain 

available subsequent to the reallotment of 

funds to States pursuant to section 110(b) of 

the Rehabilitation Act for innovative activities 

aimed at improving the outcomes of 

individuals with disabilities as defined in 

section 7(20)(B) of the Rehabilitation Act, 

including activities aimed at improving the 

education and post-school outcomes of 

children receiving Supplemental Security 

Income (SSI) and their families that may 

result in long-term improvement in the SSI 

child recipient's economic status and selfsufficiency:

This language would allow the Secretary to 

use amounts that remain available 

subsequent to the reallotment of funds to 

States under the VR State Grants program for 

innovative activities designed to improve the 

outcomes of individuals with disabilities, 

including, if needed, activities to improve the 

outcomes of children receiving SSI and their 

families under the PROMISE pilot program.

The definition of individuals with disabilities 

referenced in the language (section 7(20)(B) 

of the Rehabilitation Act) is broad enough to 

include children with disabilities, including 

children receiving SSI.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-4

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

Language Provision Explanation

6 Provided further, That any funds made 

available subsequent to reallotment for 

activities aimed at improving the outcomes of 

[children receiving SSI and their families] 

individuals with disabilities shall remain

available until September 30, 2015:

This language would permit the funds made 

available subsequent to reallotment of VR 

State Grant funds for activities aimed at 

improving the outcomes of individuals with 

disabilities to remain available for two years. 

7 Provided further, That not to exceed 

$20,000,000 of the amounts made available 

in the fourth proviso may be used for 

performance-based awards for Pay for 

Success projects:

This language would permit the Secretary to 

use up to $20,000,000 of the funds used for 

innovative activities designed to improve the 

outcomes of individuals with disabilities for 

performance-based awards under the Pay for 

Success program.

8 Provided further, That, with respect to the 

previous proviso, any funds obligated for 

such projects shall remain available for 

disbursement until expended, 

notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1552(a):

This language would permit funds designated 

by the Secretary for the Pay for Success 

projects to remain available until expended. 

9 Provided further, That, with respect to the 

sixth proviso, any deobligated funds from 

such projects shall immediately be available 

for programs authorized under the 

Rehabilitation Act.

This language requires any deobligated funds 

of the Pay for Success projects to be available 

for programs under the Rehabilitation 

Services and Disability Research account.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-5

Appropriation Adjustments and Transfers

(dollars in thousands)

Appropriation/Adjustments/Transfers 2012 2013 2014

Discretionary:

Discretionar y: Appropriation ............................................................ $390,307 $389,569 $353,524

Discretionar y: Across-the-board reduction (P.L. 112-74) ................. -738 0 0

Discretionar y budget authority:Across-the-board increase (P.L. 112-175)............... 0 +2,384 0

Total, adjusted discretionary appropriation...... 389,569 391,953 353,524

Mandatory:

Mandator y: Appropriation............................................................. 3,121,712 3,230,972 3,302,053

Mandator y Unobligated balance expiring.................................... -95,370

Mandator y Transfer between expired and unexpired accounts ... 0 +95,370 0

Total, comparable discretionary and mandatory 

appropriation................................................... 3,511,281 3,718,295 3,655,577

Total, budget authority.............................................. 3,511,281 3,718,295 3,655,577
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-6

Summary of Changes

(dollars in thousands)

2013............................................................................................ $3,620,541 1

2014............................................................................................. 3,655,577

Net change............................................................ -35,036

1 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175

Increases: 2013 base

Change 

from base

Program:

Program: Increase in funding for Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State 

grants. $3,230,972 +$71,081

Program: Increase in funding for Demonstration and Training programs to 

support technical assistance activities. 5,325 +425

Program: Increase in funding for NIDDR to support research activities

focusing on employment. 108,817 +1,183

Subtotal, increases 72,689

Decreases: 2013 base

Change 

from base

Program:

Program: Eliminates funding for the Supported Employment State grants 

program consistent with the Administration’s proposal to reduce 

duplication of effort and administrative costs and improve 

efficiency and accountability. 29,068 -29,068

Program: Eliminates funding for the Migrant and Seasonal Farm Workers 

program consistent with the Administration’s proposal to reduce 

duplication of effort and administrative costs. 1,262 -1,262

Program: Decrease in funding for the Training program consistent with the 

Administration’s proposal to reduce administrative costs, 

streamline program administration, and improve efficiency and 

accountability. 35,515 -5,327

Program Decrease reflects the elimination of funding for a separate 

alternative financing program that was authorized in the 2012 

appropriations language. 32,836 -1,996

Subtotal, decreases -37,653

Net change + 35,036
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-7

Authorizing Legislation

(dollars in thousands)

Activity

2013

Authorized

footnote

2013

Estimate

footnote

2014

Authorized

footnote

2014

Request

Vocational rehabilitation (VR) State grants:

VR Grants to States (RA-I A, B-110 and 111) 0 1,2 $3,191,748 0 1,3 $3,261,966

VR Grants for Indians (RA-I-C) --- 2,4 39,224 --- 3,4 40,087

Client assistance State grants (RA-I-112) 0 1 12,240 0 1 12,240

Supported employment State grants (RA-VI-B) 0 5 29,068 0 5 0

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers (RA-III-304) 0 5 1,262 0 5 0

Training (RA-III-302(a)-(g)(2),(h)-(i)) 0 1 35,515 0 1 30,188

Demonstration and training programs (RA-III-303) 0 1 5,325 0 1 5,750

Independent living (IL):

IL State grants (RA-VII-1-B) 0 1 23,359 0 1 23,359

IL Centers (RA-VII-1-C) 0 1 79,953 0 1 79,953

IL Services for older blind individuals (RA-VII-2) 0 1 34,018 0 1 34,018

Protection and advocacy of individual rights (RA-V-509) 0 1 18,031 0 1 18,031

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research 

(RA-II) 0 1 108,817 0 1 110,000

Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults 

(HKNCA) 0 1 9,145 0 1 9,145

Assistive technology (ATA):

Assistive technology programs (ATA-4,5, and 6) 0 6 30,840 0 6 30,840

AT Alternative financing programs 0 7 1,996 0 0

Total definite authorization 0 0

Total discretionary appropriation 389,569 353,524

K-7
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Authorizing Legislation—continued

(dollars in thousands)

K-8

Activity

2013

Authorized

footnote

2013

Estimate

footnote

2014

Authorized

footnote

2014

Request

Total mandatory appropriation 3,230,972 3,302,053

Total appropriation 3,620,541 3,655,577

Portion of request not authorized 3,655,577

Total appropriation including 0.612 percent ATB

discretionary increase

3,622,925

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004; the program is authorized in FY 2013 through appropriations language. Continued funding is 

proposed for this program in FY 2014 under appropriations language. 2 The authorizing legislation specifies that the amount to be appropriated for VR State grants for a fiscal year be at least at the level of the prior fiscal year 

increased by the 12-month percentage change from October to October in the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPIU). In FY 2013, this 

amount was $3,230,972 thousand. 3 The authorizing legislation specifies that the amount to be appropriated for a fiscal year be at least the level of the prior fiscal year increased by the 

12-month percentage change from October to October in the CPIU. In FY 2014, this amount is $3,302,053 thousand. 4 The Rehabilitation Act requires that 1.0 percent to 1.5 percent of the appropriation for Vocational Rehabilitation State grants be set aside for Grants for 

Indians. 5 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. The Administration is not proposing to authorize this program through appropriations language for FY 

2013. 6 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; this program is proposed for authorization in FY 2014 through appropriations language. Up to $1,235 

thousand may be used for National Activities, unless the amount available for AT State grants exceeds $20,953,534, in which case up to $1,900 thousand may 

be used for National Activities. 7 The FY 2012 appropriation authorized funds to support a separate competitive alternative financing program. 

K-8
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-9

Appropriations History

(dollars in thousands)

Year

Budget 

Estimate 

to Congress

House 

Allowance Footnote

Senate 

Allowance Foot

-

note Appropriation

2005 $3,047,197 $3,054,587 $3,077,328 $3,074,574

2006 3,059,298 3,128,638 3,133,638 3,125,544

2007 3,180,414 N/A1 N/A1 3,242,512

2008 3,184,263 3,279,743 3,286,942 3,276,768

2009 3,218,264 3,387,4432 3,379,1092 3,387,762

Recovery Act Supplemental 

(PL 111-5) 0 700,000 610,000 680,000

2010 3,500,735 3,504,305 3,507,3223 3,506,861

2011 3,565,326 3,501,7664 3,542,5103 3,474,7185

2012 3,541,111 3,522,6866 3,511,7356 3,511,281

2013 3,517,710 3,511,2817 3,626,3807 3,622,9258

2014 3,655,577

1 This account operated under a full-year continuing resolution (P.L. 110-5). House and Senate Allowance 

amounts are shown as N/A (Not Available) because neither body passed a separate appropriations bill. 2 The levels for the House and Senate allowances reflect action on the regular annual 2009 appropriations bill, 

which proceeded in the 110th Congress only through the House Subcommittee and the Senate Committee. 3 The levels for the Senate allowance reflects Committee action only. 4 The levels for the House allowance reflects the House-passed full-year continuing resolution. 5 The level for appropriation reflects the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 

(P.L. 112-10). 6 The level for the House allowance reflects an introduced bill and the level for the Senate allowance reflects 

Senate Committee action only. 7 The level for the House and Senate allowances reflect action on the regular annual 2013 appropriations bill, 

which proceeded in the 112th Congress only through the House Subcommittee and the Senate Committee. 8 The amount shown includes the 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided by P.L. 112-175, in effect 

through March 27, 2013.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-10

Significant Items in FY 2013 Appropriations Reports

Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants - PROMISE

Senate: Report 112-176. The Committee bill continues language, as requested by the 

Administration, allowing unmatched funds in excess of any funds requested 

during the reallotment process to be available for the PROMISE program 

described under the Special Education account and SSA. Such funds used for 

the PROMISE program will remain available for obligation through September 

30, 2014. As requested by the Administration, the Committee bill also includes 

new bill language that allows a portion of the funds provided under the PROMISE 

program to be used for Pay for Success awards, which are described in the 

highlights section in the introduction to the Committee report. The Committee 

expects to be notified prior to the issuance of any notice related to Pay for 

Success activity.

Response: Grants under the Promoting Readiness of Minors in SSI (PROMISE) program will 

be awarded in fiscal year 2013 from fiscal year 2012 funds that remained 

available subsequent to the reallotment of funds to States under the Vocational 

Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants program. The grant funds, which remain 

available for Federal obligation until September 30, 2013 under the authority 

provided in the fiscal year 2012 appropriations language, will not be used for Pay 

for Success activities. VR funds that are unobligated at the end of FY 2013 will 

be made available to help support PROMISE project continuation costs.

Demonstration and Training Programs

Senate: Report 112-176. The Committee recommendation includes $750,000 to support 

a new competition for parent training and information centers, which provide 

information and training on transition planning, the adult service system, and 

strategies that prepare youth for successful employment, postsecondary 

education, and independent living outcomes. The Committee expects RSA to 

coordinate with OSEP in carrying out this activity.

Response: The funds provided for the Demonstration and Training programs in fiscal year 

2013 are only sufficient to cover the continuation costs of ongoing activities. 

Therefore, funds are not available for new awards, including awards for parent 

training and information centers in fiscal year 2013. The Department will use the 

funds appropriated to support continuation costs under the Demonstration and 

Training Programs; no new grant competitions will be conducted in fiscal year 

2013.

Summary of Request
Summary of Request

K-11

K-11

Click here for accessible version 

(in thousands of dollars) 2014

Category 2012 2013 President's

Account, Program and Activity Code Appropriation Appropriation Budget Amount Percent

Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research

1. Vocational rehabilitation (VR) State grants:

(a) Grants to States (RA Title I-A, sections 110 and 111) M 3,083,814 3,191,748 3,261,966 178,152 5.777%

(b) Grants to Indians (RA Title I-C) M 37,898 39,224 40,087 2,189 5.776%

Mandatory baseline M 3,121,712 3,230,972 3,302,053 180,341 5.777%

 2. Client assistance State grants (RA section 112) D 12,240 12,240 12,240 0 0.000%

 3. Supported employment State grants (RA VI-B) D 29,068 29,068 0 (29,068) -100.000%

 4. Migrant and seasonal farmworkers (RA section 304) D 1,262 1,262 0 (1,262) -100.000%

 5. Training (RA section 302(a)-(g)(2), (h)-(i)) D 35,515 35,515 30,188 (5,327) -14.999%

 6. Demonstration and training programs (RA section 303) D 5,325 5,325 5,750 425 7.981%

 7. Independent living (RA VII):

(a) State grants (Chapter 1, Part B) D 23,359 23,359 23,359 0 0.000%

(b) Centers (Chapter 1, Part C) D 79,953 79,953 79,953 0 0.000%

(c) Services for older blind individuals (Chapter 2) D 34,018 34,018 34,018 0 0.000%

Subtotal 137,330 137,330 137,330 0 0.000%

 8. Protection and advocacy of individual rights (RA section 509) D 18,031 18,031 18,031 0 0.000%

 9. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (RA II) D 108,817 108,817 110,000 1,183 1.087%

 10. Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults (HKNCA) D 9,145 9,145 9,145 0 0.000%

 11. Assistive technology programs (ATA, sections 4,5, and 6) D 32,836 32,836 30,840 (1,996) -6.079%

Subtotal 389,569 389,569 353,524 (36,045) -9.253%

Total 3,511,281 3,620,541 3,655,577 144,296 4.109%

Discretionary D 389,569 389,569 353,524 (36,045) -9.253%

Mandatory baseline M 3,121,712 3,230,972 3,302,053 180,341 5.777%

Across-the-board 0.612% increase applied to discretionary appropriation, provided in P.L. 112-175. 2,384

Total, Discretionary Appropriation 389,569 391,953 353,524 (36,045) -9.253%

NOTES: D = discretionary program, M = mandatory program; FY = fiscal year 

FY 2013 discretionary appropriation amounts are based on P.L. 112-175, the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2013, that provided appropriations through March 27, 2013. FY 2013 mandatory amounts are 

either specifically authorized levels, or are based on FY 2013 President's Budget Policy, updated for more recent estimates of mandatory costs, or FY 2014 President's Budget Policy, as applicable.

Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.

2014 President's Budget 

Compared to 2012 Appropriation
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Summary of Request 

K-12

People with disabilities represent a vital and integral part of our society. As a Nation, our goals 

include independence, equal opportunity, and productivity for Americans with disabilities, many 

of whom require a range of services and supports in order to learn, work productively and live in 

the community. Numerous pieces of federal legislation establish policies to meet these 

requirements. We recognize that once these supports and services are provided, people with 

disabilities contribute to the fabric of our country just like everyone else.

The Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research account supports grants to States for 

vocational rehabilitation (VR) and independent living services and a variety of smaller research, 

demonstration, and service programs authorized under the Rehabilitation Act, as well programs 

authorized under the Helen Keller National Center Act and the Assistive Technology Act of 1998 

(the AT Act). The Administration’s 2014 request for this account provides $3.7 billion to support 

comprehensive and coordinated vocational rehabilitation and independent living services for 

individuals with disabilities through research, training, demonstration, technical assistance, 

evaluation, and direct service programs. 

The $3.3 billion request for the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants program includes an 

increase of $71.081 million over the fiscal year 2013 mandatory level, to assist States and tribal 

governments to increase the participation of individuals with disabilities in the workforce. The 

request includes the CPIU adjustment specified in the authorizing statute, which would more 

than offset the reduction in funds ($35 million) resulting from the Administration’s proposal to 

eliminate separate funding authorities for the smaller VR-related programs under the 

Rehabilitation Act. Direct service programs proposed for elimination include Supported 

Employment State Grants and Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers programs. The 

Administration is also proposing language that would override the requirement to set aside the 

portion of the Training program funds for grants to State VR agencies to support in-service 

training for agency personnel since in-service training can be provided through the VR State 

Grants program.

The Administration believes that the proposed eliminations would reduce duplication of effort and 

administrative costs, streamline program administration at the Federal and local levels, and 

improve accountability. To lessen the potential impact of this proposal, the Administration is 

proposing language that would ensure that no State's fiscal year 2014 allocation under the 

Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants program would be less than the total amount allocated to 

a State under the distribution formulas for the VR State grants program and the Supported 

Employment State Grants program for fiscal year 2013. In addition, the Administration is seeking 

authority to pay the fiscal year 2014 continuation costs of the remaining four Migrant and 

Seasonal Farmworkers projects from funds appropriated for the VR State Grants program. 

The 2014 request also includes language that would allow the Secretary to use amounts under 

the VR State Grants program that would otherwise lapse to support innovative activities aimed at 

improving outcomes for individuals with disabilities, including activities under the Promoting 

Readiness of Minors in Supplemental Security Income (PROMISE) program, and that would 

provide authority for these funds to remain available for Federal obligation until September 30, 

2015.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Summary of Request

K-13

The $110 million request for the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research 

includes an increase of $1.2 million over the 2012 level for research activities in the employment 

domain under a new regulatory framework that NIDRR intends to have in place by 2014. 

The request for the Demonstration and Training programs is $5.8 million, $425,000 above the

fiscal 2012 level, to support model demonstrations, technical assistance, and projects designed 

to improve program performance and the delivery of vocational rehabilitation and independent 

living services. 

The Administration’s request of $30.2 million for the Training program includes a reduction of 

$5.3 million from the 2012 level, reflecting the elimination of the funding reservation for the 

In-Service Training program.

The $30.8 million request for Assistive Technology (AT) programs includes $25.6 million for the 

AT State grant program, $4.3 million for the Protection and Advocacy for Assistive Technology 

program, and $1.0 million for technical assistance required under the AT Act’s National Activities 

authority. The proposed decrease reflects the elimination of funding for a separate alternative 

financing program that was authorized in the 2012 appropriations language. 

All other programs in the Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research account would be 

maintained at the 2012 level. The Administration believes that this level will provide sufficient 

funds for the activities in these programs. 

The Administration continues to look for ways to better coordinate services and improve 

outcomes for people with disabilities. Since 2012, the Departments of Education and Labor 

have instituted a formal process to review current investments, plan future ones, and share 

information about common goals and grantees. These discussions will lead to more frequent 

joint grant solicitations, reduce duplication, and ensure the best use of limited funding with an 

eye towards improving outcomes for people with disabilities.

The Rehabilitation Act requires that 1 percent of the aggregate funds appropriated for programs 

authorized in Titles II, III, VI, and VII be used for minority outreach activities. In fiscal year 2014, 

this amount would total $2.8 million, and to the extent possible, the requirement will be 

implemented by reserving 1 percent of the funds provided for each of the specified programs.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-14

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title I, Parts A, B (Sections 110 and 111), and C)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2014 Authorization: 0 1, 2

Budget Authority: 

Change

Program 2012 2013 2014 from 2013

State grants $3,083,814 $3,191,748 $3,261,966 +$70,218

Indian set-aside 37,898 39,224 40,087 +863

Total 3,121,712 3,230,972 3,302,053 +71,081

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. The Administration proposes to continue funding in FY 2014 

through appropriations language. 2 The authorizing statute specifies that the amount to be appropriated for a fiscal year be at least the level of the 

prior fiscal year increased by the 12-month percentage change from October to October in the Consumer Price Index 

for all Urban Consumers (CPIU). In FY 2014 this amount is $3,302,053 thousand. The authorizing statute also 

requires that not less than 1.0 percent and not more than 1.5 percent of the appropriation for each fiscal year for 

Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants be set aside for Grants for American Indians.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants program supports VR services through formula 

grants to State VR agencies. These agencies provide a wide range of services designed to help 

persons with disabilities prepare for and engage in gainful employment to the extent of their 

capabilities. Individuals with a physical or mental impairment that results in a substantial 

impediment to employment who can benefit in terms of an employment outcome and require VR 

services are eligible for assistance. The VR State Grants program is a required partner in the 

one-stop service delivery systems under section 121 of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA). 

Program services are tailored to the specific needs of the individual through an individualized 

plan for employment (IPE). An eligible individual, or as appropriate, the individual’s 

representative, may develop all or part of the IPE with or without assistance from a qualified 

rehabilitation counselor, or with technical assistance from other outside resources. The IPE must 

be agreed to by the individual and approved and signed by a qualified rehabilitation counselor 

employed by the State VR agency. The program may provide a variety of services, such as 

vocational evaluation, counseling, mental and physical restoration, education, vocational training, 

job placement, rehabilitation technology, and supported employment services. Priority is given to 

serving individuals with the most significant disabilities. 

This is a current-funded formula grant program that provides financial assistance to States to 

cover the cost of direct services and program administration. The authorizing legislation requires 

the program to be funded at least at the prior year level, and increased by the percentage 

increase in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (CPIU) over the past year. States 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-15

may carry over unobligated Federal funds for an additional year, if a State has met all matching 

requirements for the fiscal year in which funds were appropriated. 

An allotment formula that takes into account population and per capita income is used to 

distribute funds among the States. The fiscal year 2012 State distributions were based on the 

April 1, 2010 Census data released on December 21, 2010. The fiscal year 2013 State 

distributions are based on the July 1, 2011 estimates published in December 2011. The fiscal 

year 2014 State distributions are based on the July 1, 2012 estimates published on December 

20, 2012. Per capita income averages for fiscal years 2012 and 2013 were based on Bureau of 

Economic Analysis revised estimates for calendar years 2007, 2008, and 2009 as reported by 

the Department of Commerce as September 22, 2011. Per capita income averages for fiscal 

year 2014 are based on Bureau of Economic Analysis revised estimates for calendar years 

2009, 2010, and 2011 as reported by the Department of Commerce on September 25, 2012. 

Grant funds are administered by VR agencies designated by each State. There are currently a 

total of 80 State VR agencies. Thirty-two (32) States operate a “combined” agency serving all 

disability categories. Twenty-four (24) States operate a separate agency for individuals who are 

blind or visually impaired and a “general” agency for all other disability categories. The State 

matching requirement is 21.3 percent, except the State share is 50 percent for the cost of 

construction of a facility for community rehabilitation program purposes. States are required to 

maintain the level of State expenditures made under the State plan from non-Federal sources at 

least at the level spent during the fiscal year 2 years earlier. Each State is also required to 

reserve and use a portion of the Federal funds received under the VR State Grants program for 

innovation and expansion activities authorized in section 101(a)(18).

Section 106 of the Rehabilitation Act (the Act) requires the establishment of evaluation standards 

and performance indicators for the VR program that include outcome and related measures of 

program performance. Each State VR agency must report program performance data 60 days 

after the end of each fiscal year that is used to determine if it is in compliance with the evaluation 

standards and performance indicators. A State agency failing to meet the standards must 

develop a program improvement plan outlining specific actions to be taken to improve program 

performance. The Department provides technical assistance to those State agencies that 

perform below the established evaluation standards to assist them to improve their performance. 

The Act requires that not less than 1.0 percent or more than 1.5 percent of the funds 

appropriated for the VR State grants program be set aside for grants under the American Indian 

VR Services program (section 121 of the Act). Service grants for up to 60 months are awarded 

to Indian tribes on a competitive basis to help tribes develop the capacity to provide VR services 

to American Indians with disabilities living on or near reservations. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-16

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were as follows:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2009...............................................................$2,974,635

Recovery Act ......................................................540,000

2010.................................................................3,084,696

2011.................................................................3,084,696

2012.................................................................3,121,712

2013.................................................................3,230,972

FY 2014 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $3.302 billion, an increase of $71.081 million over the fiscal year 

2013 mandatory level, to assist States and tribal governments to increase the participation of 

individuals with disabilities in the workforce. Of the amount requested, $40.087 million would be 

set aside to support grants under the American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services 

(AIVRS) program. The request includes the CPIU adjustment specified in the authorizing 

statute, which would more than offset the reduction in funds ($35 million) resulting from the 

Administration’s proposal to eliminate separate funding authorities for the smaller VR-related 

programs under the Rehabilitation Act.

