Department of Education

REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Fiscal Year 2015 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 2014 Appropriations Reports.............................................................K-10

Summary of Request ............................................................................................................K-11

Activities:

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

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

Supported employment State grants ...............................................................................K-37

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers..................................................................................K-46

Training...........................................................................................................................K-50

Demonstration and training programs .............................................................................K-58

Independent living ...........................................................................................................K-62

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

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research ............................................K-76

Helen Keller National Center...........................................................................................K-89

Assistive technology........................................................................................................K-99

State Tables*

*State tables reflecting 2014 allocations and 2015 estimates are 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, [$3,680,497,000] 

$3,683,335,000, of which [$3,302,053,000]$3,335,074,000 shall be for grants for vocational 

rehabilitation services under Title I of the Rehabilitation Act:

1 Provided, That the Secretary of 

Education may allocate to States, in accordance with a formula determined by the Secretary, up 

to $33,021,000 of the amount provided for the vocational rehabilitation program:

2 Provided 

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

section 302 of such Act:

3

 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 self-sufficiency:4 [Provided further, That from 

the remaining available amounts that are not used to carry out activities aimed at improving the 

education and post-school outcomes of children receiving SSI and their families authorized in 

the previous proviso, up to $20,000,000 may be used for other innovative activities aimed at 

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

Rehabilitation Act:]

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

funds to other public and private, non-profit entities: 6 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]2016:

7 [:Provided 

further, That, $2,000,000 shall be for competitive grants to support alternative financing 

programs that provide for the purchase of assistive technology devices, such as a low-interest 
K-2

loan fund; an interest buy-down program; a revolving loan fund; a loan guarantee; or insurance 

program: Provided further, That applicants shall provide an assurance that, and information 

describing the manner in which, the alternative financing program will expand and emphasize 

consumer choice and control: Provided further, That State agencies and community-based 

disability organizations that are directed by and operated for individuals with disabilities shall be 

eligible to compete].

8 (Department of Education Appropriations Act, 2014)

NOTE

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] 

$3,335,074,000 shall be for grants for 

vocational rehabilitation services under Title I 

of the Rehabilitation Act:

This language earmarks funds provided for 

Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants 

program.

2 Provided, That the Secretary of Education 

may allocate to States, in accordance with a 

formula determined by the Secretary, up to 

$33,021,000 of the amount provided for the 

vocational rehabilitation services program

This language would give the Secretary

flexibility in distributing the increase in funds 

for the VR program in a manner that would 

lessen the potential impact of the 

Administration’s proposal to eliminate 

separate funding authorities for the smaller 

VR-related programs under the Rehabilitation

Act whose activities can be carried out under 

the VR program.

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

the Rehabilitation Act shall not apply to funds 

provided under section 302 of such Act:

This 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.

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:

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.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-4

Analysis of Language Provisions and Changes

Language Provision Explanation

5 [Provided further, That from the remaining 

available amounts that are not used to carry 

out activities aimed at improving the 

education and post-school outcomes of 

children receiving SSI and their families 

authorized in the previous proviso, up to 

$20,000,000 may be used for other 

innovative activities aimed at improving the 

outcomes of individuals with disabilities as 

defined in section 7(20)(B) of the 

Rehabilitation Act:]

This language limits the amount of remaining 

available VR funds that can be used for 

conducting other innovative activities aimed at 

improving the outcomes of individuals with 

disabilities, other than for carrying out the 

PROMISE program. The deletion of this 

language would ensure that all unused funds 

would remain available to improve the 

outcomes of individuals with disabilities, 

instead of being returned to the Treasury. 

6 Provided further, That States may award 

subgrants for a portion of the funds to other 

public and private, non-profit entities:

This language would permit States to use a 

portion of their project funds to make 

subgrants to other public and private, nonprofit entities for carrying out innovative 

activities aimed at improving the outcomes of 

individuals with disabilities.

7 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]2016:

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 2 years. 

8 [Provided further, That, $2,000,000 shall be 

for competitive grants to support alternative 

financing programs that provide 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: 

Provided further, That applicants shall 

provide an assurance that, and information 

describing the manner in which, the 

alternative financing program will expand 

and emphasize consumer choice and control: 

Provided further, That State agencies and 

community-based disability organizations 

that are directed by and operated for 

individuals with disabilities shall be eligible to 

compete].