The Administration believes that the proposed eliminations would reduce duplication of effort and 

administrative costs, streamline program administration at the Federal and local level, and 

improve efficiency and accountability. Direct service programs proposed for elimination include

Supported Employment State Grants and Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers programs. In 

addition, the Administration is proposing language that would override the requirement in section 

302(g)(3) to set-aside 15 percent of the funds appropriated for the Training program to support 

the training of existing State VR agency personnel. State VR agencies are able to use VR State 

Grant funds for training State agency personnel, consistent with the agency’s Comprehensive 

System of Personnel Development (CSPD) plan under Title I of the Rehabilitation Act. The 

proposal would eliminate the administrative costs involved in making small grants each year to 

State VR agencies under the Training program and improve the efficiency of training delivered 

under the Rehabilitation Act.

To lessen the potential impact of this proposal, the Administration is proposing language that 

would ensure that no State's fiscal year 2014 allocation under the Vocational Rehabilitation State 

Grants program would be less than the total amount allocated to a State under the distribution 

formulas for the VR State grants program and the Supported Employment State Grants program

for fiscal year 2013. The Administration is also seeking authority to pay the final year of 

continuation costs for the remaining four Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers projects from funds 

appropriated for the VR State Grants program.

The direct service programs proposed for elimination have the primary purpose of assisting

individuals with disabilities to obtain employment. All of the individuals receiving supported 

employment services with funds provided under the State Supported Employment program also 

receive services through the VR program. In addition, all of the individuals receiving services 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-17

under the Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers program are eligible to receive VR services and 

most of these individuals are currently receiving these services. The Administration believes that 

the benefits of this proposal outweigh the costs of any short term disruption that may be 

encountered as a result of this proposal. 

The Administration is also examining options that will help to ensure that State agencies continue 

to invest appropriate levels of their resources in providing supported employment services. All 

States that have significant numbers of migrant and seasonal farmworkers, including States that 

currently have projects funded under the Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers program, would be 

encouraged to use their VR funds to carry out the strategies and practices that have been found 

to be effective in reaching out to this population. 

Although many people with disabilities are obtaining jobs and remaining employed, the 

unemployment rate for people with disabilities is still unacceptably high. For example, in its 

2009 Annual Disability Status Report (2011), the Cornell University Rehabilitation and Research 

Center on Disability Demographics and Statistics reported results from the 2009 American 

Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau) indicating that of those aged 21-64 (U.S. working age 

population), people with sensory, physical, mental, and/or self-care disabilities are much less 

likely to be employed (either full-time or part-time) than people without such disabilities 

(36.0 percent versus 76.8 percent respectively) and that only 22.5 percent of working-age 

individuals with disabilities were working full-time/full-year. 

The VR State Grants program is the primary Federal vehicle for assisting individuals with 

disabilities, particularly individuals with the most significant disabilities, to prepare for, obtain, or 

retain employment. Nationally, there are about 1 million individuals with disabilities in various

phases of the vocational rehabilitation process within the VR system, about 93 percent of whom

are individuals with significant disabilities. If a State VR agency cannot serve all eligible persons, 

it must serve first those individuals with the most significant disabilities under an “order of 

selection.” For fiscal year 2013, the State Plans of 37 of the 80 State VR agencies documented 

that the agency had established an order of selection, one more agency than in fiscal year 2012. 

This total includes 62.5 percent of the general and combined State VR agencies and 8 percent of 

the State VR agencies serving blind individuals. In fiscal year 2012, preliminary waiting list data 

from the RSA Cumulative Caseload Report show that there were about 77,605 individuals with 

disabilities on the waiting list for VR services at some point during the fiscal year, about 163

fewer than in fiscal year 2011. At the end of fiscal year 2012, VR agencies reported a total of 

29,369 individuals remaining on waiting lists (about 4,833 fewer than in 2011), 73 percent of 

whom were individuals with significant disabilities.

In addition, the number of individuals on a waiting list varies considerably among State agencies 

operating under an order of selection. For example, only 25 of the 30 agencies that identified in 

the Caseload Report that they were operating under an order of selection in fiscal year 2012

reported that there were individuals on the waiting list during the fiscal year. At the end of fiscal 

year 2012, 5 agencies had fewer than 30 individuals on a waiting list, while 11 agencies had lists 

that ranged from over 1,287 to 4,401 individuals. As compared to the end of fiscal year 2011, 

thirteen agencies had significantly fewer individuals on waiting lists at the end of fiscal year 2012, 

while four VR agencies reported significant increases in the number of individuals on their 

waiting lists in fiscal year 2012. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-18

State VR agencies also play a major role under the Ticket to Work program administered by the 

Social Security Administration (SSA). Under this program, most Supplemental Security Income 

(SSI) recipients and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries between the ages 

of 18 and 64 are offered a “ticket,” which they may use to obtain employment services, VR 

services, and other support services from an employment network of their choice to enable them 

to enter the workforce. State VR agencies have the option of participating in the Ticket to Work 

program as an employment network or remaining in the traditional reimbursement system, 

including the option to elect either payment method on a case-by-case basis. Under the 

traditional system, the VR program is reimbursed for the costs of services provided to SSDI and 

SSI beneficiaries with a single payment after the beneficiary performs substantial gainful activity 

(for 2012, earnings in excess of $1,010 per month for non-blind disabled beneficiaries and 

$1,690 per month for blind beneficiaries) for at least 9 consecutive months. As of 

September 27, 2012, about 252,595 Ticket-Holders are working with a State VR agency under 

the traditional reimbursement arrangement and have their tickets “in use” with the State VR 

agency. In addition, about 38 percent of the 62,430 tickets that have been assigned have been 

assigned to State VR agencies and about 62 percent have been assigned to other employment 

networks.

Disability Innovation Fund

The fiscal year 2012 appropriations bill included language that allows the Secretary to use 

amounts that remain available subsequent to the reallotment of funds to States under the 

VR State Grants program pursuant to section 110(b) of the Rehabilitation Act for improving the 

education and employment outcomes of children receiving SSI and their families. In fiscal year 

2013, these funds, which remain available for Federal obligation until September 30, 2013, will 

be used to support State model demonstration projects under the Promoting Readiness of 

Minors in Social Security Income (PROMISE) pilot program. PROMISE is a joint initiative with 

the Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Departments of Health and Human Services 

and Labor. The Department will award a small number of grants to States that will develop 

partnerships and implement interventions designed to improve the provision and coordination of 

services and supports for children who receive SSI and their families and achieve outcomes that 

lead to increased economic self-sufficiency and a reduction in their dependence on SSI 

payments. Projects will be required to collaborate with the national evaluation of PROMISE to be 

conducted under a contract with SSA, in collaboration with the Department and use a rigorous 

evaluation design to guide implementation, gather evidence, and validate outcomes. 

The Administration believes that building effective partnerships will increase the likelihood of 

success of these projects by improving the coordination of services and integrating multiple 

funding sources and other resources, as well as contributing to the States’ ability to effectively 

serve these individuals. We also believe that focusing on the needs of families may help to 

further the long-term goal of independence and self-sufficiency for these SSI beneficiaries. In 

particular, we are interested in testing whether intervening with the child and family at an earlier 

age (14 to 16 years of age) will lead to better outcomes. For this reason, each PROMISE project 

must have several core features: (1) strong and effective partnerships with agencies responsible 

for programs that play a key role in providing services to the target populations; (2) a plan to 

provide a model set of coordinated services, supports, and practices targeted to the needs of 

child recipients of SSI and their families; and (3) the capacity to achieve results, including the 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-19

capacity to implement the required project design and the collect the data needed to test and 

evaluate the results of the project.

The President’s fiscal year 2013 request included language that would allow the Secretary to use

funds that remain available subsequent to the reallotment of funds to State VR agencies to 

support innovative activities aimed at improving outcomes for individuals with disabilities,

including activities under the PROMISE program, and provide authority for the funds to remain 

available for Federal obligation until September 30, 2014. The Administration is proposing 

similar language in the FY 2014 request. After providing funds that may be needed to support 

the PROMISE program, the Department proposes to set aside $5 million of the VR funds that 

remain available at the end of fiscal year 2014 to support cross-agency projects to improve 

educational, employment and other key outcomes for disconnected youth with disabilities, which 

may include Pay for Success projects and targeted technical assistance to support the 

development of Performance Partnership Pilots, and an unspecified amount to support an 

SSDI/SSI pilot demonstration project. The balance of funds would be used to support other 

innovative activities aimed at improving services and employment outcomes of individuals with 

disabilities, including individuals with disabilities under the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants 

program and individuals with disabilities served under workforce system through the Department 

of Labor’s Workforce Innovation Fund (WIF). The Administration is seeking authority to use up 

to $20,000,000 of the funds for innovative activities to support Pay for Success awards, a multiagency productivity initiative designed to employ “pay for performance” models to drive better 

results and greater cost-efficiency from Federal investments.

The President’s fiscal year 2014 budget request includes a proposal to provide SSA with 

enhanced demonstration authority under the SSDI and SSI programs to test promising, 

research-based interventions with the potential to be scalable and cost-effective. This authority 

would allow for a range of new demonstration projects such as targeted early intervention efforts 

aimed at preserving the wellbeing and work ability of the non-beneficiaries most at risk of 

becoming severely impaired. SSA will work with the Department and other federal partners to 

develop possible demonstrations, such as incentivizing State efforts to utilize an array of State 

and federal programs/funding streams, which could include the Vocational Rehabilitation State 

Grants program, to provide early intervention services to at-risk populations. 

Section 110(b)(2) of the Rehabilitation Act requires the Commissioner to make available for 

reallotment any funds that were allotted but not utilized by a State to carry out the VR program to 

States that will be able to use such additional amounts during the current or subsequent fiscal 

year, provided they are able to pay the non-Federal share of the cost in the fiscal year for which 

the funds are appropriated. VR funds become available for reallotment when a State is unable to 

provide the required non-Federal share (21.3 percent) for the total amount of funds allotted to the 

State under the formula distribution or when a State is unable to meet its maintenance of effort 

(MOE) requirement (and did not request or receive a full or partial waiver of its MOE 

requirement). Historically, the Department has been able to reallot all of the funds that have 

been returned or unallotted due to MOE penalties because the request for additional funds 

exceeded the amounts available for reobligation. However, for the last three fiscal years 

(2010 -2012), the amount of funds that were returned by States, or remained unobligated due to 

MOE penalties, exceeded the additional funds requested due to the increase in the number of 

States unable to match the Federal funds. In fiscal year 2012, 16 of the 80 State VR agencies 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-20

relinquished funds, 6 fewer than the previous year. As in fiscal year 2011, a large amount of the 

2012 funds were relinquished by a small number of States with 5 VR agencies relinquishing 

67 percent of the total $143 million relinquished. However, fewer States requested additional 

funds in 2012 and the total amount of additional funds requested in the reallotment was less than 

in fiscal year 2011. In addition, a total of 22 States and territories did not meet their fiscal year 

2011 maintenance of effort requirement resulting in $42.6 million in penalty reductions taken 

from fiscal year 2012 funds. As a result, there is a total of $95 million in fiscal 2012 funds that 

are available to be used to support grants and other related activities under the PROMISE 

program during fiscal year 2013. Absent authority provided in appropriations language, these 

annual funds would have lapsed and no longer be available for Federal obligation.

American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services

In fiscal year 2014 the Administration would set aside $40.087 million for grants under the 

American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services (AIVRS) program, an increase of $863,000 

over the amount to be set aside in FY 2013. The request would enable the Administration to 

provide support for about 90 tribal VR projects, including 53 new awards and 37 continuation 

awards. These funds assist tribal governments to provide a program of VR services, in a 

culturally relevant manner, to American Indians with disabilities residing on or near reservations.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

Measures 2012 2013 2014

Individuals receiving services 1 1,011,665 1,011,665 1,011,665

Individuals with significant disabilities as a 

percent of all individuals receiving services

93% 93% 93%

Total number of cases closed 474,380 474,380 474,380

Individuals whose cases were closed and 

received VR services 323,275 323,275 323,275

Individuals achieving an employment outcome 2 180,200 180,200 180,200

Individuals with significant disabilities as a 

percent of all individuals achieving an 

employment outcome

91% 91% 91%

Notes: Data for fiscal years 2012, 2013, and 2014 are projections based on actual data for fiscal years 2010 and 

2011 and preliminary data for fiscal year 2012 from the RSA Quarterly Cumulative Caseload Report (RSA-113). 1 Includes all eligible individuals who received VR services during the fiscal year. 2 Number of individuals who exited the program after receiving services and achieved an employment outcome.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-21

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands)

American Indian vocational rehabilitation services

Program funding 2012 2013 2014

Project funding:

New project funding 0 1 0 2 $24,788

Continuation funding $37,898 $39,224 3 15,279

Peer review of new award applications 0 $20

Number of projects:

New projects 0 0 53

Continuation 85 85 37

Total projects 85 85 90

1

 No new awards were made in FY 2012. As a result of recent GAO report recommendations (GAO 12-348), the 

Department cancelled the program’s FY 2012 competition and published a notice to extend the 8 projects that would 

have ended in FY 2012 for an additional year. In the report, the GAO made a finding in which it noted that the 

Department’s interpretation of reservation used in determining eligibility under the AIVRS program raised substantial 

questions for GAO about the eligibility of State-recognized tribes that are not located on State reservations, but rather 

are located on a defined and contiguous area of land where there is a concentration of tribal members and in which 

the tribe is providing structured activities and services, such as the tribal service areas identified in a tribe’s grant 

application. The GAO recommended that the Secretary review the Department’s practices with respect to eligibility 

requirements and take appropriate action with respect to grants made to tribes that do not have Federal or State 

reservations. The extension will allow the Department time to regulate on the definition of "reservation" before a 

FY 2013 competition is held. 

2

 No new awards are planned for FY 2013. The Department intends to publish a notice to extend the 8 projects 

that would have ended in FY 2012 for a second year and the 24 projects that would have ended in FY 2013 for an 

additional year. 

3 About $1,449 thousand of the FY 2013 funds will be used to support a portion of the FY 2014 continuation costs.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, GPRA 

goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data, and an assessment of the 

progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based on 

the cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years and those requested in fiscal 

year 2014 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by this 

program.

Fiscal year 2012 data for the VR State Grants and the American Indian VR Services programs 

will be available in April of 2013.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-22

VR State Grants

Goal: Individuals with disabilities served by the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grant 

program will achieve high quality employment.

Objective: Ensure that individuals with disabilities who are served by the Vocational 

Rehabilitation State Grant program achieve employment consistent with their particular 

strengths, resources, abilities, capabilities, and interests.

Measure: Percentage of general and combined State VR agencies that assist at least 

55.8 percent of individuals receiving services to achieve employment.

Year Target Actual

2009 78 61

2010 80 48

2011 70 54

2012 55

2013 57

2014 57

Measure: Percentage of State VR agencies for the Blind that assist at least 68.9 percent of 

individuals receiving services to achieve employment.

Year Target Actual 

2009 66 42

2010 67 54

2011 60 62

2012 60

2013 62

2014 62

Additional information: This measure assesses the performance of State VR agencies in 

meeting program performance indicator 1.2 established in program regulations pursuant to 

Section 106 of the Rehabilitation Act. Indicator 1.2 measures the percentage of individuals who 

the State VR agency determines to have achieved an employment outcome out of all the 

individuals who exit the VR program after receiving services. In order to pass indicator 1.2, a 

general or combined agency must achieve an employment outcome rate of 55.8 percent, while 

an agency for the blind must achieve a rate of 68.9 percent. 

In fiscal year 2011, the target set for the group of general and combined State VR agencies was 

not met. However, performance on this measure improved for this group as compared to fiscal 

year 2010, with three additional agencies meeting the 55.8 percent performance criteria. The 

group of State VR agencies serving individuals who are blind met their FY 2011 target for this 

measure. As compared to fiscal year 2010, two additional State VR agencies for individuals who 

are blind met the 68.9 percent performance criteria in fiscal year 2011. For the general and 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-23

combined State VR agencies, excluding outlying areas, employment outcome rates ranged from 

34.6 percent to 81.8 percent, with a median of 56.2 percent. For the State VR agencies for 

individuals who are blind, employment outcome rates ranged from 40.2 percent to 81.3 percent, 

with a median of 71.3 percent. 

In fiscal year 2009, there was a large decrease in the total number of individuals who obtained 

an employment outcome (12 percent). While the number of individuals who achieved an 

employment outcome continued to decline in fiscal year 2010, the overall drop in employment

outcomes was smaller (4.8 percent). The overall decline in employment outcomes ended in FY 

2011. Fiscal year 2011 data show an increase of 3.7 percent increase in the number of 

individuals who achieved an employment outcome. However, performance among States was 

varied. For example, 57 of the 80 agencies experienced an increase or no change in the number 

of employment outcomes, while 23 agencies had a decrease in employment outcomes. In the 

group of State agencies that had a decrease in employment outcomes, one State (Ohio) 

accounted for 49 percent of the total decrease for that group. The decrease in employment 

outcomes can, at least in part, be attributed to the general decline in available employment 

opportunities. Many VR agencies in States experiencing high rates of unemployment for the 

general population have had a difficult time assisting individuals with disabilities to obtain 

employment. However, there were a number of VR agencies in States with high rates of 

unemployment that did not experience a decrease in employment outcomes, including some of 

which reported an increase in employment outcomes.

Measure: Percentage of general and combined State VR agencies that assist at least 

85 percent of individuals with employment outcomes to achieve competitive employment.

Year Target Actual

2009 97 93

2010 97 95

2011 97 93

2012 95

2013 95

2014 95

Measure: Percentage of State VR agencies for the Blind that assist at least 65 percent of 

individuals with employment outcomes to achieve competitive employment.

Year Target Actual

2009 79 92

2010 80 83

2011 80 92

2012 85

2013 90

2014 92
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-24

Additional information: This measure is derived from Section 106 performance indicator 1.3, 

which measures the percentage of individuals who achieve competitive employment of all 

individuals who achieve employment. Competitive employment is defined under the State VR 

program as work in the competitive labor market that is performed on a full-time or part-time 

basis in an integrated setting, and for which an individual is compensated at or above the 

minimum wage, but not less than the customary wage and level of benefits paid by the employer 

for the same or similar work performed by individuals who are not disabled. In order to pass 

indicator 1.3, a general or combined agency must achieve a rate of 72.6 percent, while an 

agency for the blind must achieve a rate of 35.4 percent.

The GPRA measure is more ambitious and has a higher performance criterion than the State VR 

agency performance indicator 1.3 because in fiscal year 2006 nearly all of the VR agencies 

passed indicator 1.3. Under the GPRA measure, general and combined agencies must assist at 

least 85 percent of individuals with employment outcomes to achieve competitive employment, 

and agencies for the blind must assist at least 65 percent of individuals with employment 

outcomes to achieve competitive employment. Despite the decline in the number of employment 

outcomes, States have been fairly successful in sustaining the percentage of competitive 

employment outcomes. In fiscal year 2011, the target for the general and combined agencies 

was not met, with performance returning to the FY 2009 level of 93 percent. In fiscal year 2011,

only 4 of the 56 general and combined agencies did not meet the performance criterion, 

including 1 combined State agency and 3 of the territories, one more territory than in FY 2010. 

The percentage of individuals with employment outcomes who achieved competitive employment 

reported by general and combined agencies in 2011 ranged from 50 percent to 100 percent with 

a median of 98.2 percent. In 2011, the target for the group of agencies for the blind was met with 

only two agencies not performing at the 65 percent criterion. The percentage of individuals with 

employment outcomes who achieved competitive employment reported by agencies for the blind 

ranged from 33.7 percent to 99.6 percent, with a median of 90.5 percent.

Measure: Percentage of general and combined State VR agencies for which at least 80 percent 

of the individuals achieving competitive employment have significant disabilities.

Year Target Actual

2009 89 87

2010 89 89

2011 89 93

2012 90

2013 91

2014 92
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-25

Measure: Percentage of State VR agencies for the Blind for which at least 90 percent of the 

individuals achieving competitive employment have significant disabilities.

Year Target Actual

2009 100 100

2010 100 96

2011 100 96

2012 100

2013 100

2014 100

Additional information: This measure is derived from the Section 106 performance indicator 

1.4, which measures the percentage of individuals achieving competitive employment who have 

significant disabilities. In order for a general or combined agency to pass this indicator, at least 

62 percent of individuals achieving competitive employment must have a significant disability. 

The GPRA measure for general and combined agencies is more ambitious and has a higher 

performance criterion than performance indicator 1.4. Under this measure, at least 80 percent of 

individuals achieving competitive employment must have a significant disability. In fiscal year 

2011, 93 percent of general and combined agencies achieved the 80 percent criterion and the 

GPRA target was met.

For an agency for the blind to pass indicator 1.4, at least 89 percent of individuals achieving 

competitive employment must have a significant disability. The performance criterion for 

agencies for the blind on the GPRA measure is only slightly higher, 90 percent compared to 

89 percent. All but one of the agencies for the blind met the 90 percent performance criterion

and the 100 percent GPRA target was not met.

Efficiency Measures

Objective: Ensure that State VR agencies demonstrate effective fiscal management.

The Department has established efficiency measures to ensure that State VR agencies 

demonstrate effective fiscal management. These include the cost per participant and a 

consumer expenditure rate. 

Measure: Percentage of general and combined State VR agencies that demonstrate an 

average cost per participant between $1,200 and $3,300.

Year Target Actual

2009 70 61

2010 70 70

2011 70 68

2012 70

2013 70

2014 70
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-26

Measure: Percentage of State VR agencies for the Blind that demonstrate an average cost per 

participant of no more than $8,000.

Year Target Actual

2009 70 58

2010 70 58

2011 70 63

2012 63

2013 63

2014 65

Additional information: A common efficiency measure for job training programs is the cost per 

participant. At the national aggregate level, the cost per participant is calculated by dividing the 

total appropriation (minus the set-aside for Grants to Indians) by the total number of eligible 

individuals who received VR services. The sources of data for this measure are State agency 

data from the RSA-113 Caseload Report and RSA final State agency allocation tables. For fiscal 

year 2011, the average annual cost per participant for general and combined State vocational 

rehabilitation agencies was $2,811 with a range (excluding the outlying areas) of $1,328 to 

$6,459. For agencies for the blind, the average annual cost per participant was $7,109 with a 

range from $1,029 to $13,390, with the exception of two agencies that had a cost per participant 

of about $30,000 to $40,000. In comparison, the fiscal year 2010 average annual cost per 

participant for general and combined State vocational rehabilitation agencies was $2,860, while 

for agencies for the blind it was $7,290. Neither group met the FY 2011 performance target of 

70 percent. In fiscal year 2011, 38 of the 56 (68 percent) general and combined State VR 

agencies demonstrated an average cost per participant within the established performance 

range (between $1,200 and $3,300) – one fewer agency than in fiscal year 2010. Of the 24 

agencies for the blind, 15 (63 percent) had an average cost per participant of no more than 

$8,000 – one more agency than in 2010. The fiscal year 2012 target for agencies for the blind 

was revised in FY 2011 to reflect a more realist target based on performance in recent fiscal 

years.

Measure: Percentage of general and combined State VR agencies that demonstrate an 

average annual consumer expenditure rate of at least 83 percent.

Year Target Actual

2009 74 79

2010 74 73

2011 74 70

2012 74

2013 74

2014 75
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-27

Measure: Percentage of State VR agencies for the Blind that demonstrate an average annual 

consumer expenditure rate of at least 70 percent.

Year Target Actual

2009 65 58

2010 65 71

2011 65 67

2012 66

2013 68

2014 70

Additional information: This efficiency measure examines the percentage of State VR 

agencies whose consumer service expenditure rate is at or above a specified level. Under this 

measure, the consumer service expenditure rate is calculated by dividing the agency’s consumer 

service expenditures by the agency’s total VR program expenditures. The sources of data for 

this measure are State agency data from the RSA-2 report and RSA final State agency allocation 

tables. In fiscal year 2011, 39 of the 56 general and combined VR agencies (70 percent) 

demonstrated an average annual consumer expenditure rate of at least 83 percent and the target 

was not met. The average annual consumer service expenditure rate for all general and 

combined State vocational rehabilitation agencies was 86 percent with a range (excluding the 

outlying areas) of 43 percent to nearly 100 percent. In 2011, 16 of the 24 agencies for the blind 

(67 percent) had an average annual consumer expenditure rate of at least 70 percent and the 

target was met. The average annual consumer service expenditure rate for all agencies for the 

blind ranged from 46 percent to nearly 100 percent, with an average of 73 percent. 

American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services

Performance Measures

Goal: To improve employment outcomes of American Indians with disabilities who live 

on or near reservations by providing effective tribal vocational rehabilitation services.

Objective: Ensure that eligible American Indians with disabilities receive vocational 

rehabilitation services and achieve employment outcomes consistent with their particular 

strengths, resources, abilities, capabilities, and interests.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-28

Measure: The percentage of individuals who leave the program with employment outcomes, 

after receiving services under an individualized plan for employment.

Year Target Actual

2009 66 61

2010 66 62

2011 66 63

2012 64

2013 65

2014 65

Additional information: The numbers of American Indians with disabilities achieving an 

employment outcome continue to increase annually along with the number of projects funded 

under the program. In fiscal year 2011, the 82 projects operating in that fiscal year (projects 

funded with fiscal year 2010 appropriations) assisted a total of 1,724 American Indians with 

disabilities to achieve an employment outcome. However, one of the new projects that was to 

begin in fiscal year 2011 was unable to serve or place any individuals in that year because of 

delays in getting the project underway and another project has not submitted its fiscal year 2011 

performance data. Data for fiscal year 2011 show that 63 percent of the 2,737 individuals with 

disabilities who exited the program after receiving services achieved an employment outcome. 

Although there was a slight increase in performance as compared to the previous year, the target 

for this measure was not met. There is a wide variation in the percentage of individuals who 

achieved an employment outcome reported by AIVRS projects. In 2011, the percentage of 

individuals achieving an employment outcome reported by the 80 projects ranged from 

22 percent to 100 percent. 

There are several factors that may have accounted for lower performance on this measure in 

past three fiscal years. Probably the most significant factor was the poor economic conditions. 

American Indian tribes already experience some of the worst economic conditions in the country 

with limited labor markets and very few job opportunities. When those same economic conditions 

affect communities outside the reservation, it compounds the difficulty in achieving employment 

outcomes. 

Efficiency Measures

Objective: Ensure that AIVRS projects demonstrate effective fiscal management.

The Department has established two efficiency measures to ensure that AIVRS projects 

demonstrate effective fiscal management. These include cost per employment outcome and 

cost per participant. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-29

Measure: The percentage of AIVRS projects that demonstrate an average annual cost per 

employment outcome of no more than $35,000.

Year Target Actual

2009 68 71

2010 70 71

2011 72 72

2012 72

2013 72

2014 72

Additional information: This AIVRS program efficiency measure examines the percentage of 

AIVRS projects having a cost per employment outcome within a specified range. The source of 

data for this measure is the AIVRS Annual Reporting Form. At the national level, the average 

cost per employment outcome for this program is calculated by dividing the amount of the 

set-aside, excluding peer review costs, by the total number of individuals who achieved an 

employment outcome. Using this method for the AIVRS program in fiscal year 2011, the overall 

average cost per employment outcome for the 81 projects reporting data was approximately 

$20,053 with a median of $24,962. However, the cost per employment outcome varied 

significantly across projects. For the 80 projects reporting that they had placed at least one 

individual in employment in fiscal year 2011, the average cost per employment outcome ranged

from about $5,213 to $266,032. The target for this measure was met in fiscal year 2011, with 58

of the 81 AIVRS projects reporting (72 percent) an average cost per employment outcome of no

more than $35,000.

Measure: The percentage of AIVRS projects that demonstrate an average annual cost per 

participant of no more than $10,000.

Year Target Actual

2009 77 83

2010 78 86

2011 78 85

2012 84

2013 85

2014 86

Additional information: At the national level, the average annual cost per participant for this 

program is calculated by dividing the amount of the set-aside, excluding peer review costs, by 

the total number of individuals who received services under an Individualized Plan for 

Employment (IPE). In fiscal year 2011, 81 AIVRS projects reported serving a total of 8,081

American Indians with disabilities. For fiscal year 2011, the overall average annual cost per 

participant for the 81 projects reporting data was approximately $4,705. For the 80 projects who 

served American Indians with disabilities in fiscal year 2011, the average cost per participant 

ranged from $1,198 to $60,000 with a median of $5,555. In fiscal year 2011, 69 of the 81 AIVRS 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-30

projects (85 percent) had an average cost per participant of no more than $10,000 and the target 

was met.

Targets for fiscal years 2007 – 2010 were established based on the number of individuals served 

in the reporting period whose IPE was developed during the current 5-year grant cycle. These 

targets did not take into account individuals served in the reporting period whose IPE was 

developed in the previous 5-year grant cycle because data collected on these individuals were 

not reliable. However, RSA has since made improvements in its reporting system and provided 

guidance that makes these data more reliable. Beginning with fiscal year 2008, grantees report 

all individuals receiving services with current grant funds, including individuals whose IPE was

developed in the previous 5-year grant cycle. The targets for fiscal years 2011 through 2013 are 

higher than previous targets to reflect the fact that the including both groups of individuals in the 

calculation of performance on this measure lowers the cost per participant and increases the 

percentage of projects that have a cost per participant of no more than $10,000. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-31

Client assistance State grants

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title I, Section 112)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2014 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority:

Change

Program 2012 2013 2014 from 2012

$12,240 $12,240 2 $12,240 0

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. The Administration proposes to continue funding in 

FY 2014 through appropriations language. 2 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Client Assistance Program (CAP) provides grants to States for services to assist eligible 

individuals and applicants for the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State grants program and other 

programs, projects, and services funded under the Rehabilitation Act (the Act). Services are 

provided to help eligible individuals and applicants understand the rehabilitation services and 

benefits available under the Act, and to advise them of their rights and responsibilities in 

connection with those benefits. Assistance may also be provided to help eligible individuals and 

applicants in their relationships with those providing services under the Act, including assistance 

and advocacy in pursuing legal and administrative remedies to ensure the protection of their 

rights. State VR agencies must inform VR consumers about the services available from the 

CAP and how to contact the CAP. States must operate a CAP in order to receive VR State 

grant funds.

States and outlying areas have adopted different organizational structures for meeting the 

requirement to establish a CAP in each State. Each Governor designates a public or private 

agency to operate a CAP. This designated agency must be independent of any agency that 

provides services under the Act, except in cases where the Act “grandfathered” agencies 

providing services under the Act. In the event one of these “grandfathered” agencies is 

restructured, the Act requires the Governor to redesignate the CAP in an agency that does not 

provide services under the Act. 

Current designations include the following:

• 29 of the Governors have designated their State Protection and Advocacy (P&A) system to 

provide CAP services;

• 11 of the Governors have designated the VR agency to provide services; and

• the remaining 16 Governors have designated other entities to provide CAP services. 

Of the 16 CAPs located outside State VR agencies and not within the P&A system, 5 are 

located in the Governor’s Office; 6 are located in another State agency, office, or government-
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Client assistance State grants

K-32

sponsored commission or group; 4 are located in legal aid and nonprofit organizations; and 1 is 

located in a private law firm.

The CAP is a current-funded formula grant program. When appropriations exceed $7.5 million, 

funds are distributed on the basis of population, with a minimum allotment of $100,000 to each 

of the 50 States, D.C., and Puerto Rico and $45,000 to each of the outlying areas. When the 

appropriation increases, the Act also requires the Secretary to increase the minimum allotments 

for States and outlying areas by a percentage not greater than the percentage increase in the 

appropriation. The fiscal year 2012 allotments were based on the July 1, 2010 population 

estimates published by the Census Bureau in December 2010. The fiscal year 2013 allotments 

are based on the July 1, 2011 population estimates published in December 2011. The fiscal 

year 2014 State distributions are based on the July 1, 2012 Census data released in December 

2012. 

Grantees may carry over unobligated Federal funds for an additional year. 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were as follows:

Year (dollars in thousands)

2009...........................................................$11,576

2010.............................................................12,288

2011.............................................................12,263

2012.............................................................12,240

2013.............................................................12,240 1

_________________

1 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

FY 2014 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $12.240 million for the Client Assistance program (CAP) in fiscal 

year 2014, the same as the fiscal year 2012 level. This request will help ensure that individuals 

with disabilities who are applying for or receiving services funded under the Rehabilitation Act 

will receive appropriate services and have access to administrative, legal, and other appropriate 

remedies when needed to protect their rights. 

Data collected in fiscal year 2011 show that, nationwide, CAPs responded to 52,376 requests 

for information and provided extensive services to 6,965 individuals. Slightly more than 94 

percent of those cases in which extensive services were provided involved applicants for or 

recipients of services from the VR program. In 87 percent of all cases, issues related to the 

delivery of VR services. These data also demonstrate that in 36 percent of the cases closed, 

CAPs enabled the individuals to advocate for themselves through the explanation of policies; 

19 percent resulted in the development or implementation of an IPE; and 19 percent of these 

cases resulted in the reestablishment of communication between the individuals and other 

parties. In addition, 68 percent of the cases requiring action by the CAP on behalf of the 

individual were resolved in the individual’s favor.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Client assistance State grants

K-33

Examples of CAP activities during FY 2011 include:

• In New York, a consumer came to CAP after learning that the VR agency would not support 

his goal to obtain a Bachelor of Arts degree in graphic design at a local university. The 

consumer had a two-year degree but believed he needed a four-year degree to become 

gainfully employed in the graphic design field. The agency asserted that the consumer’s 

two-year degree in graphic design made him employable at an entry level for this field. CAP 

showed through its research that the only position available for a person with a two-year 

degree was Assistant to a Graphic Designer, which would entail mainly clerical duties as 

opposed to creative graphic design duties. At a meeting attended by the CAP advocate, the 

CAP attorney, the VR counselor and supervisor, and the consumer, the VR agency was 

persuaded that the consumer could not work as a graphic designer without a four-year 

degree and agreed to fund his education. This consumer finished his bachelor’s program 

and obtained permanent employment.

• In Kentucky, a farmer with limited vision in his right eye and total loss of vision in his left eye 

requested VR services to continue working on his farm. The consumer had experienced 

significant facial trauma, and as a result, had undergone extensive reconstruction and nasal 

surgeries. As a farmer, he was charged with overseeing 133 acres of land and 30 herd of 

cattle on a daily basis, but felt unable to continue his life-long work due to the severity of his 

disabilities. His doctor strongly recommended an enclosed cab for his tractor to protect his 

nose from any additional trauma or noxious stimuli. Following an assessment through 

AgrAbility--a US Department of Agriculture program that enables high quality lifestyles for 

farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural workers with disabilities-- was determined that the 

consumer could resume his duties if he could obtain an enclosed cab as an 

accommodation. Since the VR agency denied his request for the needed accommodation, 

the consumer contacted CAP. Working with AgrAbility, and VR, CAP arranged for the 

acquisition of a new tractor, with an enclosed cab, by trading in the old tractor. The 

consumer was able to resume working on his farm performing the same duties.

• In one U.S territory, a 32 year old man with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) recently 

lost his job as an instructor in English as a Second Language (ESL) with the State 

Department. The consumer applied for VR services, but was told he was not ready to go 

back to work because of a psychological evaluation. The consumer contacted CAP and 

CAP disagreed with the evaluation and argued the standard for "clear and convincing" 

evidence had not been met by a single evaluation, and furthermore, no proof had been 

provided that demonstrated the consumer could not benefit from VR services. As a result, 

the consumer was able to receive VR services and become gainfully employed. 

• In Louisiana, a consumer with a long history of mental health issues and difficulties securing 

employment was placed in a plan for trial work experiences by his VR counselor. The 

biggest challenge for the consumer had been finding a job with a flexible work schedule. VR 

recommended the consumer participate in trial work experiences for a period up to one 

year, which was acceptable to the consumer. However during that year, the consumer 

received no contact from VR or feedback on his progress. He called CAP for assistance. 

CAP reviewed the consumer’s case file and found that there was no documentation of 

contact with the consumer or an assessment of his progress, as required under the 

Rehabilitation Act. CAP requested the consumer be determined eligible for services and for 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Client assistance State grants

K-34

an IPE to be developed in conjunction with the consumer. VR acknowledged its failure to 

follow its policy and immediately developed an IPE for the consumer. The consumer has 

since completed his services and is now competitively employed. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

Measures 2012 2013 2014 

Information inquiries/referrals 52,400 52,400 52,400

Individuals provided case services 7,000 7,000 7,000

NOTE: 2013 excludes 0.612 percent across-the=board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

NOTE: Data for fiscal years 2012 through 2014 are projected from actual data collected for fiscal year 2011 in 

which CAPs responded to 52,376 requests for information and provided extensive services to 6,965 individuals. 

Data for fiscal year 2012 will be available in December of 2013. 

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, GPRA 

goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data, and an assessment of the 

progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of results is based on the 

cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years and those requested in fiscal year 

2014 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by this 

program. 

Goal: To provide assistance and information to help individuals with disabilities secure 

the benefits available under the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants program and 

other programs funded under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.

Objective: Accurately identify problem areas requiring systemic change and engage in 

systemic activity to improve services under the Rehabilitation Act.

Measure: The percentage of CAPs that reported that their systemic advocacy resulted in 

changes in policy or practice.

Year Target Actual 

2009 60 80

2010 60 64

2011 65 87

2012 70

2013 70

2014 72

Additional information: CAPs address numerous systemic issues related to the provision of 

VR and other services under the Act. CAPs utilize a variety of methods to achieve changes in 

policies and practices, including individual advocacy, participation in the policymaking process, 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Client assistance State grants

K-35

and negotiation with State agencies. Permanent systemic change is very difficult to achieve, 

and some States undertake activities that may take years to accomplish. All 56 CAPs currently 

are engaged in work that should ultimately result in systemic change, but this indicator 

measures only those States that report their activity as complete. Data are compiled from 

narrative reports submitted by all CAPs. A random sample of files is cross-checked with 

reported data to verify the data quality. The grantees input their data into the RSA Management 

Information System (MIS), which has edit checks to verify the accuracy of the information 

entered into the data fields. 

The baseline was established in fiscal year 1999, when 24 of the 56 CAPs (43 percent) reported 

changes in practice or policy due to their efforts. In fiscal year 2006, 34 of the 56 CAPs 

(61 percent) reported success with their efforts, exceeding the target for the fifth successive 

year. In light of these data the Department raised the targets from 54 percent to 60 percent for 

fiscal years 2007 through 2010, and set a target of 65 percent for 2011. Based on improved 

performance in 2009, the Department increased the target to 70 percent for 2012. The fiscal 

year 2010 data reflect a large decrease in the number of CAPs reporting success for this 

measure, but performance improved in fiscal year 2011 to 87 percent—the highest percentage 

since this measure was established in 1999. The data for fiscal year 2012 will be available in 

December 2013.

Objective: Resolve cases at lowest possible level. 

Measure: The percentage of cases resolved through the use of alternative dispute resolution 

(ADR).

Year Target Actual 

2009 85 99

2010 86 98

2011 93 97

2012 93

2013 98

2104 98

Additional information: The performance targets through fiscal year 2008 were based on 

fiscal year 2001 data, which showed 84 percent of CAP cases were resolved through alternative 

dispute resolution (ADR). The target was first exceeded in fiscal year 2006, when 4,977 of the 

5,855 closed cases (85 percent) were resolved through ADR techniques. However, data from 

fiscal year 2007 reflect a huge increase to 98 percent of the closed cases being resolved 

through ADR. The percentage of cases being resolved through the use of ADR held at 

98 percent during 2008, and rose to 99 percent in 2009, although dropped to 98 percent in fiscal 

year 2010 and 97 percent in fiscal year 2011. The data for fiscal year 2012 will be available in 

December 2013.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-36

Supported employment State grants

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title VI, Part B)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2014 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority: 

Change

2012 2013 2014 from 2012

$29,068 $29,068 2 0 -$29,068

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004; no appropriations or new reauthorizing legislation is sought 

for FY 2014. 2 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The purpose of the Supported Employment (SE) State Grants program is to assist States in 

developing collaborative programs with appropriate public and private nonprofit organizations to 

provide supported employment services for individuals with the most significant disabilities. 

Under this formula grant program, State vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies receive 

supplemental funds to assist VR consumers with the most significant disabilities in achieving the 

employment outcome of supported employment. The term “supported employment” includes 

both competitive employment and working in an integrated setting toward competitive 

employment. Individuals in competitive employment must earn at least the minimum wage. 

Supported employment placements are achieved by augmenting short-term vocational 

rehabilitation services (supported employment services) with ongoing support provided by other 

public or nonprofit agencies or organizations (extended services) for the duration of that 

employment. State VR agencies provide time-limited services for a period not to exceed 

18 months, unless a longer period to achieve job stabilization has been established in the 

individualized plan for employment (IPE). The IPE for an individual with a goal of supported 

employment must specify the expected extended services that will be needed to support the 

individual in integrated employment and identify the source of extended services at the time the 

IPE is developed, including the basis for determining that there is a reasonable expectation that 

those services will become available. 

An individual's potential for supported employment must be considered as part of the 

assessment to determine eligibility for the Title I Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants program. 

The requirements pertaining to individuals with an employment goal of supported employment 

are the same in both the Title I VR State Grants program and the Title VI-B SE State Grants 

program. A State VR agency may support an individual’s supported employment services 

solely with VR State Grant funds, or it may fund the cost of SE services in whole or in part with 

funds under the SE State Grants program. Title VI-B SE funds may only be used to provide 

supported employment services and are essentially used to supplement Title I funds. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-37

To be eligible for this current-funded formula grant program, States must submit a supplement 

to their Title I VR State Grants program plan. Funds are distributed on the basis of population, 

except that no State receives less than $300,000, or one-third of 1 percent of the sums 

appropriated, whichever is greater. The minimum allotment for Territories is one-eighth of 

1 percent of the sums appropriated. The fiscal year 2012 allotments were based on the 

April 1, 2010 Census data released in December 2010. The fiscal year 2013 State allotments 

are based on the July 1, 2011 estimates published in December 2011. States may carry over 

unobligated funds to the next fiscal year. 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were as follows:

Year (dollars in thousands)

2009...........................................................$29,181

2010.............................................................29,181

2011.............................................................29,123

2012.............................................................29,068

2013.............................................................29,0681

_________________

1 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

FY 2014 BUDGET REQUEST

No funds are requested for fiscal year 2014 for the SE State Grants program. The 

Administration recognizes that supported employment can be an effective strategy in assisting 

individuals with the most significant disabilities to obtain competitive employment in integrated 

settings. However, because supported employment is now an integral part of the VR State 

Grants program, the Administration believes that there is no longer a need for a separate 

funding stream to ensure the provision of such services. The proposed program elimination will 

reduce unnecessary administrative burden at the national, State, and local levels and will 

enhance efforts to assess the provision and effectiveness of supported employment services.

The Administration is also examining options to help ensure that State agencies continue to 

invest appropriate levels of their resources in supported employment.

The SE State Grants program was first authorized under the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 

1986 to provide supplemental grants to assist States in developing collaborative programs with 

public agencies and private nonprofit organizations for training and time-limited postemployment services for individuals with the most severe handicaps. At that time, supported 

employment was a new promising practice in employing individuals who traditionally would not 

have achieved employment in the integrated labor market. Initially, many rehabilitation 

professionals were skeptical about its feasibility and concerned about the potential costs. As a 

supplemental source of dedicated funds, the SE State grant program provided an incentive for 

State VR agencies to provide supported employment services. 

In addition, from 1986 to 1996 the Department of Education supported a number of supported 

employment discretionary grant projects designed to further develop and expand the provision 

of supported employment services. These included a total of 54 State-wide systems change 

grants to 47 States, the District of Columbia, and the Virgin Islands; 2 national scope projects; 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-38

2 national technical assistance projects; and a total of 66 community-based supported 

employment projects. Finally, in fiscal year 1997, the Department awarded a 3-year cooperative 

agreement to support the Supported Employment Consortium whose purpose was to identify 

and disseminate replicable policies, models, and supported employment practices appropriate 

for dissemination and to provide technical assistance.

Data from the RSA 911 Case Service Report for fiscal year 2011 show that approximately 

34,500 individuals whose cases were closed in FY 2011 after receiving services had a goal of 

supported employment on their Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE) at some time during 

their participation in the VR program. This number includes individuals who received support for 

SE services entirely through funds provided under the VR State Grants program and those 

individuals whose services were, at least in part, supported with funds under the SE State 

Grants program. Although there was a decrease in the number of individuals whose cases 

were closed in FY 2011 after receiving services that had a goal of supported employment, this 

decrease is proportional to the decrease in the total number of individuals in the VR program 

whose cases were closed in FY 2011 after receiving services. On a national level, individuals 

who had a goal of supported employment represented about 10 percent of the total individuals 

whose cases were closed in fiscal year 2011 after receiving services. 

Information on how State VR agencies use their SE State Grant funds to supplement their VR 

funds is limited. State agencies report whether any SE funds were used to provide services to 

an individual with a supported employment goal, but not the amount of SE funds that were 

expended for such individuals. Because VR agencies may use funds from one or both funding 

sources to purchase supported employment services, information on the actual cost of providing 

SE services to an individual with a SE goal, including individuals who did or did not obtain a 

supported employment outcome is unavailable. Data collected through the RSA 911 report 

indicate that there is significant variation in SE practices and the use of SE funds among State 

agencies. As a part of its re-design of the VR program data collections, the Rehabilitation 

Services Administration (RSA) has included additional SE-related data elements that will enable 

RSA to better monitor the services, service costs, and the outcomes achieved by individuals 

with a supported employment goal under the VR State Grants program and identify those 

agencies that need technical assistance.

The SE State Grants program has accomplished its goal. State VR agencies recognize 

supported employment as an integral part of the VR program and a viable employment option 

for individuals with the most significant disabilities. State VR agencies continue to spend VR 

State Grant funds (including State matching funds) to provide supported employment services 

for those individuals who require such services to participate in the integrated labor market. 

State VR agencies must also give priority to serving individuals with the most significant 

disabilities, many of whom may require supported employment services. The Department

expects that State VR agencies will continue to provide supported employment services in 

fiscal year 2014 through the VR State Grants program to at least as many individuals as they 

did under the two separate authorities. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-39

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands)

Measures 2012 2013 2014

Individuals with a supported 

employment IPE goal who received 

services and exited the program.

35,000 35,000 35,000

Employment outcomes: 1 18,000 18,000 18,000

Supported employment outcomes 2 16,200 16,200 16,200

Employment without supports in an 

integrated setting3 1,630 1,630 1,630

Other employment outcomes4 170 170 170

Minority outreach $291 $291 0

Note: Estimates for FYs 2012, 2013, and 2014 are based on actual 2009, 2010, and 2011 closure data from the 

RSA-911 Case Service Report for all VR consumers with a supported employment goal identified on their IPE 

(including consumers who received SE services with funds provided under the VR State Grants and/or under the 

Supported Employment State Grants programs). 

Note: For FY 2014, program output estimates include consumers whose cases were closed in FY 2014 and 

received SE services with funds provided under VR State Grants as well as consumers who received SE services 

with funds provided under Supported Employment State Grants in previous years.

1 Includes employment outcomes for VR consumers who had or are estimated to have a supported employment 

goal.

2 Of the individuals who had a supported employment goal, the number who were employed in an integrated 

setting and receiving ongoing support services. 3 Of the individuals who had a supported employment goal, the number who met the employment outcome 

criteria for the VR State Grants program but who were not receiving ongoing support services. 4 Of the individuals who had a supported employment goal, the number who met the employment outcome 

criteria for the VR State Grants program who were either self-employed, employed in a Business Enterprise Program, 

a family worker, or a homemaker. 

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents program performance information, including, for example, GPRA goals, 

objectives, measures, and performance targets and data, and an assessment of the progress 

made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based on the 

cumulative effect of the resources provided for this program and the Vocational Rehabilitation 

State Grants program in previous years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those 

served by these programs. With the exception of the program’s efficiency measure, 

performance on supported employment measures would continue to be assessed in fiscal year

2014 as part of GPRA reporting for the VR State Grants program. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-40

Goal: Individuals with significant disabilities with a goal of supported employment will 

achieve high quality employment.