This language, which earmarks funds to 

support alternative financing programs, is 

deleted because the request does not include 

funds for this program in fiscal year 2015.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-5

Appropriation, Adjustments and Transfers 

(dollars in thousands)

Appropriation/Adjustments/Transfers 2013 2014 2015

Discretionary:

Discretionar y: Appropriation .................................................. $389,569 $378,444 $348,261

Discretionar y: Across-the-board reduction (P.L. 113-6)......... -779 0 0

Discretionar y budget authority Total, discretionary appropriation................ 388,790 378,444 348,261

Discretionar y: Sequester (P.L. 112-25).................................. -19,597 0 0

Total, adjusted discretionary appropriation.. 369,193 378,444 348,261

Mandatory:

Mandator y: Appropriation .................................................. 3,230,972 3,302,053 3,335,074 Discretionar y

Mandator y: Sequester (P.L. 112-25).................................. -164,780 -237,748 0

 Total, adjusted mandatory appropriation ..... 3,066,192 3,064,305 3,335,074

 Total, adjusted discretionary and 

mandatory appropriation 3,435,385 3,442,749 3,683,335
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-6

Summary of Changes

(dollars in thousands)

2014............................................................................................ $3,680,497 1

2015............................................................................................. 3,683,335

Net change............................................................ +2,838

 1 Excludes 7.2 percent sequester reduction of mandatory VR State Grant funds pursuant to the 

Budget Control Act (P.L. 112-25)

Increases: 2014 base

Change 

from base

Program:

Increase in funding for Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State 

grants. $3,302,053 +$33,021

Increase in funding for NIDDR to support research activities 

focusing on employment. 103,970 +4,030

 Subtotal, increases 37,051

Decreases: 2014 base

Change 

from base

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. 27,548 -27,548

Eliminates funding for the Migrant and Seasonal Farm 

Workers program consistent with the Administration’s proposal 

to reduce duplication of effort and administrative costs. 1,196 -1,196

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. 33,657 -3,469

Decrease reflects the elimination of funding for a separate 

alternative financing program, authorized through

appropriations language in fiscal year 2014. 33,000 -2,000

 Subtotal, decreases -34,213

Net change + 2,838
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-7

Authorizing Legislation

(dollars in thousands)

Activity

2014

Authorized

footnote

2014

Estimate

footnote

2015

Authorized

footnote

2015

Request

Vocational rehabilitation (VR) State grants:

VR Grants to States (RA-I A, B-110 and 111) 0 1,2 $3,027,104 0 1,3 $3,294,586

VR Grants for Indians (RA-I-C) --- 2,4 37,201 --- 3,4 40,488

Client assistance State grants (RA-I-112) 0 1 12,000 0 1 12,000

Supported employment State grants (RA-VI-B) 0 5 27,548 0 5 0

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers (RA-III-304) 0 5 1,196 0 5 0

Training (RA-III-302(a)-(g)(2),(h)-(i)) 0 1 33,657 0 1 30,188

Demonstration and training programs (RA-III-303) 0 1 5,796 0 1 5,796

Independent living (IL):

IL State grants (RA-VII-1-B) 0 1 22,878 0 1 22,878

IL Centers (RA-VII-1-C) 0 1 78,305 0 1 78,305

IL Services for older blind individuals (RA-VII-2) 0 1 33,317 0 1 33,317

Protection and advocacy of individual rights (RA-V-509) 0 1 17,650 0 1 17,650

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (RA-II) 0 1 103,970 0 1 108,000

Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults 

(HKNCA) 0 1 9,127 0 1 9,127

Assistive technology (ATA):

Assistive technology programs (ATA-4,5, and 6) 0 6 31,000 0 6 31,000

AT Alternative financing programs 0 7 2,0007 0 0

Total definite authorization 0 0

Total discretionary appropriation 378,444 348,261

K-7
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Authorizing Legislation—continued

(dollars in thousands)

K-8

Total mandatory appropriation $3,302,053 $3,335,074

Total appropriation 3,680,497 3,683,335

Portion of request not authorized 3,683,335

Total appropriation including mandatory decrease 3,442,749

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004; the program is authorized in FY 2014 through appropriations language. Continued funding is 

proposed for this program in FY 2015 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 2014, this 

amount was $3,302,053 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 2015, this amount is $3,335,074 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 2015. 6 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011; this program is proposed for authorization in FY 2015 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 2014 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

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 3,622,925

2014 3,655,577 N/A 8 3,698,1743 3,680,497

2015 3,683,335

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 House allowance is shown as N/A because there was no Subcommittee action.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-10

Significant Items in FY 2014 Appropriations Reports

Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants - PROMISE

Senate: Report 113-71. After covering the costs of PROMISE, the Administration 

requests and the Committee recommends new authority through the DIF 

[Disability Innovation Fund] to provide $5,000,000 to support a new cross-agency 

initiative aimed at improving the educational and employment outcomes for 

disconnected youth with disabilities and providing targeted technical assistance 

to support performance partnership pilots. The Committee expects the initiative 

to serve youth with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 24 who are homeless, 

in foster care, involved in the justice system, or are neither employed nor enrolled 

in an educational institution. 

The amount of unused VR State Grant funding will not be determined until the 

end of fiscal year 2014. If an excess amount of funds are available after 

supporting PROMISE and the disconnected youth and SSA-ED initiatives, the 

Committee expects the DIF to support the development of effective, evidencebased strategies to improve the long-term outcomes for people with disabilities. 