Objective: Ensure that individuals with significant disabilities with a supported employment 

goal achieve high quality employment.

Measure: Of those individuals with significant disabilities who had a supported employment 

goal and achieved an employment outcome, the percentage who obtained competitive 

employment, including individuals who receive supported employment services funded under 

the VR State Grants program and/or the Supported Employment State Grants program.

Year Target Actual

2009 94 91

2010 94 92

2011 94 93

2012 94

2013 94

2014 94

Additional information: Individuals with a supported employment goal who achieve an 

employment outcome may be working in competitive employment (employment at least at the 

minimum wage in an integrated setting) or may be working in an integrated setting toward 

competitive work (receipt of the minimum wage). In fiscal year 2011, 17,566 individuals, or 

51 percent of individuals whose service records were closed after receiving services who had a 

SE goal, including both consumers who received SE services from funds provided under the 

VR State Grants and under the Supported Employment State Grants programs, achieved an 

employment outcome. Of those who achieved an employment outcome, 93 percent of 

individuals with a supported employment goal achieved a competitive employment outcome. 

Although performance on this measure has slowly increased over the last three years, the 

performance target was not met. The performance targets for fiscal years 2008 upward were 

increased based on performance in 2006 and 2007, during which years actual performance 

rose to 94 percent.

Fiscal year 2011 RSA 911 Case Service Report data show that while there was a significant 

decrease in the total number of individuals with a supported employment goal who achieved an

employment outcome, there was an increase in the number and percentage of such individuals 

who obtained a supported employment outcome (employment in the integrated labor market 

and receiving ongoing supports). The percentage of individuals with a supported employment 

goal achieving an employment outcome who obtained a supported employment outcome 

increased from 76.7 to 90.5 percent). Data for fiscal year 2012 are expected to be available in 

April 2013. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-41

Measure: Average weekly earnings for individuals with significant disabilities who achieved a 

supported employment outcome.

Year Target Actual

2009 199 188

2010 203 208

2011 203 205

2012 203

2013 205

2014 208

Additional information: The Department established a new measure in FY 2008 to monitor 

the average weekly earnings of individuals with significant disabilities who achieved a supported 

employment outcome. As previously stated, individuals with significant disabilities in supported 

employment may be working in competitive employment or may be working in an integrated 

setting toward the receipt of the minimum wage. Performance data for this measure are 

calculated by dividing the average weekly earnings for all individuals who obtained a supported 

employment outcome with earnings by the total number of individuals who obtained a supported 

employment outcome with earnings. The performance data do not include individuals served by 

State VR agencies for the Blind. Performance targets were set based on 2007 and 2008 data.

For the performance group, fiscal year 2011 data show that the average weekly earnings of 

individuals with significant disabilities who achieved a supported employment outcome was

$205, a slight decrease from the previous year ($208) but the performance target was

exceeded. However, the median average weekly earnings for agencies in the performance 

group increased by $9 from $185 to $194. In 2011, average weekly earnings ranged from a low 

of $106 to a high of $408. About 56 percent of the performance group reported an increase or 

no change in average weekly earnings as compared to 2010. In 2011, average hourly earnings 

increased from $7.26 per hour to $12.44 per hour. Although on a national level there was a 

slight decrease in average hours worked, 23.2 hours in 2010 compared to 22.9 in 2011, about 

59 percent of the agencies in the performance group reported an increase in average hours 

worked as compared to 2010.

Efficiency Measure

Objective: Ensure that State VR agencies effectively use Supported Employment Grant funds 

to achieve supported employment outcomes.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-42

Measure: Percentage of general and combined State VR agencies that demonstrate at least 

30 supported employment outcomes per $100,000 received in SE Grant funds.

Year Target Actual

2009 75 67

2010 75 67

2011 70 81

2012 75

2013 75

Additional information: The efficiency measure developed for the Supported Employment 

State Grants program examines the percentage of State VR agencies for which the number of 

supported employment outcomes per $100,000 received in SE Grants funds is within a 

specified range. For the purpose of this measure, the number of supported employment 

outcomes per $100,000 is calculated by dividing the reported number of individuals that 

achieved a supported employment outcome by the amount of a State agency’s SE allocation 

and multiplying the result by 100,000. The performance group does not include State VR 

agencies for the Blind or for the 4 territories because they receive less than $100,000 in SE 

Grants funds. The performance range and targets were established based on fiscal year 2007 

and 2008 data. In fiscal year 2007, 65 percent of the performance group achieved at least 30 

supported employment outcomes per $100,000 and in fiscal year 2008 performance was 

79 percent. However, performance at the higher fiscal year 2008 level was not sustained and 

performance dropped in fiscal year 2009 to 67 percent, slightly above the FY 2007 level. In 

fiscal year 2010, performance remained the same as in fiscal year 2009 and so the performance 

targets for fiscal year 2011 and fiscal year 2012 were adjusted to reflect the fact that fiscal year 

2008 data appeared to be atypical. However, in FY 2011 performance increased significantly 

with 81 percent of the performance group achieving at least 30 supported employment 

outcomes per $100,000 and the performance target of 70 percent for FY 2011 was exceeded. 

The average number of supported employment outcomes per $100,000 increased from 68 in 

fiscal year 2010 to 75 in fiscal year 2011. In fiscal years 2007 and 2008, the average for the 

performance group was 71 and 73, respectively. However in FY 2009 the average hit a low of 

63. Among agencies in the performance group, the average number in fiscal year 2011 ranged 

significantly from 2 (Hawaii) to 235 (New Jersey), with a median of 55 supported employment 

outcomes per $100,000. A performance target for fiscal year 2014 has not been set for this 

efficiency measure because the Department is proposing to eliminate this separate funding 

authority for the SE Grants program.

Other Performance Information

Limited information is available about how State VR agencies serve individuals who have a goal 

of SE or how State VR agencies use Title VI Part B funds from the SE State Grants Program in 

conjunction with Title I funds to pay for services provided to individuals with disabilities. 

Moreover, the reviews of the State plans and monitoring reports reveal that the extent to which 

State VR agencies achieve SE outcomes for individuals with disabilities is uneven. This 

variability stems in part from differences in policies, practices, and resources that States and 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-43

State agencies have with regard to SE. The Department is currently conducting a study to 

obtain a more in-depth understanding of how State VR agencies provide SE services for their 

consumers, including how the supplemental SE appropriation is used in conjunction with VR 

State Grant funds to assist individuals with the most significant disabilities to achieve a 

supported employment outcome. The Department collected survey data from 94 percent of the 

80 State VR agencies on how they implement SE services, how they use Title VI Part B funds in

conjunction with Title I funds to fund SE, and SE outcomes. To explore agency strategies for 

providing SE services in more detail, the next and final step in data collection is to conduct 

in-depth discussions with three agencies to follow up on their responses and to learn more 

about the administration of the SE State Grants program as implemented in these agencies. 

The final report should be completed by April 13, 2013. This study is designed to complement 

other studies that examine SE supports beyond the time-limited support provided through the 

VR program such as the one described below.

In 2010, funds appropriated under RSA’s Evaluation program were used to support a sub-study 

focusing on supported employment (SE) services through the National Institute on Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research’s Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Vocational 

Rehabilitation (VR RRTC). The purpose of this sub-study was to identify the role and impact of 

the VR program within the larger supported employment delivery system. This research 

focused on vocational rehabilitation (VR) agency partnerships with other State entities, and 

sources and models for long-term funding (extended services). Examples of topics that were 

investigated include providers and sources of funding for supported employment, the availability 

of supported employment services, SE placements, and extended services, and methods or 

models of collaboration and coordination in providing SE services that can be identified within or 

across States.

The design called for embedding supported employment questions in ongoing surveys of 

multiple State agencies and case studies of SE coordination and funding models in several 

States to illuminate issues identified through these surveys. The SE sub-study also included 

additional analysis of data obtained from an ongoing survey of community rehabilitation 

programs (CRPs) relevant to supported employment. The VR RRTC then conducted case 

studies of SE partnerships in five States. These case studies were designed to further the 

Department’s understanding of the range of practices that VR systems might use to ensure 

more successful transitions to long-term support through other resources. The survey and case 

study effort raised several issues for further discussion and review. 

• First, there is a need for further clarification, guidance, and consensus on indicators of 

job stability and on what constitutes integration in employment (i.e., acceptable 

employment settings for SE). 

• Second, there is a need for more exploration of creative models for SE funding that 

focus on the needs of individuals more than the constraints (real and perceived) of 

funding sources and service providers, including further consideration of strategies for 

more “braided” funding mechanisms between VR and other public systems such as 

Mental Health or Intellectual/Developmental Disabilities. Such strategies would certainly 

enhance coordination of service delivery around the individual, create more robust 

partnerships, and promote more efficient use of resources by agencies. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-44

• Third, there is a need to expand State funding for extended employment for groups that 

might not otherwise have access to long-term support dollars (e.g., people with learning 

disabilities, chronic physical impairments, or traumatic brain injuries). However, the 

report notes that this system improvement may be difficult to achieve in a challenging 

economy.

• Fourth, more work is needed to refine and develop practical strategies for VR, partner 

agencies, and their providers to use in developing strong and sufficient natural supports 

as part of the long-term services required post-VR in SE. The report states that “it is 

clear from our on-site interviews as well as the extant research on this issue that policy 

and practice in this area varies dramatically, and that many states lack a structured 

approach to the use of natural supports.” 

• Finally, RSA and Medicaid might consider working together to develop guidance for 

State Medicaid systems about allowable Medicaid reimbursable expenses under the 

Mental Health Rehabilitation Option or the new 1915(i) State plan amendment attendant 

to employment. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-45

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title III, Section 304)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2014 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority:

Change

2012 2013 2014 from 2012

$1,262 $1,262 20 -$1,262

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. The Administration proposes to continue funding in FY 

2014 through appropriations language.

2 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers (MSFW) program makes comprehensive vocational 

rehabilitation (VR) services available to migrant and seasonal farmworkers with disabilities, with 

the goal of increasing employment opportunities for them. Projects also develop innovative 

methods for reaching and serving this population. Emphasis is given in these projects to 

outreach, specialized bilingual rehabilitation counseling, and coordination of VR services with 

services from other sources. Projects provide VR services to migrant and seasonal 

farmworkers and to members of their families when such services will contribute to the 

rehabilitation of the worker with a disability. Discretionary grants are limited to 90 percent of the 

costs of the projects providing these services. This is a current-funded program.

The Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers program is administered in coordination with other 

programs serving migrant and seasonal farmworkers, including programs under Title I of the 

Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965, Section 330 of the Public Health Service Act, the 

Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, and the Workforce Investment Act of 

1998. 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were as follows:

Year (dollars in thousands)

2009.............................................................$2,239

2010...............................................................2,239

2011...............................................................1,856

2012...............................................................1,262

2013............................................................... 1,262 1

_________________

1 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers

K-46

FY 2014 BUDGET REQUEST

No funds are requested for the Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers (MSFW) program in fiscal 

year 2014. The Administration proposes to eliminate funding for this small, duplicative 

competitive grants program as services are provided under the larger Vocational Rehabilitation 

(VR) State grants program. For fiscal year 2014, the Administration is seeking authority to pay 

the remaining continuation costs for this program from the funding requested for the VR State 

grants program. The Administration believes that elimination of this separate program will 

improve administrative inefficiencies and help focus Federal efforts on ensuring that States 

provide effective appropriate services to all eligible individuals, including the population served 

under this program.

The authorizing legislation for the VR State grants program requires States to submit a plan to 

the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) that describes how the State will provide 

services to all eligible individuals within that State. The statute contains many provisions to 

ensure that State VR agencies reach and serve all individuals with disabilities within the State, 

including minority, unserved, and underserved populations--

• States must provide for the cooperation, collaboration, and coordination with other 

components of the Statewide workforce investment system. Specifically, States must 

describe their interagency cooperation with, and utilization of the services and facilities of, 

Federal, State and local agencies and programs, including programs carried out by the 

Department of Agriculture’s Under Secretary for Rural Development.

• States must provide an assurance that the State will not impose a residence requirement 

that excludes from services any individual who is present in the State.

• States must conduct comprehensive, statewide assessments describing the rehabilitation 

needs of individuals with disabilities residing within the States, particularly the VR service 

needs of individuals with disabilities who are minorities and individuals with disabilities who 

have been unserved or underserved by the VR State grants program. Using the statewide 

assessment, States must identify their goals and priorities in carrying out their programs. 

• States must provide a description of the strategies they will use to address the needs 

identified in the comprehensive, statewide assessment and to achieve the identified goals 

and priorities, including outreach procedures to identify and serve individuals with 

disabilities who are minorities and individuals with disabilities who have been unserved or 

underserved by the VR State grants program. 

Specialized services, such as those provided through the MSFW program, can be beneficial in 

meeting the complex needs of migrant or seasonal farmworkers with disabilities. However, the 

specialized services provided under the MSFW program are services that all State VR agencies 

should be providing to reach and appropriately serve underserved populations under the VR 

State grants program and should not depend on the availability of separate funding. For 

example, outreach activities in churches and community centers that identify farmworkers with 

disabilities would also assist in identifying other persons with disabilities who visit these places. 

The hiring of bilingual counselors benefits all consumers who are monolingual in a non-English
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers

K-47

language, whether those consumers are farmworkers or not. In addition, the provision of 

transportation services for rural areas will benefit all rural residents, whether farmworkers or not. 

The Administration believes that continuing to provide separate funding for this small, narrowly 

targeted program is not an efficient way to ensure appropriate and high quality services for 

special populations who may be underserved under the VR State grants program. With the 

funding that the Administration is requesting for the VR State grants program, State VR 

agencies would have resources to provide services that would benefit migrant or seasonal 

farmworkers, along with other unserved or underserved populations. The Administration 

believes that RSA should focus its monitoring and technical assistance efforts on improving the 

performance of the VR State grants program, including its delivery of services to and the 

outcomes of its most needy and vulnerable populations. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands)

Program funding and awards 2012 2013 2014

Program funding:

Continuation projects $1,249 $1,249 10

Minority outreach 13 13 0

Total 1,262 1,262 0

Number of projects:

Continuation projects 7 4 0

_________________

NOTE: 2013 excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175. 1 This amount includes $574,000 that would be used to cover a portion of FY 2014 continuation costs. 

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, GPRA 

goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data, and an assessment of the 

progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of results is based on the 

cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years, as well as the resources and 

efforts invested by those served by this program. 

Goal: To increase employment opportunities for migrant and seasonal farmworkers who 

have disabilities. 

Objective: Ensure that eligible Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers with disabilities receive 

Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services and achieve employment.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers

K-48

Measure: The percentage of migrant or seasonal farmworkers with disabilities served by both 

VR and the VR Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers projects who were placed in employment.

Year Target Actual 

2009 65 67

2010 65 60

2011 65 56

2012 65

2013 65

Additional information:

During fiscal year 2011, the 11 State VR agencies and the 12 projects in the 11 States with 

MSFW projects reported in the RSA-911 report that they served 71 individuals, placing 40 in 

employment (56.34 percent), a decline in performance from fiscal year 2010 (59.9 percent). 

Three of the grantees in 3 States met or exceeded the performance target for fiscal year 2011.

The 9 remaining projects in 8 States reported employment rates that ranged from 0 to 63 

percent.

RSA is concerned about the steady decreases in the overall numbers served by States with a 

MSFW project. In fiscal year 2008, 218 individuals were served by States with an MSFW project 

and 174 individuals were placed; in fiscal year 2009, 189 were served and 154 were placed; in 

fiscal year 2010, 137 were served and 128 were placed; and in fiscal year 2011, 71 were served 

and 40 were placed. 

Through its oversight, RSA has determined that the decrease in the numbers served might be 

attributed to States with MSFW projects not accurately counting and reporting in the RSA-911 

report the individuals served and placed. For example, in FY 2011, the MSFW grantees directly 

reported that 501 individuals were served by both the MSFW projects and the State VR 

agencies and that 219 of those served were placed. In light of the huge discrepancy between 

these data and the RSA-911 data (71 individuals served and 40 placed into employment) and 

the lack of information on the validity of any of the data being reported here, it is difficult to 

assess the performance of the program. 

A fiscal year 2014 performance target has not been set for this measure because the 

Administration is proposing to eliminate the separate funding authority for the MSFW program.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-49

Training

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title III, Section 302 (a)-(g)(2), (h)-(i))

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2014 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority: 

2012 2013

footnote

2014

Change

from 2012

$35,515 $35,5152 $30,188 -$5,327 _________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. The Administration proposes to continue funding in 

FY 2014 through appropriations language. 

2

 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 

The purpose of the Training program is to ensure that skilled personnel are available to meet 

the rehabilitation needs of individuals with disabilities assisted through vocational rehabilitation 

(VR), supported employment, and independent living programs. The program supports training 

and related activities designed to increase the number of qualified personnel providing 

rehabilitation services. Grants and contracts are awarded to States and public and nonprofit 

agencies and organizations, including institutions of higher education, to pay all or part of the 

cost of conducting training programs. 

Awards may be made in any of 31 long-term training fields, in addition to awards for continuing 

education, short-term training, experimental and innovative training, and training interpreters for 

persons who are deaf or hard of hearing and persons who are deaf-blind. These training 

programs vary in terms of content, methodology, and type of trainee. For example, the LongTerm Training program supports academic training grants that must direct 75 percent of the 

funds to trainee scholarships. Students who receive financial assistance from projects funded 

under the program are required to pay back such assistance, either by maintaining acceptable 

employment in public or private non-profit rehabilitation agencies for a period of time after they 

complete their training, or by making a cash repayment to the Federal Government.

The Training program authority requires recipients of grants under the Long-Term Training 

program to build closer relationships between training institutions and State VR agencies, 

promote careers in public vocational rehabilitation programs, identify potential employers who 

would meet students’ payback requirements, and ensure that data on student employment are 

accurate. Training of statewide workforce systems personnel is authorized under the Training 

program, and such training may be jointly funded by the Department of Labor. Statewide 

workforce systems personnel may be trained in evaluation skills to determine whether an 

individual with a disability may be served by the VR State grants program or another component 

of the statewide workforce system. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-50

Of the funds appropriated for the Training program, 15 percent must be used to support the InService Training program. This program is intended to assist State VR agencies in the training 

of State agency staff consistent with the State’s Comprehensive System of Personnel 

Development (CSPD). Under Title I of the Rehabilitation Act, each State is required to establish 

procedures to ensure there is an adequate supply of qualified staff for the State agency, to 

assess personnel needs and make projections for future needs, and to address the current and 

projected personnel training needs. States are further required to develop and maintain policies 

and procedures for job-specific personnel standards that are consistent with certification, 

licensure, or other State personnel requirements for comparable positions. If a State’s current 

personnel do not meet the highest requirements for personnel standards within the State, the 

CSPD must identify the steps a State will take to upgrade the qualifications of its staff, through 

retraining or hiring. VR State grant funds may be used to comply with these requirements. 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were as follows: 

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands) footnot

e

2009..................................................................................... 37,766

2010..................................................................................... 37,766

2011..................................................................................... 35,582

2012..................................................................................... 35,515

2013..................................................................................... 35,5151

_________________

1 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175

FY 2014 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $30.188 million for the Training program in fiscal year 2014, a 

reduction of $5.327 million from the fiscal year 2012 level. This reduction reflects the 

elimination of funding for the In-Service Training program. The Administration does not seek 

funding for this program because it duplicates in-service training activities that can be carried 

out under the larger Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants program, for which the 

Administration requests an increase of $178.152 million from the fiscal year 2012 level.

Currently, the Act requires that 15 percent of the funds appropriated for the Training program be 

set aside to support the training of existing State VR agency personnel. However, State VR 

agencies have the responsibility to provide needed professional development to State agency 

personnel, consistent with the agency’s Comprehensive System of Personnel Development 

(CSPD) plan under Title I of the Act and can use the funds provided under the VR State Grants 

program for this purpose. In addition, the elimination of the set-aside would save on the 

administrative costs involved in making small grants to State agencies and the associated 

reporting requirements for grantees. Hence, the Administration believes a separate revenue 

stream to support in-service training through the Training program is inefficient. The requested 

increase in funding in the VR State Grants program would ensure that State VR agencies have 

resources available to support in-service training for their personnel.

The Training program is designed to support programs that provide training to new VR staff or 

upgrade the qualifications of existing staff. In recent years, the major focus of the program has 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-51

been to address the shortage of qualified State VR agency staff by supporting long-term training 

programs at institutions of higher education (IHEs) to train new counselors and administrators. 

Currently, VR agencies are undergoing dramatic turnover in their staffs due to the retirement of 

a large number of qualified counselors. According to 2010 data from State VR agencies, there 

were 1,222 vacancies out of the 16,064 total positions nationwide in these offices. Over the 

next 5 years, these agencies projected an additional 5,481 vacancies. This would mean that, in 

the next 5 years, State VR agencies may need to hire as much as 42 percent of their staff to 

maintain current staffing levels. The Administration believes that similar shortages, though not 

as severe, will also affect other VR providers in the same timeframe. In order to address this 

issue, the Administration has focused a considerable amount of resources in the Training 

program on long-term training, and is seeking to further target funds to address those areas of 

greatest need. Additionally, the Rehabilitation Act (the Act) requires that 75 percent of the funds 

awarded to universities under the Long-Term Training (LTT) program must go directly to 

students for tuition assistance and stipends. Since this tuition assistance must be repaid 

through work in State VR agencies and other appropriate work settings, the Department 

believes it is the best mechanism for recruiting new graduates into the field of rehabilitation.

The Department’s investment in eight Technical Assistance and Continuing Education (TACE) 

centers was originally slated to expire in fiscal year 2013, with two additional centers expiring in 

December 2013. In November 2012, the Department published a request for information in the 

Federal Register to gather input on grants awarded under the Rehabilitation Program, including 

the TACE centers. Using feedback from both this request for information and focus groups 

conducted during the spring and summer of 2013, the Department plans to conduct a new 

competition in fiscal year 2014 to address the technical assistance (TA) and continuing 

education (CE) needs of State VR agencies. However, recognizing that it would be contrary to 

the public interest to have a lapse in the provision of TA and CE currently provided by the TACE 

centers, the Department has proposed to extend the project periods of the existing ten TACE 

centers until September 2014. 

In fiscal year 2014, the Department will also continue support for continuing education and 

technical assistance to State VR agencies and their partners to improve their performance 

under and compliance with the Rehabilitation Act. The majority of funds requested for fiscal 

year 2014 would be used to support awards in this area and in the Long-Term Training 

program. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-52

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands)

Program Funding: 2012 2013 2014 footnote

Long-Term Training:

New 0 $4,466 $3,455

Continuations $19,445 13,961 16,031

Subtotal 19,445 18,427 19,486

Technical Assistance & Continuing 

Education:

New 0 0 8,000

Continuations 7,837 9,000 0

Subtotal 7,837 9,000 8,000

Short-Term Training:

Continuations 197 200 200

Subtotal 197 200 200

Unit In-Service Training:

Continuations $5,327 $5,327 0 1

Subtotal 5,327 5,327 0

Training for Interpreters for Individuals 

who are Deaf and Deaf-Blind:

Continuations 2,063 2,100 $2,100

Subtotal 2,063 2,100 2,100

General Training:

Continuations 290 0 0

Subtotal 290 0 0

Program Totals:

New 0 4,466 11,455

Continuations 35,159 30,588 18,331

Peer review of new award applications 0 105 100

Minority Outreach 2 356 356 302

Total

35,515 35,515 30,188

_________________________

NOTE: 2013 excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175. 1 Under the Administration’s FY 2014 proposal, funding will no longer be provided for this activity under the 

Training program. 2 Section 21(b) the Rehabilitation Act requires the Rehabilitation Services Administration to set aside 1 percent of 

funds appropriated under this account for minority outreach activities.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-53

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, GPRA 

goals, objectives, measures and performance targets and data; and an assessment of the 

progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based on 

the cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years and those requested in 

FY 2014 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by this 

program. 

Goal: To provide the public vocational rehabilitation (VR) sector with well-trained staff 

and to maintain and upgrade the skills of current staff.

Objective: To provide graduates who work within the vocational rehabilitation (VR) system to 

help individuals with disabilities achieve their goals.

Annual Performance Measures

This program has three annual performance measures. All three of these measures are 

designed to provide information on various aspects of the program, including its ability to 

address the shortage of State VR agency counselors and staff, the proportion of scholars 

fulfilling their payback requirements, and the proportion of currently employed State VR agency 

counselors who meet their State’s CSPD requirements. While these measures alone do not 

provide a comprehensive view of the Training program, the Administration believes that they do 

provide evidence as to the efficacy of the program and its expenditures.

Measure: The percentage of Masters-level counseling graduates fulfilling their payback 

requirements through employment in State Vocational Rehabilitation agencies.

Year Target Actual 

2009 53 36

2010 53 39

2011 53 37

2012 53

2013 55

2014 55

Additional Information: The Department annually collects data about scholars through the 

Payback Reporting Form, which grantees submit by November 30 of each year. After a 

consistent decline from 2005 to 2008, the proportion of Masters-level counseling graduates 

fulfilling their payback requirements through employment in State VR agencies leveled off from 

2009 through 2011. While program graduates are not mandated to meet their service obligation 

by working in State VR agencies, the Department believes that these agencies should be the 

main employer of these graduates, especially given the current and future shortages outlined 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-54

above. This overall downward trend may have been be the result of a confluence of factors, 

including, but not limited to, the range of acceptable employment for meeting the service 

obligations outlined in statute, State hiring freezes, and the salary and working conditions in 

State VR agencies relative to those in other acceptable employment settings. According to the 

Act, program graduates are able to meet the requirements of their payback through employment 

in a number of different types of agencies, including employment in private VR agencies or in 

related State agencies, such as special education. As a result, some of the program’s 

graduates are able to find acceptable employment in a number of different settings other than 

State VR agencies. When combined with the lower salary offered by State VR agencies 

compared to those in private firms, it may be that more program graduates are opting to seek 

employment elsewhere, while still meeting the terms of their service obligation. Of all Masterslevel graduates, 83 percent were fulfilling their service obligation in some form of acceptable 

employment in 2011, with roughly 55 percent of the employed graduates opting to work in 

settings other than the State VR agency. Over the past three years, the proportion of employed 

graduates working in settings other than the State VR agency has been slowly increasing.

Measure: The percentage of RSA-supported graduates fulfilling their payback requirements 

through acceptable employment.

Year Target Actual 

2009 86 77

2010 86 83

2011 87 83

2012 87

2013 87

2014 87

Additional Information: Using the annual Payback Reporting Form, grantees are required to 

report the number of RSA-supported graduates fulfilling their payback requirements through 

acceptable employment. This measure captures all program graduates who received RSAsupported scholarships, including those receiving undergraduate and graduate degrees and 

certificates. It also includes individuals maintaining acceptable employment in all acceptable 

agencies, not just State VR agencies. The Act requires that all program graduates maintain 

acceptable employment for at least 2 years for every year they received assistance from an 

RSA-supported grant. However, only four in five scholars are currently doing so. It is possible 

that some portion of program graduates are receiving waivers of their payback requirements for 

various reasons, including exceptions and deferrals provided in accordance with 

34 CFR 386.41, such as permanent disability or full-time enrollment in an institution of higher 

education. It is also possible that some subset of individuals who received scholarship support 

opt to obtain employment in for-profit rehabilitation agencies and simply repay their initial 

scholarship as if it were a loan. Without further information, the Department cannot determine 

the extent to which these explanations hold, but RSA has revised the Payback Reporting Form 

to be used by grantees in order to significantly improve the quality and accuracy of the data 

RSA receives about scholars.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-55

Measure: The percentage of currently employed State Vocational Rehabilitation agency 

counselors who meet their state’s Comprehensive System of Personnel Development (CSPD) 

standards.

Year Target Actual 

2009 74 75

2010 75 84

2011 76 86

2012 77

2013 78

2014 78

Additional Information: The Department annually collects data from State VR agencies about 

the qualifications of their currently-employed counselors. Since 2002, the proportion of currently 

employed State VR agency counselors who meet their State’s CSPD standards has increased

and performance on this measure in 2010 and 2011 was markedly better than in prior years. 

The general trend of improved performance could be due, in part, to enhanced training made 

possible through the Training program. However, it could also be due to the natural aging of the 

State VR workforce accompanied by replacing retiring counselors who do not meet the CSPD 

standards with new counselors who do. The Department believes that both factors may have 

contributed to the increased qualifications of State VR counselors, but cannot definitively parse 

out the individual effects of each. As for the sudden increase in performance in 2010, the 

Department believes that this may be due to higher quality data reporting on the part of States 

and increased monitoring and technical assistance from the Department. In general, more 

information is needed about this measure and the potential causes of the recent trends. 

Efficiency Measures

The Department has adopted an efficiency measure for the Long-Term Training program (LTT). 

This measure is the cost per Master’s-level vocational rehabilitation counseling graduate.

Measure: The Federal cost per RSA supported rehabilitation counseling graduate at the 

Masters-level.

Year Target Actual 

2009 $10,702 $27,331

2010 10,702 $23,477

2011 10,702 $23,721

2012 10,702

2013 24,000

2014 24,000

Additional Information: The measure is calculated by dividing the total funds spent on longterm training during a fiscal year by the number of graduates supported under that program 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-56

during the same fiscal year. Since 2001, the Federal cost per RSA supported rehabilitation 

graduate at the Masters level typically ranged from $10,000 to $12,000. Beginning in 2010, the 

Department has calculated this measure for individual cohorts of grantees by dividing the sum 

of all project costs supported with Federal funds (across all years of each individual scholar’s 

training) by the number of degree recipients who successfully completed funded training 

programs closing in that year. Prior to 2010, this measure was calculated using only the funds 

directly made available for scholarships. For purposes of the table above, the Department 

recalculated the 2009 measure using the revised methodology in order to allow cross-year 

comparisons. The targets for 2009 through 2012 are based on the previous methodology. The 

higher Federal cost per RSA-supported graduate under the new methodology is in line with 

similar measures in other programs supporting training at the Masters level. However, there 

remains wide variation across types of programs and projects. The Department is analyzing 

these data to determine ways to improve efficiency across the Training program.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-57

Demonstration and training programs

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title III, Section 303)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2014 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority:

Change

2012 2013 2014 from 2012

$5,325 $5,325 2$5,750 +$425

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. The Administration proposes to continue funding in FY 

2014 through appropriations language.

2 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Demonstration and Training programs are authorized to provide competitive grants to, or 

contracts with, eligible entities to expand and improve the provision of rehabilitation and other 

services authorized under the Rehabilitation Act (the Act) and to further the purposes and 

policies of the Act. These current-funded discretionary programs also are authorized to support 

activities that increase the provision, extent, availability, scope, and quality of rehabilitation 

services under the Act, including related research and evaluation activities. 

Section 303(b) of the Rehabilitation Act authorizes the support of activities to demonstrate 

methods of service delivery to individuals with disabilities, as well as activities such as technical 

assistance, systems change, special studies and evaluation, and dissemination and utilization of 

project findings. Eligible entities include State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) agencies, 

community rehabilitation programs, Indian tribes or tribal organizations, other public or nonprofit 

agencies or organizations, and for-profit organizations. Competitions may be limited to one or 

more type of entity. 

Sections 303(c) and (d) of the Act authorize a parent information and training program and a 

Braille training program. 

The majority of projects currently supported under Demonstration and Training programs are 

designed to increase employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities by expanding and 

improving the availability and provision of rehabilitation and other services. These projects are 

intended to increase employment outcomes for individuals for whom vocational rehabilitation 

services were previously unavailable or who previously did not take advantage of such services. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Demonstration and training programs

K-58

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Year (dollars in thousands)

2009.............................................................$9,594

2010.............................................................11,601

2011...............................................................6,459

2012...............................................................5,325

2013...............................................................5,325 1

_________________

1 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

FY 2014 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $5.750 million for the Demonstration and Training programs in 

fiscal year 2014, an increase of $425,000 over the fiscal year 2012 appropriation for this 

program. The requested increase would support technical assistance (TA) activities designed to 

promote promising and evidence-based practices to improve employment outcomes for youth 

with disabilities. The TA would focus on practices developed and implemented by RSA’s six 

Transitional Model Demonstration projects that ended in September 2012 and highlighted at the 

recent National Transition Conference. These six projects, which operated in Ohio, 

Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Maryland, South Carolina, and Oregon, were developed to 

demonstrate the use of promising practices of collaborative transition planning and service 

delivery to improve the postsecondary education and employment outcomes of youth with 

disabilities. 

The request would also support two new Braille Training grants ($300,000) that will be 

competitively awarded under this program during fiscal year 2014. 

All other funds requested for fiscal year 2014 would provide funding for the continuation of 

activities that began in previous fiscal years. 

Of the amount requested, $4.9 million would be used to continue support for a grantee that is 

demonstrating how State VR agencies can achieve high quality employment outcomes for 

Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries and Supplemental Security Income 

(SSI) recipients. This activity began in fiscal year 2010, and will receive its final year of funding 

in fiscal year 2014. Program improvement efforts would include quantitative and qualitative 

analytical activities that assist the Department to assess and improve program performance. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Demonstration and training programs

K-59

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands) 

Program funding and awards: 2012 2013 2014

Program funding:

Technical assistance support activities)

New awards 0 0 $425

SSDI/SSI demonstrations (FIP)

Continuations $4,883 $4,893 4,893

Braille training(FIP)

Continuations 300 300 0

FIP: New awards 0 0 300

FIP: Subtotal 300 300 300

Program improvement activities 60 79 76

Minority Outreach 82 53 53

Peer review of new award applications 0 0 3

 Total—Program costs 5,325 5,325 5,750

Number of awards

 Number of continuation awards 4 4 1

 Number of new awards 0 0 4

 Total—Number of awards 4 4 5

__________________________

NOTE: 2013 excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Efficiency Measure

Goal: To expand, improve or further the purposes of activities authorized under the Act.

Objective: Expand and improve the provision of rehabilitation services that lead to employment 

outcomes. 

The efficiency measure for this program is the percentage of projects that met their goals and 

objectives as established in their original applications, or as modified during the first year. This 

efficiency measure is designed to determine whether the grantees are providing the services for 

which they were awarded funding through the competitive process. In December 2012, RSA 

received final reports from 13 grantees, including 6 Transition Model Demonstrations and 

7 Parent Information and Training Centers. RSA is reviewing the applications submitted by 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Demonstration and training programs

K-60

these grantees in relation to their final reports to determine whether these grantees achieved 

the goals and objectives they set out to accomplish. 

Other Performance Information

RSA has developed performance measures tailored to the specific projects being funded under 

this program. For example, in fiscal year 2010, RSA established performance measures for the 

Model Demonstration Project to Improve Outcomes for Individuals Receiving Social Security 

Disability Insurance (SSDI) Served by State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies to assess the 

effectiveness of the grantee’s performance in the following areas:

• The degree to which the data collected from the project sites show that the intervention 

model results in improvement in employment outcomes, such as employment rate, 

wages at case closure, average hours worked, and percentage of individuals earning an 

amount greater than substantial gainful activity, as determined by the Social Security 

Administration, at closure;

• The degree to which the project recommended strategies that could be used by other 

State VR agencies to implement the model;

• The degree to which the grantee has disseminated its findings to State VR agencies;

and 

• The responsiveness of the grantee to recommendations made through the reviews 

conducted by the panel of experts.

Data is expected to be available in early summer 2013.

 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-61

Independent living

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title VII, Parts B and C, and Chapter 2)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2014 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority: 

Program

2012 2013 2014

Change

from 2012

Independent living State grants $23,359 $23,3592 $23,359 0

Centers for independent living 79,953 79,9532 79,953 0

Services for older individuals who 

are blind

34,018 34,0182 34,018 0

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. The Administration proposes to continue funding in 

FY 2014 under appropriations language. 2 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The purpose of the independent living programs is to maximize the leadership, empowerment, 

independence, and productivity of individuals with disabilities, and to integrate these individuals 

into the mainstream of American society. Independent living programs provide financial 

assistance to sustain, expand, and improve independent living services; develop and support 

statewide networks of centers for independent living; and foster working relationships among 

State independent living rehabilitation programs, centers for independent living, Statewide 

Independent Living Councils, Rehabilitation Act programs outside of Title VII, and other relevant 

Federal and non-Federal programs. The independent living programs are current-funded. 

The Independent Living State Grants program supports formula grants to States, with funds 

allotted based on total population. States participating in the State Grants program must match 

10 percent of their grant with non-Federal cash or in-kind resources in the year for which the 

Federal funds are appropriated. The fiscal year 2012 State allotments are based on the 

April 1, 2010 population counts published by the Census Bureau in December 2010. The fiscal 

year 2013 State distributions are based on the July 1, 2010 estimates released in December 

2011. The fiscal year 2014 allotments are based on the July 1, 2011 estimates published by the 

Census Bureau in December 2012.

To be eligible for financial assistance under the Independent Living (IL) State Grants or Centers 

for Independent Living program, States are required to establish a Statewide Independent Living 

Council (SILC). Each State must also submit a State Plan for Independent Living that is jointly 

developed and signed by the director of the designated State vocational rehabilitation unit(s) 

(DSU) and the chairperson of the SILC. States may use these funds to provide resources to 

support the operation of the SILC and for one or more of the following purposes:
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-62

• to demonstrate ways to expand and improve independent living services;

• to provide independent living services;

• to support the operation of centers for independent living;

• to increase the capacity of public or nonprofit agencies and organizations and other entities 

to develop comprehensive approaches or systems for providing independent living services;

• to conduct studies and analyses, gather information, develop model policies and 

procedures, and present information, approaches, strategies, findings, conclusions, and 

recommendations to Federal, State, and local policymakers;

• to provide training on the independent living philosophy; and

• to provide outreach to populations who are unserved or underserved by programs under 

Title VII of the Rehabilitation Act, including minority groups and urban and rural populations.

The Centers for Independent Living (CIL) program provides grants for consumer-controlled, 

community-based, cross-disability, nonresidential, private nonprofit agencies that are designed 

and operated within a local community by individuals with disabilities and provide an array of 

independent living services. At a minimum, centers are required to provide the core services of 

information and referral, independent living skills training, peer counseling, and individual and 

systems advocacy. Most centers are also actively involved in one or more of the following 

activities: community planning and decisionmaking; school-based peer counseling, role 

modeling, and skills training; working with local governments and employers to open and 

facilitate employment opportunities; interacting with local, State, and Federal legislators; and 

staging recreational events that integrate individuals with disabilities with their non-disabled 

peers.

A population-based formula determines the total amount that is available for discretionary grants 

to centers in each State. In most cases, the Department awards funds directly to centers for 

independent living. In fiscal year 2012, 356 centers and two States received funding from the 

CIL program. If State funding for CIL operation exceeds the level of Federal CIL funding in any 

fiscal year, the State may apply for the authority to award grants under this program through its 

DSU. There are currently only two States, Massachusetts and Minnesota, that are both eligible 

and have elected to manage their own CIL programs.

In addition to funding centers for independent living, the Department must award between 

1.8 and 2 percent of the funds appropriated for this program for grants, contracts, or cooperative 

agreements to provide training and technical assistance with respect to planning, developing,

conducting, administering, and evaluating centers for independent living. Each State must 

submit an annual performance report providing information regarding the centers’ and SILCs’ 

most pressing training and technical assistance needs.

The Rehabilitation Act establishes a set of standards and assurances that centers for 

independent living must meet and requires the Department to develop and publish indicators of 

minimum compliance with the standards. These standards and assurances are used in 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-63

evaluating compliance in the following areas: philosophy, including consumer control and equal 

access; provision of services on a cross-disability basis; support of the development and 

achievement of the independent living goals chosen by consumers; advocacy to increase the 

quality of community options for independent living; provision of independent living core 

services; resource development; and community capacity-building activities, such as community 

advocacy, technical assistance, and outreach. Each year, the Department must conduct 

compliance reviews of at least 15 percent of the centers and one-third of the designated State 

units funded under this part. The Rehabilitation Act requires the Department to award grants to 

any eligible agency that had been awarded a grant as of September 30, 1997. In effect, all 

centers funded by the end of fiscal year 1997 are "grandfathered in" and thus guaranteed 

continued funding as long as they continue to meet program and fiscal standards and 

assurances.

The Independent Living Services for Older Individuals Who Are Blind program supports 

services to assist individuals aged 55 or older whose recent severe visual impairment makes 

competitive employment extremely difficult to obtain, but for whom independent living goals are 

feasible. Funds are used to provide independent living services, conduct activities that will 

improve or expand services for these individuals, and conduct activities to improve public 

understanding of the problems of these individuals. Services are designed to help persons 

served under this program to adjust to their blindness by increasing their ability to care for their 

individual needs. Services provided under this program are typically not covered under private 

insurance or Medicaid. 

Grantees are State vocational rehabilitation agencies for persons who are blind and visually 

impaired or, in States with no separate agency for persons who are blind, State combined 

vocational rehabilitation agencies. States participating in the Services for Older Individuals Who 

Are Blind program must match 10 percent of their grant with non-Federal cash or in kind 

resources in the year for which the Federal funds are appropriated. When appropriations for 

this program exceed $13 million—as they have since fiscal year 2000—awards are distributed 

to States according to a formula based on the population of individuals who are 55 years of age

or older. The fiscal year 2012 allotments were based on the July 1, 2010 estimates of the 

population of individuals age 55 and older published by the Census Bureau in December 2010. 

The fiscal year 2013 and 2014 State allotments are based on the April 1, 2011 population 

counts published in December 2011. The fiscal year 2014 allotments will be revised when new 

population estimates by age group become available. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-64

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Independent living State grants

Year (dollars in thousands)

2009..........................................................$23,450

Recovery Act...............................................18,200

2010............................................................23,450

2011............................................................23,403

2012............................................................23,359

2013............................................................23,3591

Centers for independent living

Year (dollars in thousands)

2009..........................................................$77,266

Recovery Act...............................................87,500

2010............................................................80,266

2011............................................................80,105

2012............................................................79,953

2013............................................................79,9531

Services for older individuals who are blind

Year (dollars in thousands)

2009..........................................................$34,151

Recovery Act...............................................34,300

2010............................................................34,151

2011............................................................34,083

2012............................................................34,018

2013............................................................34,0181

_________________

1 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

FY 2014 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $23.36 million for the Independent Living State Grants (IL State 

Grants) program, $79.95 million for the Centers for Independent Living program (CIL), and 

$34.02 million for the Independent Living Services for Older Individuals Who are Blind 

(Older Blind) program. The request for each program is the same as the 2012 level.

Independent Living State Grants and Centers for Independent Living

The Administration requests $23.36 million for the State Grants program and $79.95 million for 

the CIL program, the same as the fiscal year 2012 level. The request for the CIL program would 

continue support for existing centers, including any new center grants awarded in 2013. Funds 

requested for the State Grants program would continue the Department's support of 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-65

77 designated State units (DSUs) that use grant funds to: support Statewide Independent 

Living Councils (SILCs); provide independent living services in unserved and underserved 

geographic areas; promote coordination among centers for independent living; and support the 

operation of centers for independent living. These services help ensure that individuals with 

disabilities can live independently and participate as productive members of their communities.

The Administration believes that structural reforms are needed for these programs. Specifically, 

consolidating the IL State Grants and CIL programs would reduce overlap and streamline the 

administration of independent living services. However, the Administration has requested 

funding in fiscal year 2014 under current law because it believes these structural issues would 

be more effectively addressed through the reauthorization of the programs rather than the 

appropriations process. The structural issues that could be addressed by consolidation are:

• There is significant overlap between the two programs. A majority of IL State Grants 

funding is used for the same purposes as the competitive funds for the CIL program—to

provide independent living services, either directly or through grants and contracts with 

centers for independent living and other providers. The authorized uses of funds are 

nearly identical for the two programs. The target population of the two programs is also 

identical—individuals with significant disabilities.

• The usual advantages of a competitive program—a stronger focus on performance and 

accountability—are muted under the CIL program because the authorizing statute 

requires all centers funded as of fiscal year 1997 to receive noncompetitive funding as 

long as they continue to meet program and fiscal standards and assurances. In 

practice, this provision is also applied to centers established after 1997. As a result, all 

354 centers in the CIL program are eligible to receive noncompetitive continuing funding 

in perpetuity.

• The structure of the CIL program also puts the Department in the position of monitoring 

more than three hundred and fifty small, local centers that operate in a service system 

that is largely organized, planned, and in many States, primarily funded at the State 

level, with the Designated State Unit and the State Independent Living Council 

occupying central roles. A 2012 report from the Department’s Inspector General found 

that RSA has not been able to comply with the Rehabilitation Act’s requirement to 

monitor at least 15 percent of the centers each year. Despite recent efforts to improve 

the efficiency of monitoring by leveraging State resources and revising monitoring 

protocols, RSA does not have sufficient funding for staff and travel to meet this 15 

percent requirement. Federal oversight and monitoring of individual centers is 

administratively inefficient and focused primarily on compliance with Federal 

requirements rather than on State and local needs. 

• These factors contribute to an independent living service system with overlapping 

programs, fragmented funding, tangled oversight, and service duplication among State 

agencies, non-profit consumer-controlled centers, and private contractors. The 

Administration is concerned that these structural features create inefficiencies and are 

not ideal for delivering services to consumers. The Administration believes these 

concerns should be addressed as part of the reauthorization of these programs.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-66

The Administration also believes that reforms to these programs should maintain consumer 

control of centers; provide adequate representation of the centers on the SILC; ensure that 

centers receive a predominate share of the program funds; maintain State matching 

requirements; and realign monitoring responsibilities so that the Federal government can hold 

States accountable for their service systems and States can monitor, and be responsive to, the 

localized needs of centers and consumers.

Independent Living Services for Older Individuals Who Are Blind 

The Administration requests $34.02 million for the Independent Living Services for Older 

Individuals who are Blind program for fiscal year 2014, the same as the fiscal year 2012 level. 

According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2010 American Community Survey, 6.9 percent of 

individuals 65 and older (about 2.7 million people) have a vision-related disability. The 

occurrence of a sensory disability was more than six times greater among older adults than 

working-age people. Persons age 55 or older, the target population of this program, are 

projected to increase as a share of the population over the next decade and beyond. 

Independent living services for these individuals are predominately provided through contracts 

administered by State vocational rehabilitation agencies, not centers for independent living, and 

many of the needs of this target population are different from those of the consumers that would 

be served under the proposed Grants for Independent Living program. For these reasons, the 

Administration believes a sustained investment in this program separate from the Grants for 

Independent Living program is warranted. At the requested funding level, an estimated 

16 States would receive the minimum award of $225,000, and the Territories would continue to 

be funded at their minimum level. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-67

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands)

Measures: 2012 2013 2014

Centers for Independent Living: (CIL)

CIL Number of Grantees 356 356 356

CIL Minimum State Allocation $857 $857 $857

CIL Average State allocation $1,483 $1,483 $1,483

CIL Minority outreach $801 $800 $800

CIL Training and Technical Assistance $1,443 $1,444 $1,444

Services for Older Individuals Who Are 

Blind: (OIB)

OIB Number of Grantees 56 56 56

OIB Minimum State award $225 $225 $225

OIB Average State award $645 $645 $645

OIB Minority outreach $340 $340 $340

Independent Living State Grants: (IL)

IL Number of Grantees 77 77 77

IL Minimum State award $312 $312 $312

IL Average State award $442 $442 $442

IL Minority outreach $234 $234 $234

________________

NOTE: 2013 excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, GPRA 

goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data; and an assessment of the 

progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based on 

the cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years, including funding provided 

under the Recovery Act, and those requested in fiscal year 2014 and future years, as well as

the resources and efforts invested by those served by the program. 

Goal: To promote and support a philosophy of independent living (IL)—including a 

philosophy of consumer control, peer support, self-help, self-determination, equal 

access, and individual and system advocacy—in order to maximize the leadership, 

empowerment, independence, and productivity of individuals with disabilities, and the 

integration and full inclusion of individuals with disabilities into the mainstream of 

American society.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-68

Objective: Through the provision of IL services (including the four IL core services), increase 

the percentage of consumers who report having access to services needed to improve their 

ability to live more independently and participate fully in their communities.