The Committee should be notified in advance of announcements related to any 

additional activities.

Response: The Department will notify the Committee of its plans for using unobligated fiscal 

year 2014 funds that remain available after covering the costs of the PROMISE 

program. 

Demonstration and Training Programs

Senate: Report 113-71. The Committee recommendation also includes $750,000 to 

support a new competition for parent information and training 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 under the Demonstration and Training programs for parent 

information and training centers (§303(c) of the Rehabilitation Act) will allow the 

Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) to conduct a competition for this 

program in fiscal year 2014. RSA last funded the parent information and training 

program in fiscal year 2011 and intends to fund the same number of awards, with 

a slightly larger grant award size, in fiscal year 2014. 
K-11

Summary of Request

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FISCAL YEAR 2015 PRESIDENT'S BUDGET 

Click here for accessible version 

(in thousands of dollars) 2015

Category 2013 2014 President's

Account, Program and Activity Code Appropriation Appropriation Budget Amount Percent

Rehabilitation Services and Disability Research

1. Vocational rehabilitation State grants:

(a) Grants to States (RA Title I-A, sections 110 and 111) 1 M 3,028,969 3,027,104 3,294,586 267,482 8.836%

(b) Grants to Indians (RA Title I-C) M 37,224 37,201 40,488 3,287 8.836%

Subtotal 3,066,192 3,064,305 3,335,074 270,769 8.836%

Mandatory Baseline M 3,066,192 3,302,053 3,335,074 33,021 1.000%

 2. Client assistance State grants (RA section 112) D 11,600 12,000 12,000 0 0.000%

 3. Training (RA section 302) D 33,657 33,657 30,188 (3,469) -10.307%

 4. Demonstration and training programs (RA Section 303) D 5,046 5,796 5,796 0 0.000%

 5. Migrant and seasonal farmworkers (RA section 304) D 1,196 1,196 0 (1,196) -100.000%

 6. Protection and advocacy of individual rights (RA section 509) D 17,088 17,650 17,650 0 0.000%

 7. Supported employment State grants (RA VI-B) D 27,548 27,548 0 (27,548) -100.000%

 8. Independent living (RA VII):

(a) State grants (Chapter 1, Part B) D 22,137 22,878 22,878 0 0.000%

(b) Centers (Chapter 1, Part C) D 75,772 78,305 78,305 0 0.000%

(c) Services for older blind individuals (Chapter 2) D 32,239 33,317 33,317 0 0.000%

 9. Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults (HKNCA) D 8,667 9,127 9,127 0 0.000%

 10. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (RA II) D 103,125 103,970 108,000 4,030 3.876%

 11. Assistive technology programs (ATA, sections 4, 5, and 6) D 31,118 33,000 31,000 (2,000) -6.061%

Subtotal 369,193 378,444 348,261 (30,183) -7.976%

Total 3,435,385 3,442,749 3,683,335 240,586 6.988%

Discretionary D 369,193 378,444 348,261 (30,183) -7.976%

Mandatory M 3,066,192 3,064,305 3,335,074 270,769 8.836%

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

For mandatory programs, the levels shown in the 2014 Appropriation column reflects the 7.2 percent sequester that went into effect October 1, 2013, pursuant to the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25); 

the 2015 President's Budget column does not reflect a sequester in 2015. 

Detail may not add to totals due to rounding. 

Compared to 2014 Appropriation

2015 President's Budget 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Summary of Request

FY2013 PRESIDENT’S BUDGET

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 2015 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 $33 million more than the fiscal year 2014 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 

offset the reduction in funds ($32 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 (SE) State Grants and Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers programs. The services 

provided through these programs can be provided by the larger VR State Grants program. The 

Administration is also proposing appropriations 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 State levels, and 

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

proposing language that would give the Department flexibility to allocate up to $33 million of the 

funds provided for the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants program to States in accordance 

with a formula determined by the Secretary. 

The 2015 request also includes language that would allow the Department 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, 2016. After paying continuation costs of the PROMISE program, the 

Administration proposes to use funds that remain available at the end of fiscal year 2015 for a 

new Transition Model System initiative that would support the development and testing of a 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Summary of Request

f Request

K-13

coordinated model system of transition planning, services, and supports in order to improve 

postsecondary results for youth with disabilities. 

The $108 million request for the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research 

includes an increase of $4 million more than the 2014 level for research activities in the 

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

2015. 

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

$3.5 million from the 2014 level, reflecting the elimination of the funding reservation for the 

In-Service Training program.

The $31 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 of $2 million from the 2014 level reflects the 

elimination of funding for a separate alternative financing program that was authorized in the 

2014 appropriations language. 

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

maintained at the 2014 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 efforts have led to joint dialogues and 

briefings, the sharing of spending plans for the purposes of eliminating program duplication, and 

identifying areas in which previous investments might be coordinated. In addition, the fiscal 

year 2015 request continues to seek to reestablish demonstration authority for the Social 

Security Disability Insurance program. Staff from the Social Security Administration, Health and 

Human Services (HHS), Education, and Labor have participated in this effort and have 

developed proposals for a range of early-intervention demonstration projects which would 

leverage programs in HHS, Education, and Labor.

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 2015, 

this amount would total $2.78 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 2015 Authorization: 0 1, 2

Budget Authority: 

Program 2014 2015 Change

VR State grants $3,261.966 $3,294,586 +$32,620

VR Indian set-aside 40,087 40,488 +401

VR Total 3,302,053 3 3,335,074 +33,021

_________________

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

program in FY 2015 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 2015, this amount is $3,335,074 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.

3 The amount shown in the 2014 column is the mandatory amount that was appropriated for the VR State Grants 

program in the 2014 Omnibus Act and does not include the 7.2 percent sequester reduction for mandatory programs 

pursuant to the Budget Control Act of 2011.

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 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-15

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. If a

State has met all matching requirements for the fiscal year in which funds were appropriated, the

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

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

distribute funds among the States. The fiscal year 2013 State distributions were 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. The fiscal year 2015

State distributions will be based on the July 1, 2013 estimates published on December 30, 2013.

Per capita income averages for fiscal year 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 years 2014 and 2015 

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. The performance data are used to determine if the State 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 5 years 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)

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

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

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

2013 ................................................................3,066,192

2014 ................................................................3,302,053 1

_________________

1 The amount shown for 2014 is the mandatory amount that was appropriated for the VR State Grants program in 

the 2014 Omnibus Act and does not include the 7.2 percent sequester reduction for mandatory programs pursuant to

the Budget Control Act of 2011.

FY 2015 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $3.3 billion, an increase of $33.0 million over the fiscal year 2014 

mandatory level to assist States and Tribal governments to increase the participation of 

individuals with disabilities in the workforce. Of the amount requested, $40.5 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 

(1.0 percent for 2015), which would offset the reduction in funds ($32.2 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 changes would reduce duplication of effort and 

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

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

the Supported Employment State Grants and Migrants 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 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 appropriations 

language that would give the Department flexibility to allocate up to $33.0 million of the funds 

provided for the Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants program (the amount of the CPIU 

adjustment) to States in accordance with a formula determined by the Secretary. For fiscal year 

2015, the Department is considering distributing these funds in a manner similar to the allocation 

formula currently used for the Supported Employment State Grants. Under this scenario a State 

would receive one award equal to the sum of their allocation under this formula and their 

allocation under the VR program consistent with section 110(a) of the Rehabilitation Act. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-17

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

individuals with disabilities who are eligible to receive services under the VR State Grants 

program to obtain employment. Individuals who receive services from funds provided under the 

Supported Employment program also receive services under the VR State grants program, 

including supported employment services. Individuals receiving services under the Migrant and 

Seasonal Farmworkers program are eligible to receive VR services and most of these individuals 

are currently receiving these VR services. The four current grantees under the Migrants and 

Seasonal Farmworkers program will receive their fifth and final year of funding in fiscal year 

2014. All States that have significant numbers of migrant and seasonal farmworkers 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. The Administration believes that the benefits of 

this elimination outweigh the costs of any short term disruption that may be encountered as a 

result of this proposal. 

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 

“Persons with a Disability: Labor Force Characteristics” report (2012), the U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics released results from the American Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau) 

indicating that of those aged 16-64 (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 parttime) than people without such disabilities (27.0 percent versus 70.4 percent respectively) and 

that only 19.1 percent of working-age individuals with disabilities were usually working full-time. 

Source: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/disabl.toc.htm. 

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. 

Performance among State VR agencies varies considerably in both good and bad economic 

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

obtained an employment outcome and the number continued to decline in fiscal year 2010 to a 

low of about 172,000; although the overall drop in employment outcomes was smaller from 2009 

to 2010. The decrease in employment outcomes can, at least in part, be attributed to the 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. On a national 

level the decline ended after 2010 with a 3.7 percent increase in employment outcomes in fiscal 

2011 and smaller increases in years 2012 and 2013 of about 1 percent. Preliminary 2013 data 

show continued progress with about 182,715 individuals with disabilities obtaining an 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-18

employment outcome. The performance of many State agencies continues to vary, particularly 

in terms of the number and percentage of employment outcomes (see further discussion under 

performance measures section). For example, in fiscal year 2012, 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. 