Measure: The percentage of Independent Living Centers consumers who report having access 

to previously unavailable appropriate accommodations to receive health care services, as a 

result of direct services provided by an Independent Living Center (including referral to another 

service provider).

Year Target Actual

2009 69 58

2010 69 60

2011 70 62

2012 70

2013 71

2014 71

Measure: The percentage of Independent Living Centers consumers who report having access 

to previously unavailable assistive technology which results in increased independence in at 

least one significant life area, as a result of direct services provided by an Independent Living

Center (including referral to another service provider).

Year Target Actual

2009 73 62

2010 74 69

2011 76 67

2012 76

2013 76

2014 76

Measure: The percentage of Independent Living Centers consumers who report having access 

to previously unavailable transportation, as a result of direct services provided by an 

Independent Living Center (including referral to another service provider).

Year Target Actual

2009 84 73

2010 86 69

2011 87 92

2012 87

2013 87

2014 87

Additional information: For these measures, grantees in the Centers for Independent Living 

program are required under section 704 of the Rehabilitation Act to report annually detailed data 

on the services they provided and the resulting outcomes, including the percentage of their 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-69

consumers who report—as result of services provided by a CIL (including referral to another 

service provider), designated State unit, or designated State unit’s grantee or contractor—

having access to previously unavailable transportation, appropriate accommodations to receive 

health care services, and/or assistive technology resulting in increased independence in at least 

one significant life area. The denominator is determined by the grantee based on the number of 

consumers who have goals specified in their Independent Living Plans that require measurable 

progress on these intermediate outcomes (access to transportation, health care services, and/or 

assistive technology) for their achievement. These are not the only outcomes of interest to CIL 

grantees or consumers, but RSA believes that a significant portion of CIL activities are directly 

related to these outcomes and that improved performance on these outcomes will result in 

increased independence for CIL consumers overall.

Data for 2011 indicate that targets were not met for two of the three outcome areas reported 

under these measures. However, performance on two of the measures showed progress 

compared to the previous year. The third measure (access to assistive technology) showed a 

small decline. RSA staff and the program’s technical assistance grantees have conducted data 

quality training sessions in recent years to improve the validity of the data. RSA also 

implemented a series of automated data checks, which have resulted in further improvements in 

the accuracy of the data. RSA will examine whether to reset targets for these measures using 

the more accurate data. Data for 2012 are expected in April 2013.

Measure: The percentage of Independent Living Centers’ consumers who move out of 

institutions into a community-based setting through the provision of Independent Living services 

(including the four independent living core services).

Year Target Actual

2009 56 45

2010 56 54

2011 57 54

2012 57

2013 58

2014 58

Additional information: Many CILs believe that one of the most important functions of the CIL 

program is assisting people with disabilities with moving out of institutions and living 

independently. Consumers counted by this measure must have set a goal to move out of an 

institution or nursing home and now live in a community-based setting. This measure is 

calculated by dividing the number of consumers who, with the assistance of a center for 

independent living, moved to a community-based setting by the number of consumers who set a 

community living goal (3,844 / 7,078 = 54%). The percentage of consumers who met their 

community living goal in 2011 was the same as the prior year. The target was not met. RSA 

staff and the program’s technical assistance grantees have conducted data quality trainings in 

recent years to improve the validity of the data. RSA also implemented a series of data checks,

which have resulted in further improvements in the accuracy of the annual reports. Data for 

2012 are expected in April 2013.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-70

Objective: Increase access to community life for persons with disabilities through the provision 

of community services.

The Department previously developed measures designed to capture CIL efforts at the 

community level on key outcomes that correspond to the outcome measures for services and 

activities provided at the individual level. Grantees have found that measuring and reporting 

valid and reliable data on these outcomes at the community level is much more difficult. RSA is 

working to develop new measures that capture community-level activities and will include these 

new measures in the next version of the section 704 reporting instrument.

Objective: Through the provision of services (either directly or through contracts), increase the 

percentage of consumers receiving services funded through the Older Blind program who report 

having access to services needed to improve their ability to live more independently and 

participate fully in their communities.

Measure: The percentage of Independent Living Older Blind program consumers who have 

access to previously unavailable assistive technology aids and devices.

Year Target Actual

2009 54 68

2010 56 57

2011 58 52

2012 58

2013 58

2014 58

Additional information: The percentage of consumers reporting access in 2011 declined from 

the prior year and fell below the target level. Assistive technology is one of the most frequently 

requested and expensive forms of assistance offered by this program, and consequently some 

States may have difficulty meeting consumer demand. This measure is calculated by dividing 

the number of consumers who received assistive technology (37,482) by the total number of 

Older Blind program consumers (37,482 / 71,714 = 52%). Data for 2012 are expected by April 

2013. 

Measure: The percentage of Independent Living Older Blind program consumers who report 

an improvement in daily living skills.

Year Target Actual

2009 57 68

2010 58 60

2011 59 52

2012 59

2013 60

2014 60
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-71

Additional information: The percentage of consumers reporting improvement for 2011

declined from the prior year and fell below the target level. This measure is calculated by 

dividing the number of Older Blind program consumers who reported improvement in daily 

livings skills by the total number of Older Blind program consumers. Daily living skills include 

activities such as bathing, moving around the home, getting out of bed or a chair, and eating a 

meal. State agencies collect and provide this data in their annual program reports. Data for 

2012 are expected by April 2013.

Efficiency Measures

The Department has not established efficiency measures for the CIL program. Several years 

ago, the Department examined the utility of two possible measures of efficiency: the number of 

consumer service records closed with all goals met for every $10,000 in net operating funds, 

and the number of consumer goals accomplished per $10,000 in net operating funds. RSA pilot 

tested these measures and commissioned a contractor to analyze the efficiency data, but found 

that these measures did not provide valid and reliable results. Data from the measures showed 

that CILs varied widely in their reported efficiency depending on the size, location, funding 

sources, intensity of services, and accuracy of records of each CIL. The Department will 

continue to explore alternative methods of evaluating the efficiency of the program. 

. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-72

Protection and advocacy of individual rights

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title V, Section 509)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2014 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority:

Change

2012 2013 2014 from 2012

$18,031 $18,031 2$18,031 0

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. The Administration proposes to continue funding in FY 

2014 through appropriations language.

2 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights (PAIR) program supports a statewide system 

to protect the legal and human rights of individuals with disabilities who are ineligible for 

protection and advocacy (P&A) services provided under Part C of the Developmental 

Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act, the Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with 

Mental Illness Act, or who need P&A services that are beyond the scope of the Client 

Assistance Program. The purpose of this program is to provide assistance and information to 

eligible individuals with disabilities and conduct advocacy to ensure the protection of their rights 

under Federal law. States may use these funds to plan and carry out P&A programs for eligible 

individuals with disabilities and to develop outreach strategies to inform individuals with 

disabilities of their rights. 

Funds must be set aside under this program for two activities before awarding grants to eligible 

States and outlying areas with the remaining appropriation. If the appropriation is equal to or 

exceeds $5.5 million, the Secretary must first set aside between 1.8 percent and 2.2 percent of 

the amount appropriated for training and technical assistance to eligible systems established 

under this program. In addition, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (the Act) requires that in any year 

in which the total appropriation exceeds $10.5 million, the Secretary must award $50,000 to the 

eligible system established under the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights 

Act to serve the American Indian consortium. The Secretary distributes the remainder of the 

appropriation to the eligible systems within the States and outlying areas based on population 

estimates and after satisfying minimum allocations. The fiscal year 2012 allotments were based 

on the July 1, 2010 population estimates published by the Census Bureau in December 2010. 

The fiscal year 2013 allotments are based on the July 1, 2011 population estimates published in 

December 2011. The fiscal year 2014 State distributions are based on the July 1, 2012 Census

data released in December 2012. 

The Act also requires the Secretary to increase the minimum allotments for States and outlying 

areas by a percentage not greater than the percentage increase in the total amount 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Protection and advocacy of individual rights

K-73

appropriated for this program for the previous fiscal year. The Act establishes a minimum 

allotment of $100,000 for States or one-third of 1 percent of funds remaining after the technical 

assistance set-side and grant for the American Indian consortium, whichever is greater. The 

outlying areas receive a minimum allotment of $50,000. The program is current-funded but 

States and outlying areas may carry over unobligated Federal funds for an additional year. 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were as follows:

Year (dollars in thousands)

2009...........................................................$17,101

2010.............................................................18,101

2011.............................................................18,065

2012.............................................................18,031

2013.............................................................18,031 1

_________________

1 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

FY 2014 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $18.031 million for the Protection and Advocacy of Individual 

Rights (PAIR) program in fiscal year 2014, the same as the fiscal year 2012 level. Federal 

support for PAIR enables States to provide assistance and information to eligible individuals 

with disabilities and thereby ensure the protection of their rights under Federal law. 

During fiscal year 2011, PAIR programs reported representing 14,739 individuals and 

responded to 42,949 requests for information or referral. Of the cases handled by PAIR 

programs in that year, the greatest number of specified issues involved government 

benefits/services (22 percent), education (17 percent), employment (12 percent), housing 

(12 percent), and health care (12 percent). 

In addition to providing representation to individuals, PAIR programs address systemic issues 

faced by persons with disabilities through a variety of methods, including negotiations with 

public and private entities and class action litigation. In fiscal year 2011, 51 out of the 57 PAIR 

programs (89 percent) reported that these activities resulted in changes in policies and practices 

benefiting individuals with disabilities. 

The following examples of case services provided in fiscal year 2011 illustrate how PAIR 

programs assist individuals and bring about systemic change: 

• Maine Disability Rights Center (DRC) provided assistance to the parents of a 5-year-old 

child with a diagnosis of diabetes after the parents were notified by their child’s school that 

the school officials were not knowledgeable about this type of disability and were not trained 

to administer glucagon to the child if needed. The school district indicated these services 

were only offered in another school that was located further away than the child’s 

neighborhood school. DRC was successful in assisting the child’s parents to obtain the 

services specified in their son’s section 504 plan in the neighborhood school. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Protection and advocacy of individual rights

K-74

• Disability Rights Oregon (DRO) assisted a client who is deaf and who was encountering 

communication barriers during hospital visits. The hospital did not want to pay for her 

American Sign Language (ASL) interpreter during these medical appointments. After DRO 

informed the hospital of its responsibility to provide interpreters for patients who are deaf 

and hard of hearing, the hospital then changed its position and agreed to provide an 

interpreter for the client’s next appointment and all subsequent appointments. 

• Ohio Legal Rights Service (LRS) assisted an individual who is blind and resides in a public 

institution who needed assistive technology (AT) and accommodations to be able to live 

more independently. LRS investigated and was able to secure a cane, a new walkway, 

large print materials, and other low vision aides. 

• Massachusetts Disability Law Center (DLC) assisted a 61-year-old woman with multiple 

sclerosis and a severe visual impairment who used a dog as a service animal. After entering 

her local pharmacy with her dog, she was informed that pets were not allowed there. She 

explained that her dog was a service animal, but the pharmacy told her she would not be 

able to return with the dog in the future. DLC educated the store manager about laws 

allowing persons with disabilities to have their service animal accompany them in a public 

space, thereby ensuring that consumers using this accommodation were not restricted 

access in the future. 

• Disability Rights California (DRC) assisted an individual with a mobility impairment that 

prevented him from using the stairs in his apartment. The individual requested that his 

landlord permit him, at his own expense to install a stair-lift, which would enable him to leave 

his apartment to carry out daily activities including medical appointments. After the landlord 

denied the request, DRC notified the landlord that the provisions of the Federal Housing Act 

prohibits housing providers from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities.

The outcome was that the stair-lift was installed. 

• Illinois Equip for Equality (EFE) assisted an individual with a learning disability who worked 

for a hotel as a banquet manager. The individual had been placed on unpaid leave following 

the results of a psychological examination. He sought to return to work with 

accommodations and the employer refused. In collaboration with the client’s psychiatrist, 

EFE persuaded the employer that the individual could perform the essential functions of the 

job, and the individual returned to his job with accommodations. 

• Missouri Protection and Advocacy Services (PAS) provided assistance to a 61-year-old man 

with a series of disabilities who was denied Social Security Administration (SSA) benefits. 

PAS gathered the client’s medical records and subsequently obtained a favorable decision 

from the Social Security’s Virtual Screening Unit without having to undergo a hearing. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Protection and advocacy of individual rights

K-75

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

Measures 2012 2013 2014 

Information inquiries/referrals 42,500 42,500 42,500

Individuals provided case services 14,500 14,500 14,500

________________

NOTE: 2013 excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

NOTE: Data for fiscal years 2012 through 2014 are projected from actual data collected for fiscal year 

2011 in which PAIRs responded to 42,949 requests for information or referral and represented 14,739 

individuals. Data for fiscal year 2012 will be available in April 2013. 

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, GPRA 

goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data, and an assessment of the 

progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of results is based on the 

cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years and those requested in fiscal year 

2014 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by this 

program.

Goal: To provide assistance and information to individuals with disabilities eligible for 

the Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights program and conduct advocacy to 

ensure the protection of their rights under Federal law. 

Objective: Identify problem areas requiring systemic change and engage in systemic activities 

to address those problems.

Measure: The percentage of PAIR programs that reported that their systemic advocacy 

resulted in a change in policy or practice. 

Year Target Actual 

2009 83 96

2010 85 93

2011 89 89

2012 91

2013 91

2014 91

Additional information: Because PAIR programs cannot address all issues facing individuals 

with disabilities solely through individual advocacy, they seek to change public and private 

policies and practices that present barriers to the rights of individuals with disabilities, utilizing 

negotiations and class action litigation. Of the 57 PAIR programs, 55 (96 percent) reported 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Protection and advocacy of individual rights

K-76

success on this measure in fiscal year 2009, and 53 of the 57 (93 percent) PAIR programs 

reported success in fiscal year 2010. The target was met in fiscal year 2011, but there was a 

decline to 51 of the 57 (89 percent) PAIR programs reporting success.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-77

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2014 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority:

Change

2012 2013 2014 from 2012

$108,817 $108,817 2$110,000 +$1,183

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. The Administration proposes to continue funding in 

FY 2014 through appropriations language. 2 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The mission of the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) is to 

generate knowledge and promote its effective use to improve the abilities of people with 

disabilities to perform activities of their choice in the community, and also to expand society’s 

capacity to provide full opportunities and accommodations for its citizens with disabilities. 

NIDRR conducts comprehensive and coordinated programs of research and related activities to 

maximize the full inclusion, social integration, employment, and independent living of individuals 

with disabilities of all ages. The purposes of NIDRR are to:

• Promote, coordinate, and provide for research, demonstration and training, and related 

activities with respect to individuals with disabilities;

• Widely disseminate findings, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from its activities; 

and

• Provide leadership in advancing the quality of life of individuals with disabilities.

NIDRR's research is conducted through a network of individual research projects and centers of 

excellence located throughout the Nation. Most funding is awarded through competitive grants, 

and most of the funds are awarded to universities or providers of rehabilitation or related 

services.

As required by the Rehabilitation Act in §202(h), NIDRR is updating its Long-Range Plan (LRP) 

and is currently operating under a plan published February 15, 2006 entitled Long-Range Plan 

for Fiscal Years 2005—2009. This plan outlines three long-term performance goals and its 

strategies for achieving these goals. These goals are:
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-78

• Goal 1: Advancing knowledge through capacity building, 

• Goal 2: Advancing knowledge through research and related activities, and 

• Goal 3: Advancing knowledge through translation and dissemination.

On April 18, 2012, NIDRR published for public comment its new proposed plan-- National 

Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Long-Range Plan for Fiscal Years 2013-2017. In 

response to this Federal Register notice, the Department received 145 comments. NIDRR 

analyzed the comments and suggestions for change, made revisions, and will be publishing a 

final plan with the following 4 goals:

• Goal 1: Create a portfolio of research, development, and other activities that balances 

domains, populations of focus, and who, whether NIDRR or the grant applicant, defines the 

specific approach to a disability or rehabilitation research topic. 

• Goal 2: Support centers and projects that conduct well-designed research and 

development activities using a range of appropriate methods. 

• Goal 3: Promote the effective use of knowledge in areas of importance to individuals with 

disabilities and their families.

• Goal 4: Improve program administration.

The following is a description of the primary areas for which NIDRR makes awards:

Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers (RRTCs). RRTCs receive funding to conduct 

coordinated and advanced programs of research, training, and information dissemination in 

problem areas that are specified by NIDRR. More specifically, RRTCs conduct research to 

improve rehabilitation methodologies and service delivery systems, alleviate or stabilize 

disabling conditions, and promote maximum social and economic independence for persons 

with disabilities; provide training, including graduate, pre-service, and in-service training, to help 

rehabilitation personnel provide more effective rehabilitation services to individuals with 

disabilities; and serve as centers of excellence in rehabilitation research for providers and for 

individuals with disabilities and their representatives. Typically, awards are for 5 years. 

However, NIDRR also may award grants for less than 5 years to support new or innovative 

research. 

Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs). The RERCs conduct research on 

issues dealing with rehabilitation technology, including rehabilitation engineering and assistive 

technology devices and services. RERC activities include developing and disseminating 

innovative methods of applying advanced technology, scientific achievements, and 

psychological and social knowledge to rehabilitation issues such as the removal of 

environmental barriers; developing and disseminating technology designed to lessen the effects 

of sensory loss, mobility impairment, chronic pain, and communication difficulties; scientific 

research to assist in meeting the employment and independent living needs of individuals with 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-79

severe disabilities; and stimulating the production and distribution of equipment in the private 

sector, as well as clinical evaluations of equipment. Each RERC must provide training 

opportunities to enable individuals, including individuals with disabilities, to become researchers 

and practitioners in the field of rehabilitation technology. Typically, awards are for 5 years. 

However, NIDRR also may award grants for less than 5 years to support new or innovative 

research. 

Model Systems. NIDRR funds model systems projects in three areas: spinal cord injury, 

traumatic brain injury, and burn injury. Model systems funding supports 5-year grants to 

establish innovative projects for the delivery, demonstration, and evaluation of comprehensive 

medical, vocational, and other rehabilitation services to meet the wide range of needs of 

individuals in these areas. Grantees in each of the three areas contribute to a national database 

that is supported by NIDRR funding. These model systems programs have become platforms 

for conducting multi-site research, including randomized controlled trials to determine the 

efficacy of interventions. 

• Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems. The Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) program funds research to 

meet the wide range of needs of individuals with spinal cord injuries. (See 

http://www.ncddr.org/rpp/hf/hfdw/mscis/.) The projects also disseminate information to 

individuals with SCI and others.

• Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems. The Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Model Systems 

projects are research and demonstration grants designed to advance the understanding of 

TBI and its consequences and improve rehabilitation outcomes. Currently, the NIDRR TBI 

model systems is the largest nonmilitary TBI service delivery/research entity participating in 

various intergovernmental efforts to improve treatment and outcomes for returning veterans. 

(See http://www.tbindsc.org.)

• Burn Model Systems. The Burn Model Systems (BMS) projects are research and 

demonstration grants designed to establish, demonstrate, and evaluate a model system of 

care for burn injury survivors. The goal of the projects is to reduce disability by improving 

treatment and rehabilitation. (See http://mama.uchsc.edu/pub/NIDRR/index.html.)

Field-Initiated Projects (FIPs). Field-Initiated Projects supplement NIDRR’s directed research 

and address a wide range of topics identified by investigators, including research, 

demonstrations, development, and knowledge translation. These projects allow NIDRR to 

address emerging developments in the field beyond the scope of announced priorities. Most of 

these awards are made for 3 years. 

Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects (DRRPs). Grantees under this program focus 

on discrete research topics identified by NIDRR and address problems encountered by people 

with disabilities through a variety of methods that may include research, demonstrations, 

training, dissemination, utilization, technical assistance, or combinations of these activities.

ADA National Network Centers (ADA Network). The ADA Network supports 10 regional centers 

that provide detailed technical assistance, disseminate information, and provide training related 

to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and promote awareness of the 

ADA. Typically, these awards are for 5 years. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-80

Advanced Rehabilitation Research Training (ARRT). The ARRT program supports grants to 

institutions to provide advanced postdoctoral training in areas that are directly related to 

NIDRR’s research portfolio, such as medical rehabilitation, engineering, technology, community 

integration, and employment. Grants are made to institutions to recruit qualified persons with 

doctoral or similar advanced degrees and prepare them to conduct independent research in 

areas related to disability and rehabilitation. These training programs must operate in 

interdisciplinary environments and provide training in rigorous scientific methods. 

Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR). SBIR awards support the development of new 

rehabilitation technologies that are useful to persons with disabilities by inviting the participation 

of small business firms with strong research capabilities in science, engineering, or educational 

technology. This 2-phase program takes a product from development to market readiness. 

During Phase I, firms conduct feasibility studies to evaluate the scientific and technical merit of 

an idea. During Phase II, they expand on the results and pursue further development. In order 

to be eligible, small businesses must be American-owned and independently operated and be 

for-profit with no more than 500 employees. The principal researcher must be employed by the 

business. 

Switzer Research Fellowships. Switzer research fellows receive 1-year fellowships to carry out 

discrete research activities that are related to NIDRR’s research priorities or to pursue studies in 

areas of importance to the rehabilitation community. 

Outreach to Minority Institutions. The Rehabilitation Act (§21) requires that 1 percent of funds 

appropriated for programs authorized under certain titles be reserved for awards to minority 

entities and Indian tribes, or to provide outreach and assistance to minority entities and Indian 

tribes. 

Other Activities: NIDRR funding also supports a variety of other activities, including knowledge 

translation; collaborative projects with other agencies; development and maintenance of grantee 

reporting systems; program review; and reporting, evaluation, long-range planning, and the 

Interagency Committee on Disability Research (ICDR). The primary purpose of the ICDR is to 

promote cooperation across various Federal agencies in the development and execution of 

disability and rehabilitation research activities. (See http://www.icdr.us/.) 

NIDRR funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Year (dollars in thousands)

2009.........................................................$107,741

2010...........................................................109,241

2011...........................................................109,023

2012...........................................................108,817

2013........................................................... 108,817 1

_________________

1 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-81

FY 2014 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $110 million for the National Institute on Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research, an increase of $1.183 over the fiscal year 2012 level for this program. 

The requested increase ($1.2 million) would be used for research activities in the employment 

domain under a new regulatory framework that NIDRR intends to have in place by 2014. 

The request also enables NIDRR to cover the costs of grants that began in previous fiscal years 

($82 million) and provide $19.9 million for all other new grant awards. More than half the funds 

for new awards would be in used in three NIDRR programs—the Rehabilitation Research and 

Training Centers (RRTCs) program, the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) 

program, and domain-specific awards under the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects 

(DRRPs) program. 

NIDRR plans to request applications for RRTCs in the following areas in fiscal year 2014:

• VR Service Delivery and Management Issues;

• Employment and Intellectual and Developmental Disability;

• Employment and Individuals with Traumatic Brain Injury;

• Community Integration for Individuals with Traumatic Brain Injury; 

• Health and Function and Physical Disability;

• Center on Family Support; 

• Transition to Adulthood (co-funded with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration (SAMHSA));

• Transition for Youth with Serious Mental Health Conditions (co-funded with SAMHSA); and

• Employment and Individuals with Psychiatric Disability (co-funded with SAMHSA).

In fiscal year 2014, NIDRR also proposes funding for new RERCs and intends to request 

applications in the following broad priority areas:

• Rehabilitation Strategies, Techniques, and Interventions; 

• Information and Communication Technologies; 

• Individual Mobility and Manipulation; and 

• Physical Access and Transportation. 