The resources of the VR program are critical to assisting individuals with significant disabilities, 

for whom the economic recession has had a disproportionate impact, to obtain employment. The 

Department recognizes the need to improve employment outcomes for individuals with 

disabilities, particularly individuals with significant disabilities and transition-age youth with 

disabilities. In order to improve the effectiveness of the VR program, the Rehabilitation Services 

Administration (RSA) is moving forward on a number of fronts. For example, RSA is revising its 

accountability framework to shift the emphasis of its monitoring and technical assistance efforts 

from compliance to performance and will focus on employment and transition outcomes, as well 

as how State VR agencies use their funds to improve performance and results of the VR 

program. At the same time, RSA will continue to ensure an appropriate level of accountability in 

meeting program requirements. In addition, RSA is changing the way it supports the preparation 

of VR counselors by focusing on evidence-based practices and the competency-based skills 

necessary to meet the demands of employers and promote employment of individuals with 

disabilities. 

Approximately 35 percent of current VR consumers are youth with disabilities aged 14-24 and 

the percentage continues to rise. Accordingly, the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services (OSERS) is also implementing a number of strategies to improve outcomes for youth 

with disabilities and help to ensure they have the education and skills necessary to be successful 

in postsecondary education and the workforce. OSERS is working to build stronger collaboration

with its partners and create opportunities to leverage resources across the Department, including 

general and special education, postsecondary education, adult and career and technical 

education. OSERS is also working to create stronger linkages across systems, including the 

American Job Centers, long term support systems, transportation, housing, and Medicaid. 

OSERS is working with partner Agencies (Labor, Social Security, and Health and Human 

Services) to identify data sharing opportunities and compatible outcome goals for transition 

service programs both internally and across Agencies. 

In addition, OSERS is developing guidance for the many partners that play a role in the success 

of a student with a disability’s transition from high school to postsecondary education and 

careers, including State educational agencies, local educational agencies, State vocational 

rehabilitation agencies, local transition coordinators, and students with disabilities (and their 

families. Through this guidance, OSERS hopes to encourage collaborative transition practices 

that will enable youth with disabilities to participate in competitive, integrated employment.

Data reveal that VR agencies have better outcomes when they work in partnership with 

independent living (IL) centers. To meet the goals of working and living independently in the 

community, RSA is working to identify promising practices of collaboration, as well as to 

incentivize IL programs to work closely with VR, while simultaneously providing IL services to VR 

consumers.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-19

Disability Innovation Fund (DIF)

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

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

These funds are reallotted 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 maintain its level of State expenditures, maintenance of effort (MOE), (and did not 

request or receive a full or partial waiver of its MOE requirement). 

The fiscal year 2012 and 2013 appropriations acts included language that allows the Department 

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

VR State Grants program to improve the education and employment outcomes of children 

receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and their families. The language also provided 

authority for the funds to remain available for Federal obligation for an additional 12 month 

period. Absent authority provided in appropriations language, these annual funds would lapse 

and no longer be available for Federal obligation. 

In fiscal year 2013, such funds remaining from the 2012 appropriation, were used to award 

5 -year grants to 5 States and a consortium of States for model demonstration projects (MDPs) 

under the Promoting Readiness of Minors in Social Security Income (PROMISE) program. 

PROMISE is a joint initiative with the Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Departments 

of Health and Human Services and Labor. Under the PROMISE program, States are developing

partnerships that will 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. A rigorously designed national evaluation of PROMISE will be conducted under a 

contract with SSA, in collaboration with the Department of Education. The evaluation will guide 

implementation, gather evidence, and validate project outcomes. 

In fiscal year 2014, the Department will use the approximately $81 million in unobligated VR 

funds that became available from the fiscal year 2013 appropriation for the VR State Grants 

program to cover third and fourth year continuation costs of the MDPs as well as continuation 

costs of the PROMISE technical assistance grant to be awarded later this year. 

The fiscal year 2014 appropriation also includes language that allows the Department to use 

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

support activities under the PROMISE program and up to an additional $20 million of such funds 

for innovative activities aimed at improving outcomes for individuals with disabilities (DIF). The 

language also provides authority for the funds to remain available for Federal obligation until 

September 30, 2015. Initiatives under DIF support innovative cross-agency projects to improve 

educational, employment and other key outcomes for individuals with disabilities. The 

Administration is considering options for the use of these 2014 funds including support for 

disconnected youth with disabilities under the Administration’s Disconnected Youth Initiative and 

SSDI/SSI pilot demonstration projects targeted at early intervention efforts to preserve the 

wellbeing and work ability of the non-beneficiaries most at risk of becoming severely impaired. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-20

For fiscal year 2015 request, the Administration is requesting similar language, including 

authority for the funds to remain available for Federal obligation until September 30, 2016. 

Funds that become available subsequent to the reallotment of fiscal year 2015 VR funds would 

first be used to pay any remaining continuation costs of the PROMISE program. The 

Administration proposes to use any additional VR funds that remain available at the end of fiscal 

year 2015 for a new Transition Model System (TMS) initiative under the DIF that would support 

the development and testing of a coordinated model system of transition planning, services, and 

supports in order to improve postsecondary results for youth with disabilities. 