Under its new regulations to be published in 2013, NIDRR hopes to strengthen its overall 

research portfolio by expanding opportunities for field-initiated work within a clear framework 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-82

that is designed to both encourage innovation and promote rigorous research, and by allowing 

for a regular schedule of competitions in pre-established priority areas. To establish clear and 

consistent requirements for similar types of projects, the regulations will define the types of 

projects to be supported and specify the application requirements for each of them. Under the 

proposed framework, NIDRR would support four types of projects. They are:

• Exploration and Discovery: Generate new and refined analyses, findings, hypotheses, 

and theories that enhance knowledge of the barriers to and facilitators of improved 

outcomes for individuals with disabilities. This research can also be used to identify existing 

practices, programs, or policies that are associated with better outcomes for individuals with 

disabilities. The results from this work may either inform the development of interventions or 

lead to evaluations of interventions.

• Intervention Development: Generate and test interventions—such as research tools, 

products, programs, practices, and policies—that have potential to improve outcomes for 

individuals with disabilities. NIDRR supports grants to develop innovative interventions or to 

improve existing interventions. 

• Intervention Efficacy: Evaluate the efficacy of interventions—such as research tools, 

products, programs, practices, and policies—to determine whether they are feasible and 

practical and can have a positive impact on outcomes for individuals with disabilities. 

Efficacy studies can be used to assess the strength of an intervention’s impact on a desired 

outcome. Efficacy studies often apply experimental or quasi-experimental research 

methods. 

• Scale-up Evaluation: Conduct evaluations to determine whether interventions—such as 

research tools, products, programs, practices, and policies—are effective in producing 

improved outcomes for individuals with disabilities when implemented in multiple real-world 

settings.

NIDRR’s regulations would also specify the priority areas in which NIDRR plans to support new

research. The broad priority areas, which would be based on the domains in NIDRR’s 

forthcoming Long-Range Plan (LRP) for fiscal years 2013-2017, would be employment, 

community living and participation, and health and function. In each domain area, NIDRR would 

specify broadly-framed priority areas, in which applicants would have flexibility to determine the 

specific topics and methodologies to be proposed in response to the needs of persons with 

disabilities, families, and service providers. These priorities would remain in place for up to five 

years. Having these priority areas in place for a prolonged period of time would provide the field 

with stable opportunities for funding. Applicants who are not successful in one competition 

would be able to revise and improve their applications knowing that there will soon be another 

opportunity to have their proposal funded. Using recurring topical priorities would also simplify 

the management of NIDRR’s competitions by reducing the need for annual rule-making. 

NIDRR established the use of these domains in fiscal years 2012 and 2103 through individual 

competitions under the DRRP, RRTC, and RERC programs. During fiscal year 2014, NIDRR 

plans to use its new regulation for the following broad priority topics in its domain areas:
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-83

Employment

• Technology to improve employment outcomes for individuals with physical disabilities.

• Individual and environmental factors associated with improved employment outcomes for 

individuals with physical disabilities.

• Interventions that contribute to improved employment outcomes for individuals with physical 

disabilities. Interventions include any strategy, practice, program, policy, or tool that, when 

implemented as intended, contributes to improvements in outcomes for individuals with 

physical disabilities. 

• Effects of government practices, policies, and programs on employment outcomes for 

individuals with physical disabilities. 

• Practices and policies that contribute to improved employment outcomes for transition-aged 

youth with physical disabilities. 

• Vocational rehabilitation (VR) practices that contribute to improved employment outcomes 

for individuals with physical disabilities.

Community Living and Participation

• Technology to improve community living and participation outcomes for individuals with 

physical disabilities.

• Individual and environmental factors associated with improved community living and 

participation outcomes for individuals with physical disabilities.

• Interventions that contribute to improved community living and participation outcomes for 

individuals with physical disabilities. Interventions include any strategy, practice, program, 

policy, or tool that, when implemented as intended, contributes to improvements in 

outcomes for individuals with physical disabilities. 

• Effects of government practices, policies, and programs on community living and 

participation outcomes for individuals with physical disabilities.

• Practices and policies that contribute to improved community living and participation 

outcomes for transition-aged youth with physical disabilities.

 

Health and Function

• Technology to improve health and function outcomes for individuals with intellectual and 

developmental disabilities. 

• Individual and environmental factors associated with improved access to rehabilitation and 

health care and improved health and function outcomes for individuals with intellectual and 

developmental disabilities. 

• Interventions that contribute to improved health and function outcomes for individuals with

intellectual and developmental disabilities. Interventions include any strategy, practice, 

program, policy, or tool that, when implemented as intended, contributes to improvements in 

outcomes for the specified population. 

• Effects of government practices, policies, and programs on health care access and on 

health and function outcomes for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. 

• Practices and policies that contribute to improved health and function outcomes for 

transition-aged youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-84

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands)

Project Type Amount of Funding Number of Awards

Project Type 2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014

Research Domain-Employment

Empl oyment Research: Continuations 0 $1,000 $2,000 0 2 4

Empl oyment Research: New awards $1,000 1,000 tbd 2 2 tbd

Subtotal 1,000 2,000 tbd 2 4 tbd

Research Domain-Health and Function

Health and Functi on R esearch: Continuations 0 0 $1,000 0 0 2

Health and Functi on R esearch: New awards 0 $1,000 tbd 0 2 tbd

Health and Functi on R esearch: Subtotal 0 1,000 tbd 0 2 tbd

Research Domain-Community Living 

and Participation

Community Li vi ng Research: Continuations 0 0 1,000 0 0 2

Community Li vi ng Research: New awards 0 1,000 tbd 0 2 tbd

Community Li vi ng Research: Subtotal 0 1,000 tbd 0 2 tbd

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Centers (RRTC)

RRTC: Continuations 21,880 13,108 15,790 26 18 21

RRTC: New awards 650 8,250 tbd 1 10 tbd 

RRTC: Subtotal 22,530 21,358 tbd 27 28 tbd

Rehabilitation Engineering Research 

Centers (RERC)

RERC: Continuations 8,010 5,700 12,349 14 9 13

RERC: New awards 1,900 6,650 tbd 2 7 tbd 

RRERC: Subtotal 9,910 12,350 tbd 16 16 tbd

Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems (SCI)

SCI: Continuations 7,117 8,019 8,018 15 16 16

SCI: New awards 900 0 0 1 0 0 

SSCI: Subtotal 8,017 8,019 8,018 16 16 16
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-85

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands)

Project Type Amount of Funding Number of Awards

Project Type 2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014

Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems (TBI)

TBI: Continuations $2,334 $8,125 $8,975 3 17 18

TBI: New awards 7,000 850 0 16 1 0

TBI: Subtotal 9,334 8,975 8,975 19 18 18

Burn Model Systems

Burn M odel: Continuations 0 1,850 1,850 0 5 5

Burn M odel: New awards 1,850 0 0 5 0 0

Burn M odel: Subtotal 1,850 1,850 1,850 5 5 5

FIP:

Field Initiated Projects (FIP)

Field Initiated: Continuations 7,551 7,621 7,621 46 46 46

FIP: Fiel d Initi ated: New awards 4,000 4,000 tbd 20 20 tbd

FIP: Fiel d Initi ated: Subtotal 11,551 11,621 tbd 66 66 tbd

Disability and Rehabilitation Research

Projects (DRRP)

DRRP: Continuations 4,499 4,550 3,299 11 8 9

DRRP: New awards 1,000 750 tbd 1 1 tbd 

DRRP: Subtotal 5,499 5,300 tbd 12 9 tbd

Advanced Rehabilitation Research and

Training (ARRT)

ARRTContinuations 2,392 2,397 2,391 16 16 16

ARRTNew awards 599 600 tbd 4 4 tbd

ARRTSubtotal 2,991 2,997 tbd 20 20 tbd

Minority Outreach (Minority)

MinorityContinuations 1,088 0 0 3 0 3

MinorityNew awards 0 1 ,088 1,088 0 3 0

MinoritySubtotal 1,088 1,088 1,088 3 3 3

Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)

SBIR : Continuations 1,135 1,250 1,270 5 5 5

SBIR : New awards 2,224 2,375 2,375 18 20 20

SBIR : Subtotal 3,359 3,625 3,645 23 25 25
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-86

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands)

Project Type Amount of Funding Number of Awards

Project Type 2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014

Switzer Research Fellowships

Fellowships: New awards $400 $505 $505 6 7 7

ADA National Network

ADA: Continuations 11,925 12,534 12,534 11 12 12

ADA: New awards 650 0 0 1 0 0

ADA: Subtotal 12,575 12,534 12,534 12 12 12

Knowledge Translation (KT)

KT: Continuations 2,850 2,600 3,600 4 4 5

KT: New awards 750 1,000 0 1 1 0 

KT: Subtotal 3,600 3,600 3,600 5 5 5

Subtotals

Subtotal, continuation grants 71,281 68,754 82,012 154 158 172

Subtotal new grants 22,923 29,068 21,130 78 80 tbd

Total grants 94,204 97,822 103,142 232 238 tbd

Other Activities (Contracts) 13,939 10,095 6,358

Peer review of new grant applications 674 900 500

Subtotal 14,613 10,995 6,858

Total, NIDRR 108,817 108,817 110,000

____________________

NOTE: 2013 excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

NOTE: Amounts shown as “tbd” are still to be determined.

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures 

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, GPRA 

goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data, and an assessment of the 

progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of results is based on the 

cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years and those requested in fiscal year 

2014 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by this 

program.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-87

Goal: To conduct high-quality research and related activities that lead to high-quality 

products.

Objective: Advance knowledge through capacity building: Increase capacity to conduct and 

use high-quality and relevant disability and rehabilitation research and related activities 

designed to guide decision-making, change practice, and improve the lives of individuals with 

disabilities.

Measure: The percentage of NIDRR-supported fellows, post-doctoral trainees, and doctoral 

students who publish results of NIDRR-sponsored research in refereed journals.

Year Target Actual

2009 11

2010 9

2011 15.8

2012

2013 8

2014 8

Additional information: For this measure, refereed journals are those journals that are 

recognized by the Thompson Institute for Scientific Information. See: 

http://www.thompsonscientific.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jloptions.cgi?PC=master. 

In calculating performance on this measure, a single author is counted only once if he or she 

produces multiple peer-reviewed publications, and fellows or graduate students who coauthored a publication are counted individually for their contributions to one publication. In 2011, 

there were a total of 589 currently-supported NIDRR fellows, post-doctoral trainees and doctoral 

students. These fellows, post-doctoral trainees, and doctoral students produced 93 publications, 

of which 15.8 percent appeared in refereed journals. This statistic requires some qualification 

because of the lag time it takes to have publications appear. Some of the publications produced 

by the 2011 students will not appear until 2012 or later. In addition publishing in refereed 

journals only allow for the calculation of a rough estimate using currently funded students in the 

denominator.

The measure includes researchers supported under the following programs: Rehabilitation 

Research and Training Centers (RRTCs), Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center 

(RERCs), Advanced Rehabilitation Research Training (ARRT), Model Systems (MS), Disability 

Rehabilitation Research Projects (DRRPs), and Field Initiated Projects (FIP) grants. These data 

do not include those funded by Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program. Data for 

fiscal year 2012 will be available in December 2013. Targets may be revised for 2014 after 2012 

data have been compiled and reviewed. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-88

Measure: Percentage of NIDRR-funded grant applications that receive an average peer review 

score of 85 or higher. 

Year Target Actual

2009 96 94

2010 96 94

2011 96 93

2012 96 100

2013 96

2014 96

Additional information: This measure assesses the extent to which NIDRR-funded grant 

applications are judged by expert review panels to be of high quality. Data for the measure 

include all grant awards made within a given fiscal year. In FY 2012, one hundred percent of 

the eighty-six new awards received ratings of 85 or higher. Fiscal year 2013 data will be 

available in December 2013. 

Measure: Percentage of new grants that assess the effectiveness of interventions, programs, 

and devices using rigorous methods.

Year Target Actual

2009 35 46

2010 60 32

2011 56 35

2012 61

2013 62

2014 35

Additional information: This measure provides information on the proportion of NIDRR 

grantees that are engaged in experimental, quasi-experimental, or single subject research to 

determine whether interventions, programs, and devices are effective. The percentage of 

NIDRR grants that include tightly controlled research methods, such as true experimental, 

quasi-experimental, or single-subject methodologies, began high and then declined over a 

period of years from 65 percent in fiscal year 2002 to 35 percent in fiscal year 2006. The 

percentage increased significantly in 2008, only to decline again in 2010. In 2011, 34.5 percent

(258) of all newly funded NIDRR grantee projects (total of 748 projects) were reported to be 

using rigorous research methodologies, such as true experimental, quasi-experimental or single 

subject designs. The variation across years is affected by the mix of grants funded in a 

particular funding cycle. Fiscal year 2012 data will be available in December 2013. 

Objective: Advance knowledge through translation and dissemination: Promote the effective 

use of scientific-based knowledge, technologies, and applications to inform policy, improve 

practice, and enhance the lives of individuals with disabilities.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-89

Measure: The number of new or improved NIDRR-funded assistive and universally designed 

technologies, products, and devices transferred to industry for potential commercialization. 

Year Target Actual

2009 24 30

2010 27 15

2011 15 16

2012 16 22

2013 29

2014 22

Additional information: In fiscal year 2012, NIDRR's Annual Performance Report asked 

grantees implementing development projects to identify: “What stage of the development 

process are you in during this reporting period?” Those selecting choice “(f) commercialization” 

are included in this measure.

In 2012, NIDRR grantees reported 160 development projects, of which 22 (or 13.8%) were 

reported as technology products and devices that were transferred to industry. We expect that 

that this number will remain relatively small because of the length of time it takes to develop 

new technologies.

Development projects funded under the following programs are included in this measure: Small 

Business Innovation Research Phase II (SBIRs), Rehabilitation Engineering and Research 

Centers (RERCs), and Field Initiated Programs (FIPs).

Measure: The average number of publications per award based on NIDRR-funded research 

and development activities in refereed journals.

Year Target Actual

2009 2.0 1.37

2010 3.0 1.54

2011 1.4 1.7

2012 1.4

2013 1.5

2014 1.5

Additional information: For this measure, refereed journals are those journals that are 

recognized by the Thompson Institute for Scientific Information journal selection process 

(http://www.thompsonscientific.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jloptions.cgi?PC=master). The methodology 

for determining performance under this measure was changed in 2007 to include only NIDRR 

projects that are expected to produce publications as part of their specified tasks. This measure 

is now limited to NIDRR research grantees funded under the RRTCs, RERCs, ARRTs, MS, 

DRRPs, and FIPs programs. In addition, the methodology was changed to ensure that 

publications related to a grant were counted only once, regardless of the number of authors 

under the grant that participated in the publication. In fiscal year 2011-12, 382 NIDRR grantees 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-90

published an average of 1.7 publications per grant in referred journals. This rate was up slightly 

from the previous year. The 2013 target was increased slightly based upon actual data. Fiscal 

year 2012 data for this measure will be available by December 2013.

Objective: Enhance the efficiency of the NIDRR grant award process.

Efficiency Measures

Measure: The percentage of grant competitions for a given fiscal year that are announced by 

the beginning of that fiscal year (October 1). 

Year Target Actual

2009 70 21

2010 75 0

2011 50 0

2012 30 0

2013 40

2014 40

Measure: The percentage of grant awards issued within 6 months of the competition closing 

date.

Year Target Actual

2009 80 84

2010 85 94

2011 85 40

2012 50 40

2013 60

2014 50

Additional information: NIDRR has established efficiency measures that assess its 

performance in announcing grant competitions on a regular schedule and awarding grants in a 

timely manner. A regular announcement schedule will allow potential applicants to better 

schedule their workload. NIDRR’s goal is to announce all grant competitions for each fiscal 

year by the beginning of the fiscal year (October 1) and to notify applicants whether they have 

received an award within 6 months of application closing dates. However, there are numerous 

factors that can affect the schedule, not all of which are under the NIDRR’s control. As shown, 

in fiscal year 2012 NIDRR did not have any competitions announced by October 1, and again 

made 6 of its 15 (40%) grant competition awards within 6 months of the closing date.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-91

Helen Keller National Center

(Helen Keller National Center Act)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2014 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority: 

2012 2013 2014

Change 

from 2012

$9,145 $9,1452 $9,145 0

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. The Administration proposes to continue funding in FY 

2014 through appropriations language. 2 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults (HKNC) was created by 

Congress in 1969, and operates under the auspices of Helen Keller Services for the Blind, Inc. 

The Center provides services on a national basis to adults who are deaf-blind, their families, and 

service providers through two component programs: a national headquarters center located just 

outside New York City, in Sands Point, New York, with a residential training and rehabilitation 

facility where deaf-blind individuals receive intensive specialized services; and a network of 

10 regional field offices that provide referral, counseling, and transition assistance to deaf-blind 

individuals and technical assistance to service providers. 

The purpose of the program at the national headquarters center is to provide direct services for 

individuals with deaf-blindness in order to enhance their potential for employment and to live 

independently in their home communities. The program provides clients with an array of 

services and training leading to enhanced mobility, improved means of communication, 

constructive participation in the home and community, increased employability, and other 

improvements to their personal development. The headquarters program also offers training 

and consultation to other programs serving individuals who are deaf-blind through a technical 

assistance center and a national training team. The national training team provides training 

nationwide on a request basis, with the requesting agency covering the travel costs for the 

team. The national training team also coordinates onsite conferences and workshops across the 

country to train professionals working with individuals who are deaf-blind. 

The Center employs 11 regional representatives to serve individuals who are deaf-blind in their 

home communities. These representatives provide a variety of services, including training for 

State and local service agency staff, general technical assistance, program assessment, 

community advocacy, and helping vocational rehabilitation counselors, mental health workers, 

special education personnel, and deaf-blind consumers with developing individualized service 

plans. In addition, the regional offices provide counseling, information, and referral services for 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-92

individuals who are deaf-blind and their families to assist them to live and work independently. 

The regional representatives also assist clients who have received training at headquarters with 

making the transition back to their home community. 

HKNC also operates a number of special projects related to deaf-blindness. These include a 

service project for deaf-blind individuals who are elderly, a national parent and family services 

project, and a small but expanding research portfolio focused on such areas as assistive 

technology and diseases that cause deaf-blindness. In addition, the Center operates an 

internship program for undergraduate and graduate students in the field of deaf-blindness. 

These interns are financially supported by their sponsoring institutions or colleges during their 

stay and are expected to initiate and complete at least one project while at HKNC. 

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Fiscal Year (dollars in thousands)

2009.................................................................. $8,326

2010.................................................................... 9,181

2011.................................................................... 9,163

2012.................................................................... 9,145

2013.................................................................... 9,145 1

_________________

1 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

FY 2014 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration’s request for the Helen Keller National Center (HKNC) is $9.145 million, 

which would maintain funding at the fiscal year 2012 level. The request would support the 

Center’s range of educational and training programs that expand independent living and 

employment opportunities for individuals who are deaf-blind.

The Federal appropriation for HKNC represented about 67 percent of HKNC’s total budget in 

2011, the most recent year for which this information is available. Most of the Center’s budget 

supports operations and programs associated with serving clients in the headquarters program. 

In 2011, the Center served 65 adult clients in the intensive training program and 16 short-term 

clients at headquarters. HKNC also served 1,336 clients through its regional offices. 

Other Sources of Funding: In addition to funds provided through the appropriation, the Center 

receives funding from a variety of State, private, and other Federal sources. For example, as a 

member on the National Consortium on Deaf-Blindness, HKNC received $844,019 in fiscal year 

2012 through a grant from the Department’s Office of Special Education Programs to provide 

technical assistance to State and local educational agencies. In recent years, the Center has 

also received a number of non-Federal grants. This includes a 5-year grant from the New York 

State Office for People with Developmental Disabilities for $1.1 million per year to operate 

housing and provide supported employment services for individuals who are deaf-blind with 

intellectual disabilities who were former participants in HKNC’s training program. HKNC also 

has a contract with the New York State Commission for Blind and Visually Impaired (CBVH) to 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-93

operate a Community Services Program (CSP) that provides rehabilitation teaching, orientation 

and mobility, case work, and job placement to deaf-blind individuals in the New York 

metropolitan area who do not require the comprehensive services offered at the headquarters 

training program. In recent years, HKNC has also actively expanded its efforts to raise funds 

from private sources, including charitable foundations. The Center’s largest private grant is a 

$2 million per year award from the Helmsley Foundation for 2012 to 2014. The following charts 

show the revenues and expenses from the Center’s audited financial statements in program 

year 2010-2011. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-94

In fiscal year 2014, HKNC would use a majority of the funds requested to support client training, 

program support activities, consumer housing and residence life expenses, maintenance and 

plant operations, and administrative functions at the Center’s headquarters facility. These 

funded activities are carried out by the Center’s 11 departments: audiology; case management; 

communications; independent living; low vision; medical; orientation and mobility; vocational 

services; adaptive technology; clinical social work services; and staff functions such as payroll 

and benefits. At the request level, the Center estimates that it would serve approximately 65 

adult clients with deaf-blindness at its headquarters intensive training program and provide 

specialized short-term training for approximately 11 high school students, 3 senior citizens, and 

2 individuals who need training in the use of technology or other targeted skills.

HKNC would devote approximately estimated 20 percent of the amount requested to its field 

services and community education programs, including the activities of HKNC’s 10 regional 

offices and its national training team for other service providers. These programs help reach 

consumers in their home communities and assist personnel at State agencies and other 

organizations to serve or acquire the capacity to serve individuals who are deaf-blind through 

training, community education, and technical assistance. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

Measures1 2012 2013 2014

Number of individuals served at headquarters:

Adult training program clients 65 65 65

Specialized training services:

Transition for high school students 11 11 11

Senior citizens 3 3 3

Targeted skills training 2 2 2

Number of individuals served through regional 

representatives:2

Consumers 1,336 1,336 1,500

Families 332 332 332

Agencies/organizations 991 991 991

HKNC FTE staff 140 140 140

1 Output data are provided according to fiscal year, not HKNC’s program year of July to June. These figures are 

estimates based on data from HKNC and expected funding levels. 2 Individuals served by the regional representatives include individuals attending workshops or conferences in 

which HKNC participates, who receive materials from the Center, or who receive assessment, advocacy, counseling, 

training, or referral services from regional staff.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-95

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, GPRA 

goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data; and an assessment of the 

progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of program results is based on 

the cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years and those requested in fiscal 

year 2014 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by 

this program.

Goal: Individuals who are deaf-blind will become independent and function as full and 

productive members of their local community.

Objective: Individuals who are deaf-blind receive the specialized services and training they 

need to become as independent and self-sufficient as possible.

Measure: The percentage of training goals set and achieved by adult consumers, of adult 

consumers seeking employment who are placed in employment, and of adult consumers 

seeking to maintain their ability to live independently or move to less restrictive settings who 

achieve their goals.

Year Target Actual Target Actual Target Actual Target Actual

Year

# of Adult 

Consumers

# of Adult 

Consumers 

% in Less 

Restrictive

Settings

% in Less 

Restrictive 

Settings

% of 

Training 

goals met

% of 

Training 

goals met

% Placed

in

Employment

% Placed

in

Employment 

2009 95 74 75 75 90 90 45 47

2010 95 72 75 93 90 92 45 43

2011 90 64 75 81 90 94 45 43

2012 90 65 75 89 90 89 45 38

2013 68 85 95 46

2014 70 86 95 47

Additional information: The number of adult clients attending the HKNC rehabilitation training 

center in fiscal year 2012 (65) increased from the prior year but was below the target of 90. 

HKNC points out that the number of consumers served may fluctuate from year to year due to 

factors beyond the control of the Center, such as changes in State vocational rehabilitation 

agencies’ funding. We anticipate that the fiscal year 2013 data will be available in January 

2014. 

In addition to traditional adult consumers, HKNC also provided short-term training for eleven 

high school students, three senior citizens, and two individuals seeking assessment or training 

in skill acquisition in specific activities, such as independent living, adaptive technology or work 

experience. The high school students participate in career exploration, college preparation, and 

other services offered by the Center and return to high school after their training. The high 

school students and senior citizens receiving short-term training are not included in the counts 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-96

of adult consumers, consumers placed in employment or less restrictive settings, or consumers 

who meet their individualized training goals. Adult clients who participate in short-term targeted 

skills training are included in the measure on training goals set and achieved, but not included in 

count of adult consumers or the measures of consumers placed in employment or less 

restrictive settings.

The Center evaluates the progress of clients in achieving the goals stated in their individualized 

training plans (ITPs). This measure represents the percent of adult consumers served by Helen 

Keller National Center headquarters who successfully achieved identified training goals during 

the program year. The consumers and their instructors mutually develop these instructional 

objectives. To ensure that the measure is an accurate reflection of the Center’s performance, 

the Department and HKNC have agreed that it should only include the outcomes for adult clients 

enrolled in the long-term formal program and the targeted skills training program. Clients in the 

short-term programs for high school students and senior citizens are not included in the 

calculation. In 2012, 89 percent of adult consumers achieved their training goals, which is very 

close to the target set for this measure, but a decrease from the previous year.

The less restrictive settings measure refers to clients who move from settings such as living with 

parents or guardians, assisted living settings, and nursing homes to more independent living 

arrangements such as their own home or apartment or group homes. The percentage is taken 

only of those consumers with a specific goal to move to a less restrictive living situation. This 

measure includes participants in the independent living program whose goal is to maintain their 

ability to live independently in their current living situation. The Center believes that it is as 

important to help consumers who need assistance in maintaining their ability to live 

independently as those seeking to move to less restrictive settings. In 2012, 89 percent of 

clients moved into, or remained in, less restrictive settings, which exceeded the target set for 

this measure.

The percent placed in employment measure refers to outcomes for those individuals who came 

to the Center with a specific vocational objective. In 2012, 24 of the 52 individuals who 

terminated training had a desire to achieve a vocational outcome. Of the 24 who had a 

vocational objective, 9 (38 percent) achieved this goal, which did not meet the target for this 

measure and is a decrease from the prior year. Another 15 individuals are at home and seeking 

competitive or supported employment. Among the 28 individuals not seeking a vocational 

outcome, 4 were homemakers and 4 are continuing in postsecondary education. Five 

consumers did not complete the program and/or took a leave of absence. Two consumers 

received short term training, 3 were senior adults, and 10 were in high school.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-97

Objective: Increase the capacity of deaf-blind consumers to function more independently in the 

home community.

Measure: The number of individuals (or families on behalf of individuals) referred to State or 

local agencies or service providers by HKNC‘s regional offices.

Year Target Actual 

2009 303

2010 272

2011 239

2012 300

2013 245

2014 265

Measure: The percentage of consumers who participated in services of programs (other than 

HKNC) as a result of receiving a referral from HKNC’s regional offices. 

Year Target Actual 

2009 65

2010 63

2011 63

2012 74

2013 66

2014 67

These measures provide information on the activities of the field services programs, including 

the 11 regional representatives and the national training team, which consume a significant 

portion of the Center’s resources. Regional representatives serve individuals with deafblindness in their home communities, which often lack other service providers that are trained 

and equipped to the unique and multi-faceted needs of these consumers. The referrals 

provided by regional representatives often are the gateway to finding appropriate and 

individualized supports from various agencies and organizations. The intensity of consumers’ 

interactions with HKNC field staff varies significantly. Some consumers interact with staff only 

once over the phone, while others benefit from repeated in-person visits for a variety of services, 

such as skills assessments, counseling, and advocacy. Data for 2013 is expected in January 

2014.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-98

Objective: HKNC will assist State vocational rehabilitation and employment programs in 

increasing employment outcomes for individuals who are deaf-blind.

Measure: The number of referrals by HKNC’s regional offices to vocational rehabilitation or 

related employment programs.

Year Target Actual 

2009 90

2010 131

2011 32

2012 57

2013 84

2014 88

Measure: The percentage of individuals who achieved successful employment outcomes in 

which HKNC’s regional offices played a collaborative role contributing training, advocacy and/or 

support to the consumer or job training agency.

Year Target Actual 

2009 32

2010 24

2011 28

2012 45

2013 28

2014 30

HKNC plays an important role in connecting individuals who are deaf-blind to vocational 

rehabilitation agencies. Many vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies lack sufficient numbers of 

personnel trained in providing services to consumers who are deaf-blind. HKNC field staff 

frequently facilitate interactions between consumers and VR agencies, train VR agency staff 

about the specialized needs of these clients, and assist consumers who are returning to their 

State’s VR system after attending intensive training at HKNC headquarters. The steep 

decrease in the number of consumers who received referrals to State VR agencies in 2011 may 

reflect the lower number of all types of referrals and funding constraints on VR agencies in 

recent years. The number of referrals partially rebounded in 2012. The number of referrals to 

VR agencies is also limited by the fact that not all consumers served by HKNC field staff have 

vocational goals. Data for 2013 is expected in January 2014.

In addition to these measures, the Department may adopt new measures proposed by the 

recently completed study of HKNC. Possible measures may address the cost efficiency and 

cost effectiveness of the Center’s services, however, it is unclear whether the Center currently 

has the data management capacity needed to ensure that consistent, reliable, timely information

is collected, particularly for measures that require follow up with clients who have left the Center 

or detailed information about the cost of specific services.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-99

Other Performance Information

In July, 2011 the Department received the final report of a comprehensive study of HKNC 

conducted by an independent contractor, Westat. The purpose of the study was to examine the 

alignment of the Center’s programs with the needs of the various populations served by HKNC 

and its regional offices; the Center’s interactions with vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies; 

and the outreach that HKNC provides to other service providers and to the family members of 

deaf-blind individuals who, in turn, support those individuals. The research team’s data sources 

included: detailed in-person interviews with HKNC staff and deaf-blind former HKNC 

consumers; telephone interviews with family members of deaf-blind individuals, VR agency staff, 

service providers, and representatives of stakeholder organizations; HKNC administrative 

records; an email survey of VR agencies; and site visits to HKNC headquarters and regional 

offices. 

Notable findings include:

• Many stakeholders familiar with HKNC’s work consider HKNC to be the “gold standard” 

for the provision of services to deaf-blind individuals.

• VR agency respondents indicated that HKNC is offering an appropriate array of services, 

but more of the same services are needed to meet their needs. Specifically, the demand 

for training from the National Training Team and technical assistance from the regional 

representatives far outstrips the available supply of these services. 

• Service providers generally reported that HKNC training led to enhanced capacity to 

serve deaf-blind populations. About two-thirds of service providers said there were no 

local training alternatives available for learning how to serve deaf-blind individuals.

• Some State VR staff, regional representatives, and family members expressed concerns 

that resources for post-training follow-up were often insufficient, citing the elimination of 

job development and community placement positions at HKNC headquarters and the 

already overloaded schedules of the regional representative.

• HKNC is filling a gap in services in many communities. VR agencies and former 

consumers reported that their States and local communities generally lack services and 

resources for deaf-blind individuals who do not attend programs at HKNC’s 

headquarters. The survey of VR agencies revealed that only six States believe that they 

offer all of the services available from HKNC and that their services were as or more 

effective.

• Deaf-blind individuals who had participated in HKNC headquarters programs were 

generally satisfied with the training they received. Among the 13 studied service areas, 

orientation and mobility received the highest helpfulness rating (85%) and audiology 

received the lowest helpfulness rating (50%). 

• Overall, the study found that HKNC is meeting its legislative mandate of providing 

specialized intensive services to maximize personal development of deaf-blind 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-100

consumers. Data indicate that HKNC, in accordance with its mandate, also provides 

services to family members and allied service providers, and participates in applied 

research and development projects with respect to deaf-blind issues.

In addition, the study drew on these findings to make several recommendations focused on 

improving HKNC’s services and the outcomes of deaf blind persons served by the Center:

• Regional representatives could provide more extensive outreach to the relatively large 

population of deaf-blind individuals who do not attend HKNC headquarters programs. 

These individuals are often underserved in their local communities.

• The study found no evidence to indicate that the performance measures included in the 

fiscal year 2011 program performance plan are insufficient for the level of monitoring 

needed for a small Federal direct grant program. However, several additional measures 

could provide useful information to the Rehabilitation Services Administration and HKNC. 

These measures include cost efficiency data to capture the cost per consumer served 

and a cost-effectiveness measure for achieving consumers’ training, independent living, 

and employment goals. 

• Consumers returning from HKNC headquarters programs could benefit from better 

coordination and follow-up from HKNC staff and State VR agency staff. In particular, 

HKNC and VR staff could clarify and communicate their respective post-training 

responsibilities, especially for follow-up employment services.

• Within applicable resource constraints, HKNC should consider expanding the National 

Training Team to meet the needs for additional training of service provider personnel in 

specialized deaf blind services. HKNC and RSA should investigate other cost-efficient 

service models, such as recorded webinars and train-the-trainer resources that could 

provide assistance to States with deaf blind services.

HKNC should examine the length and cost of consumer assessment and training programs to 

address the perception of some State VR agency representatives that HKNC HQ assessment 

and training is not as efficient as it could be. The Center should take appropriate action to 

ensure that adequate instructors are available to prevent reported delays during training 

programs at headquarters.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-101

Assistive technology

(Assistive Technology Act of 1998)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2014 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority:

Change

2012 2013 2014 from 2012

$32,836 $32,836 2$30,840 -$1,996

____________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011. The Administration proposes to continue funding in FY 

2014 through appropriations language. Up to $1,235 thousand may be used for National Activities, unless the 

amount available for AT State grants exceeds $20,953,534, in which case up to $1,900 thousand may be used for 

National Activities. 2 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The purpose of the Assistive Technology (AT) Act is to provide States with financial assistance 

that supports programs designed to maximize the ability of individuals with disabilities of all 

ages and their family members, guardians, advocates, and authorized representatives to obtain 

AT devices and AT services. AT devices are defined as any item, piece of equipment, or 

product system, whether acquired commercially, modified, or customized, that is used to 

increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities. A few 

examples of such devices are computer or technology aids, modified driving controls, and 

durable medical equipment such as wheelchairs or walkers. Grants support comprehensive 

statewide programs that are designed to increase the: 

• availability of, funding for, access to, provision of, and training about AT devices and 

services; 

• ability of individuals with disabilities of all ages to secure and maintain possession of AT 

during periods of transition, such as transition between school or home and home and 

work; 

• capacity of public and private entities to provide and pay for AT devices and services; 

• involvement of individuals with disabilities in decisions about AT devices and services;

• coordination of AT-related activities among State and local agencies and other private 

entities;

• awareness of and facilitate changes in law, regulations, procedures, policies, practices, 

and organizational structures, in order to improve access to AT; and 

• awareness of the benefits of AT among targeted individuals and entities in the general 

population. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Assistive technology

K-102

Assistive Technology (AT) State grant program 

The AT State grant program is a population-based formula grant program to support 

comprehensive statewide programs that maximize the ability of individuals with disabilities of all 

ages to access and acquire AT. States must establish consumer-responsive advisory councils 

with a majority membership of individuals with disabilities who use AT to advise on the planning, 

implementation, and evaluation of these statewide programs. 

Under the formula, States and outlying areas are initially allocated a base amount equal to the 

amount of funds they received under the AT program in fiscal year 2004 (totaling $20,288,534).

Any funds appropriated in excess of the fiscal year 2004 appropriation are initially distributed 

among the eligible entities with 50 percent of available funds distributed equally amongst them 

and 50 percent distributed according to the population of the State until each entity receives at 

least $410,000. If any appropriated funds remain after each State receives this minimum, they 

are distributed with 20 percent divided equally amongst the States and 80 percent distributed 

according to their populations. To date, appropriated funds under this program have not been 

sufficient to necessitate this second round of distribution. The fiscal year 2012 allotments were 

based on the July 1, 2010 population estimates published by the Census Bureau in December 

2010. The fiscal year 2013 allotments are based on the July 1, 2011 population estimates 

published in December 2011. The fiscal year 2014 State distributions are based on the 

July 1, 2012 Census data released in December 2012. 

Each State must set measurable goals, with timelines, that address the AT needs of individuals 

with disabilities related to: education (including goals related to the delivery of AT devices and 

services to students receiving services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 

(IDEA)); employment (including goals related to the Rehabilitation Act’s Vocational 

Rehabilitation State Grant program); telecommunications and information technology; and 

community living. The State must determine whether it has met its goals each year, and the 

Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) has the authority to hold States accountable for a 

lack of progress toward these goals through technical assistance, corrective actions and/or 

sanctions if States are determined to be in noncompliance with the applicable requirements of 

the AT Act or have not made substantial progress toward achieving the measureable goals.

The State must implement each of the activities required under the program, which include 

State-level activities and State leadership activities. States must spend a minimum of 60 percent 

(unless the State elects to comply with the State flexibility provision in section 4(e)(6) of the AT 

Act, as described below) of their formula grant funds on four State-level activities: State 

financing programs, device reutilization programs, device loan programs, and device 

demonstrations. States may, however, direct their funds towards these activities in varying 

amounts if they use other State or non-Federal funds to support these activities at a comparable 

or greater level. 

States may use up to 40 percent of their AT State grant program funding on State leadership 

activities, with at least 5 percent of that amount devoted to technical assistance and training 

related to transition for students exiting school or adults entering community living. The State 

leadership activities include the provision of technical assistance and training to targeted 

individuals and entities focused on promoting the general awareness of the benefits of AT; skills 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Assistive technology

K-103

development for persons involved in the assessment of the need for AT; the appropriate 

application of AT; and the integration of AT devices and services in plans required to be 

developed under other Federal laws, such as the IDEA’s Individualized Education Program and 

the Rehabilitation Act’s Individualized Plan for Employment. In addition, States must use a 

portion of their grant funds on public awareness activities, including the continuation and 

maintenance of a statewide system of information and referral, and coordination and 

collaboration activities amongst entities in the States that are responsible for the provision of 

AT. 

The law provides States with flexibility to decide to carry out only two or three State-level 

activities, rather than all four. If a State elects to carry out two or three State-level activities, it 

must spend a minimum of 70 percent of its funds on those activities, while spending not more 

than 30 percent on the State leadership activities. 

The AT Act specifies what a State must include in its annual progress report to RSA, including 

data on: the State’s financing program, device loan program activities, device reutilization 

programs, and device demonstrations, including an analysis of those individuals who benefited 

from each of these programs; training activities; the statewide system of information and 

referral; and the outcomes of any improvement initiatives carried out by the State. The report 

must also provide data on the use of resources, including any contributed to the program by 

other public and private entities, and the level of customer satisfaction. 

Protection and Advocacy for Assistive Technology 

Formula grants for protection and advocacy (P&A) systems established under the 

Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act support protection and advocacy 

services to assist individuals with disabilities of all ages in the acquisition, utilization, or 

maintenance of AT services or devices. Funds are distributed on a State population basis, with 

a minimum annual grant of $50,000. Outlying areas must receive not less than $30,000 

annually. Also, the Act requires a minimum award of $30,000 to the P&A system serving the 

American Indian consortium. The fiscal year 2012 allotments were based on the July 1, 2010

population estimates published by the Census Bureau in December 2010. The fiscal year 2013

allotments are based on the July 1, 2011 population estimates published in December 2011.

The fiscal year 2014 State distributions are based on the July 1, 2012 Census data released in 

December 2012. 

National Activities 

The AT Act provides authority for the provision of technical assistance—through grants, 

contracts, or cooperative agreements awarded on a competitive basis—to individuals with 

disabilities of all ages, to AT State grant program grantees, and to protection and advocacy 

systems. The AT Act also requires the Secretary to make an award to renovate, update, and 

maintain a national public Internet site (http://www.assistivetech.net). In addition, the AT Act 

includes authority for grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements to assist grantees in 

developing and implementing effective data collection and reporting systems. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Assistive technology

K-104

In designing its technical assistance activities, RSA must consider the input of directors of AT 

State grant programs and Alternative Financing programs, individuals with disabilities who use 

AT, family members, and protection and advocacy service providers, among others. The 

technical assistance must respond to specific requests for information and disseminate 

information to States, entities funded under the AT Act, and any other public entities that seek 

information about AT. The technical assistance must provide model approaches for the removal 

of barriers to accessing AT, examples of effective program coordination, and practices that 

increase funding for AT devices. 

Alternative Financing Program 

The fiscal year 2012 appropriations bill provided $1,966,220 for an alternative financing program 

authorized under appropriations language. Competitive grants were awarded to support 

alternative financing programs that are providing for the purchase of assistive technology 

devices, such as a low-interest loan fund; an interest buy-down program; a revolving loan fund; 

a loan guarantee; or insurance program. Applicants were required to assure that the alternative 

financing program will expand and emphasize consumer choice and control. State agencies 

and community-based disability organizations that are directed by and operated for individuals 

with disabilities were eligible to compete.

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were as follows:

(dollars in thousands)

2009.............................................................. $30,960

2010................................................................ 30,960

2011................................................................ 30,898

2012................................................................ 32,836

2013................................................................ 32,836 1

____________________

1 Excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.

FY 2014 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $30.840 million in fiscal year 2014 for Assistive Technology (AT) 

programs, $1.996 million less than the fiscal year 2012 appropriation. The request does not 

include funds for an alternative financing program (AFP) of one-year competitive grant that was 

authorized through appropriations language in fiscal year 2012. In fiscal year 2005 Congress 

amended the AT Act to eliminate the separate AFP and establish an AT State grant program 

that requires States to conduct State financing activities, including alternative financing loan 

programs. No funds are requested for the duplicative competitive grant program funded in 

2012. 

Funding is requested for the AT State grant program, the Protection and Advocacy for Assistive 

Technology program, and National Activities. These programs enable individuals with 

disabilities to acquire technology they might not otherwise be able to obtain—technology that 

improves their quality of life, and in many cases, enables them to work or participate in other 

productive endeavors. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Assistive technology

K-105

Assistive Technology (AT) State grant program 

The request includes $25.561 million for the AT State grant program, the same as the fiscal 

year 2012 level. These funds will be used by States to carry out the third year of their 3-year 

State plan. State plans must describe how the State intends to carry out its AT State grant 

program to meet the AT needs of individuals with disabilities in the State, achieve the 

measurable goals required by the AT Act, and comply with all applicable statutory and 

regulatory requirements.

Protection and Advocacy for Assistive Technology 

The fiscal year 2014 request includes $4.283 million for the Protection and Advocacy for 

Assistive Technology (PAAT) program, the same as the 2012 level. At this level, 29 States

would receive $50,000, the minimum amount allowed under the AT Act for the protection and 

advocacy systems established under the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of 

Rights Act to carry out this program. Outlying areas each would receive $30,000. Funds would 

be used to assist individuals with disabilities of all ages in the acquisition, utilization, or 

maintenance of AT services or devices. 

National Activities 

The fiscal year 2014 request also includes $996,246 for National Activities, the same as the 

fiscal year 2012 level. In fiscal year 2014, funds would be used to continue support for grants 

that began in previous fiscal years. The Act requires support for a national information internet 

system, and authorizes State training, technical assistance, data collection, and reporting 

assistance. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands) 

Program Funding 2012 2013 2014

AT State grant program $25,561 $25,561 $25,561

Protection and advocacy program 4,283 4,283 4,283

National activities 996 996 996

Alternative financing program 1,996 1,996 0

Total 32,836 32,836 30,840

________________

NOTE: 2013 excludes 0.612 percent across-the-board increase provided in P.L. 112-175.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Assistive technology

K-106

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Performance Measures

This section presents selected program performance information, including, for example, GPRA 

goals, objectives, measures, and performance targets and data, and an assessment of the 

progress made toward achieving program results. Achievement of results is based on the 

cumulative effect of the resources provided in previous years and those requested in fiscal year 

2014 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by this 

program.

Under the AT Act, each State is required to establish measurable goals for access to and 

acquisition of AT, with timelines for meeting those goals. These goals must address the AT 

needs of individuals with disabilities in the State in the domains of education, employment, 

community living, and telecommunications and information technology (IT). 

Acquisition of AT: In order to measure the increase in the acquisition of AT, the following 

three measures have been established for the AT State grant program. The Department is 

requiring States to survey individuals served under this program to determine whether those 

who obtained AT (for education, employment, or community living purposes) believe they 

would not have otherwise obtained the AT device or service. 

Goal: To increase access to and acquisition of assistive technology for individuals with 

disabilities. 

Objective: To increase acquisition of assistive technology for individuals with disabilities. 

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding their target percentage of targeted 

individuals and entities who obtained assistive technology devices or services for educational 

purposes through State financing activities or reutilization programs, who would not have 

obtained the device or service.

Year Target Actual 

2009 75 75

2010 75 79

2011 69 87

2012 69

2013 75

2014 75
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Assistive technology

K-107

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding their target percentage of targeted 

individuals and entities who obtained assistive technology devices or services for employment 

purposes through State financing activities or reutilization programs, who would not have 

obtained the device or service.

Year Target Actual 

2009 75 61

2010 75 77

2011 64 79

2012 64

2013 75

2014 75

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding their target percentage of targeted 

individuals and entities who obtained assistive technology devices or services for community 

living purposes through State financing activities or reutilization programs, who would not have 

obtained the device or service.

Year Target Actual 

2009 90 73

2010 90 77

2011 81 81

2012 81

2013 81

2014 81

Additional information: These measures assess the extent to which States are meeting 

targets for increasing the acquisition of AT by individuals with disabilities. For fiscal years 2008-

2011 States had the flexibility to establish their own targets for each of these measures and the 

flexibility to change their targets over time. Therefore, the data for these years tell us how 

States did in relation to the performance targets they set for themselves, which ranged from as 

low as 65 percent to as high as 100 percent for these measures. In fiscal year 2011, RSA 

worked with States to establish a single performance target of 75 percent for each of the 3 

acquisition measures that is to be used by all States. Beginning in fiscal year 2012, the data for 

these measures will tell us what proportion of the States were able to meet this acquisition 

target of 75 percent. 

Access to AT: In order to measure the increase in access to AT, the following four measures 

have been established under the AT State grant program. The Department is requiring States 

to collect information from individuals served under this program to determine whether access to 

device demonstration or loan programs has enabled them to make informed decisions about AT 

devices or services (for education, employment, community living, and 

telecommunications purposes). 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Assistive technology

K-108

Goal: To increase access to and acquisition of assistive technology for individuals with 

disabilities. 

Objective: To increase access to assistive technology for individuals with disabilities. 

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding their target percentage of targeted 

individuals and entities who have accessed assistive technology device demonstrations and/or 

device loan programs, and made a decision about the assistive technology device or services 

for educational purposes as a result of the assistance they received from the Assistive 

Technology Program.

Year Target Actual 

2009 90 73

2010 90 71

2011 79 85

2012 79

2013 80

2014 80

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding their target percentage of targeted 

individuals and entities who have accessed assistive technology device demonstrations and/or 

device loan programs, and made a decision about the assistive technology device or services 

for employment purposes as a result of the assistance they received from the Assistive 

Technology Program.

Year Target Actual 

2009 85 71

2010 85 84

2011 75 84

2012 75

2013 80

2014 80
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Assistive technology

K-109

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding their target percentage of targeted 

individuals and entities who have accessed assistive technology device demonstrations and/or 

device loan programs, and made a decision about the assistive technology device or services 

for community living purposes as a result of the assistance they received from the Assistive 

Technology Program.

Year Target Actual 

2009 90 71

2010 90 71

2011 79 82

2012 79

2013 80

2014 80

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding their target percentage of targeted 

individuals and entities who have accessed assistive technology device demonstrations and/or 

device loan programs, and made a decision about the assistive technology device or services 

for technology/telecommunications purposes as a result of the assistance they received 

from the Assistive Technology Program.

Year Target Actual 

2009 80 68

2010 80 68

2011 69 84

2012 69

2013 75

2014 75

Additional information: These measures assess the extent to which States are meeting 

targets for increasing the access to AT by individuals with disabilities. For fiscal years 2008-

2011 States had the flexibility to establish their own targets for each of these measures and the 

flexibility to change their targets over time. Therefore, the data for these years tell us how 

States did in relation to the performance targets they set for themselves, which ranged from as 

low as 45 percent (for example, for the IT measure) to as high as 100 percent. In fiscal year 

2011, RSA worked with States to establish a single performance target of 70 percent for each of 

the 4 access measures that is to be used by all States. Beginning in fiscal year 2012, the data 

for these measures will tell us what proportion of the States were able to meet this access target 

of 70 percent.
K-110