The transition of youth with disabilities from school to adult life is complex. Youth with disabilities 

have different levels and types of disability and may be eligible for different programs serving 

subsets of the target population. In addition, these youth come from a variety of situations, such 

as rural and urban settings; families living in poverty or affluence; families where English is not 

spoken in the home; and families that can build on generations of social capital in their 

communities. Further complexity comes from the mix of resources, programs, educational 

experiences, accommodations, and protections that children with disabilities and their families 

may need as they plan to leave school and the entitlement to services provided under the IDEA. 

States, schools, postsecondary institutions, employers, and families continue to seek ways to 

blend these programs and resources in the right way for the right student so that any young 

person with disabilities can find a path to success. While the literature includes a good deal of 

information about transition practices, the array of options can be confusing to families, youth, 

educators, and public and private providers. 

To address these challenges, the Administration is proposing a new demonstration initiative that 

would develop and test a coordinated model system of transition planning, services, and 

supports. This initiative would build on current knowledge from a variety of investments that 

OSERS and others have made in this area, including early knowledge gained from the 

PROMISE grants. Under the proposed Transition Model System (TMS), services and supports 

would be delivered through a comprehensive coordinated system designed to improve career 

preparation, postsecondary education, and competitive employment and include a consortium of 

key system representatives such as vocational rehabilitation, secondary and postsecondary 

education, community rehabilitation providers; disability support service providers, business and 

employers, and families. TMS projects would identify, implement, and test core components of a 

transition system service delivery model that would be validated through a rigorous evaluation of 

the model system. The target population would be broader than under the PROMISE program 

which is limited to children who receive SSI and would include youth with disabilities ages 14-24 

who are receiving services under the IDEA or accommodations pursuant to section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act, as well as youth with disabilities who have dropped out or are at risk of 

dropping out of high school.

The Department estimates that at least $15 million would be needed to support the cost of the 

proposed 5-year TMS projects. If sufficient funds become available to support the TMS 

demonstration, the proposed demonstration grant(s) to be awarded under the Demonstration and 

Training authority under section 303 of the Rehabilitation Act would be integrated as a 

component of this more comprehensive system model.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-21

American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services

In fiscal year 2015, the Department would set aside $40.5 million for grants under the American 

Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services (AIVRS) program. The request would enable the 

Department to provide support for about 89 tribal VR projects, including 32 new awards and 

57 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 2013 2014 2015

Individuals receiving services 1 1,003,000 1,003,000 1,005,000

Individuals with significant disabilities as a percent 

of all individuals receiving services 93% 93% 93%

Total number of cases closed 490,000 489,500 489,000

Individuals whose cases were closed and received 

VR services 340,500 340,000 339,500

Individuals achieving an employment outcome 2 182,715 183,300 184,000

Individuals with significant disabilities as a percent 

of all individuals achieving an employment 

outcome 91.5% 91.5% 91.5%

Note: Data for fiscal years 2013 - 2015 are projections based on actual data for fiscal years 2011 and 2012 and 

preliminary data for fiscal year 2013 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-22

American Indian vocational rehabilitation services

Program funding 2013 2014 2015

Project funding:

New project funding 0 1 $21,195 $15,380

Continuation funding $37,224 2,3 $15,997 2,3 $25,100 3

Peer review of new award 0 $9 $8

Number of projects:

New projects 0 48 32

Continuation 85 37 57

Total projects 85 85 89

1 In order to implement the recommendation from a GAO report (GAO12-348) that the Department review its 

practices with respect to eligibility requirements of the AIVRS program and take appropriate action with respect to 

grants made to tribes that do not have Federal or State reservations, the Department cancelled the program’s FY 2012 

and FY 2013 competitions and published 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. The Department conducted 

much of that review and is continuing the process of tribal consultation. In the meantime, the Department determined 

that it is in the best interest of the program to hold a competition for FY 2014 while it proceeds with the process of 

regulating on the eligibility requirements of the AIVRS program. 2 The total amount of continuation funding shown in the table does not include 3 projects for which the FY 2011-

2014 continuation costs were paid in FY 2010. These costs were paid from unobligated funds that became available 

as a result of the reallotment of funds under the VR State Grants program carried out pursuant to section 110(b)(2). 3 The total amount of continuation funding shown in the table does not include 2 projects for which the FY 2012-

2015 continuation costs were paid in FY 2011. These costs were paid from unobligated funds that became available 

as a result of the reallotment of funds under the VR State Grants program carried out pursuant to section 110(b)(2).

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 2015 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by this 

program. Fiscal year 2013 data for the VR State Grants and the American Indian VR Services 

programs will be available in May of 2014.

VR State Grants

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

program will achieve high quality employment.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-23

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

2010 80% 48%

2011 70 54

2012 55 57

2013 57

2014 59

2015 60

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 

2010 67% 54%

2011 60 62

2012 60 67

2013 62

2014 62

2015 64

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 2012, the target set for the group of general and combined State VR agencies was 

exceeded and performance on this measure improved as compared to fiscal year 2011, with two 

additional agencies meeting the 55.8 percent performance criteria. The group of State VR 

agencies serving individuals who are blind also met their fiscal year 2012 target for this measure. 

As compared to fiscal year 2011, one additional State VR agency for individuals who are blind 

met the 68.9 percent performance criteria in fiscal year 2012. 

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 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-24

fiscal year 2011 when the number of individuals who achieved an employment outcome 

increased by 3.7 percent. Fiscal year 2012 data show continued progress, with a 1.1 percent 

increase in employment outcomes. However, performance among States still continues to vary. 

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

2010 97% 95%

2011 97 93

2012 95 96

2013 95

2014 95

2015 96

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

2010 80% 83%

2011 80 92

2012 85 92

2013 90

2014 92

2015 92

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 2012, the performance of the general and combined 

agencies on this measure increased from the prior year and the target was exceeded. In fiscal 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-25

year 2012, only 2 of the 56 general and combined agencies did not meet the performance 

criterion. In 2012, performance for the group of agencies for the blind remained the same as in 

the previous year and continued to exceed the target with only two agencies not performing at 

the 65 percent criterion. 

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

2010 89% 89%

2011 89 93

2012 90 89

2013 91

2014 92

2015 92

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

2010 100% 96%

2011 100 96

2012 100 96

2013 100

2014 100

2015 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 

2012, the performance of general and combined agencies on this measure fell back to the 2010 

level (89 percent)and the 90 percent GPRA target was not 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.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-26

Efficiency Measures

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

The Department 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

2010 70% 70%

2011 70 68

2012 70 68

2013 70

2014 70

2015 70

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

2010 70% 58%

2011 70 63

2012 63 63

2013 63

2014 65

2015 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 2012, the average annual cost per participant for general and combined State vocational 

rehabilitation agencies was $2,711 with a range (excluding the outlying areas) of $1,302 to 

$5,788. For agencies for the blind, the average annual cost per participant was $7,355 with a 

range from $3,819 to $16,266. In comparison, the fiscal year 2011 average annual cost per 

participant for general and combined State vocational rehabilitation agencies was $2,811, while 

for agencies for the blind it was $7,109. Only the agencies for the blind met the fiscal year 2012 

performance target. In fiscal year 2012, 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), the same as in fiscal year 2011. Of the 24 agencies for the 

blind, 15 (63 percent) had an average cost per participant of no more than $8,000 – the same 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-27

number as in 2011. The targets for fiscal year 2012 and subsequent years for agencies for the 

blind were revised in fiscal year 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

2010 74% 73%

2011 74 70

2012 74 69

2013 74

2014 74

2015 74

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

2010 65% 71%

2011 65 67

2012 66 58

2013 68

2014 68

2015 68

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 2012, 37 of the 54 general and combined VR agencies reporting data for 

this measure (69 percent) demonstrated an average annual consumer expenditure rate of at 

least 83 percent and the target was not met (the American Samoa and Kentucky General 

agencies did not report data). 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 2012, 14 of the 24 

agencies for the blind (58 percent) had an average annual consumer expenditure rate of at least 

70 percent, a decrease of 2 agencies and 9 percent from the prior year. The target was not met; 

however, the average consumer expenditure rate for all agencies only decreased by 1 percent, 

from 73 percent in 2011 to 72 percent in 2012. The average annual consumer service 

expenditure rate for all agencies for the blind ranged from 47 percent to 87 percent. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-28

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.

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

after receiving services under an individualized plan for employment.

Year Target Actual

2010 66% 62%

2011 66 63

2012 64 62

2013 65

2014 65

2015 65

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

employment outcome continue to increase in fiscal year 2012. annually along with the number of 

projects funded under the program. In fiscal year 2012, the 85 projects operating in that fiscal 

year (projects funded with fiscal year 2011 appropriations) assisted a total of 1,856 American 

Indians with disabilities to achieve an employment outcome. Data for fiscal year 2012 show that 

62.3 percent of the 2,977 individuals with disabilities who exited the program after receiving 

services achieved an employment outcome. There was a very slight decrease in overall 

performance as compared to the previous year (62.6 percent in 2011) and the target for this 

measure was not met. However, there is a wide variation in the percentage of individuals who 

achieved an employment outcome reported by AIVRS projects. Fiscal year 2013 data will be 

available in May 2014.

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.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-29

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. 

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

employment outcome of no more than $35,000.

Year Target Actual

2010 70% 71%

2011 72 72 

2012 72 76

2013 72

2014 72

2015 74

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 2012, 76 percent 

of the projects demonstrated an average annual cost per employment outcome of no more than 

$35,000 and the target for this measure was exceeded. The overall average cost per 

employment outcome for the 85 projects reporting data was approximately $21,171. However, 

the cost per employment outcome varied significantly across projects. 

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

participant of no more than $10,000.

Year Target Actual

2010 78% 86%

2011 78 85

2012 84 88

2013 85

2014 86

2015 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 2012, 85 AIVRS projects reported serving a total of 8,044 

American Indians with disabilities. For fiscal year 2012, 88 percent of the projects demonstrated 

an average annual cost per participant of no more than $10,000. The overall average annual 

cost per participant for the 81 projects reporting data was approximately $4,804. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Vocational rehabilitation State grants

K-30

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 2015 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 2015 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority: 

2014 2015 Change

$12,000 $12,000 0

_________________

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

program in FY 2015 through appropriations language. 

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 Governor is required to redesignate the CAP to 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. 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 with the States and outlying areas based on population estimates and after 

satisfying minimum allocations. The fiscal year 2013 State distributions were 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. The fiscal year 

2015 State distributions would be based on the July 1, 2013 estimates published on December 

30, 2013. 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)

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

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

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

2013............................................................11,600

2014............................................................12,000

FY 2015 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $12 million for the CAP in fiscal year 2015, the same amount as 

the fiscal year 2014 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 2012 show that, nationwide, CAPs responded to 47,109 requests 

for information and provided extensive services to 7,005 individuals. Slightly more than 91 

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

recipients of services from the VR State Grants program. In 88 percent of all cases, issues
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Client assistance State grants

K-33

were related to the VR process or delivery of VR services. This data also demonstrates that in 

36 percent of the cases closed, CAPs enabled the individuals to advocate for themselves 

through the explanation of policies; 18 percent resulted in the development or implementation of 

an Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE); and 15 percent of these cases resulted in the 

reestablishment of communication between the individuals and other parties. In addition, 66 

percent of the cases requiring action by the CAP on behalf of the individual were resolved in the 

individual’s favor.

Examples of CAP activities during FY 2012 include:

• In New York, a 41-year-old Hispanic male with a substance abuse disability contacted CAP 

for assistance concerning his individualized plan for employment. The consumer stated he 

asked his counselor for State VR agency support in receiving training for a level two training 

program of heavy equipment operation. The VR counselor referred him to a local vocational 

skills training program for heavy equipment operation training, but only for level one training. 

The consumer reported that his VR counselor made the decision for the consumer to 

receive level one training against his stated wishes and felt he had no choice but to comply 

in order to continue receiving VR services.

After the successful completion of his training program, the consumer contacted CAP for 

assistance to achieve his intended training goal. Initially, CAP contacted the Director of 

Admission Services who confirmed that the consumer would be more marketable if he 

received the level two training. CAP contacted the VR agency counselor and tried to 

negotiate on behalf of consumer. After failing to resolve the matter with the VR counselor, 

CAP contacted the counselor’s supervisor to resolve the matter at the lowest level. The 

supervisor initially supported the counselor’s decision, stating the consumer was employable 

with his current skills and experience. CAP provided the VR agency supervisor with labor 

market information and possible employment opportunities with level two training skills. The 

supervisor investigated this information with the school and the Department of Labor. 

Following additional negotiation with CAP, the supervisor agreed to support the level two 

training for the consumer. The consumer’s IPE was amended and the consumer was 

referred to the vocational training program for level two training.

• In Minnesota, a female with a severe visual impairment is self-employed as an assistive 

technology trainer, motivational speaker, and singer. Although the VR agency had provided 

her with VR services for several years without incident, the parties ran into difficulty when 

the woman’s obsolete Braille display reader and note-taker needed to be replaced and 

upgraded. An exploratory technology evaluation was completed by an assistive technology 

(AT) specialist employed by the VR agency. The AT specialist recommended a specific type 

of Braille display that is used by the evaluator for his own personal needs. This 

recommendation was made without observing the consumer read Braille or use a Braille 

reader. The consumer determined that the Braille display chosen for her would not meet her 

particular needs and requested funding for a Braille display that would better meet her 

vocational needs. When the VR agency denied her funding for the AT requested, the 

consumer appealed the decision and requested a Fair Hearing. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Client assistance State grants

K-34

In an effort to assist the consumer, CAP staff provided extensive assistance before and after 

the hearing date, advising her on hearing procedures, helping her frame her arguments, 

plan her presentation of testimony and evidence, and providing her with research findings 

regarding legal standards for the hearing decision. The hearing was successful and resulted 

in the administrative law judge’s decision in the consumer’s favor. The VR agency worked 

with the consumer to provide her with the funding needed for the requested Braille display

reader, which met the consumer’s employment needs.

• A California male with a traumatic brain injury (TBI) contacted CAP regarding the denial of 

funding for educational training as a State certified court interpreter. The consumer had met 

with his VR counselor soon after being found eligible for VR services and requested funding 

to become a court interpreter. However, the consumer’s VR counselor did not agree with his 

choice of employment goal due to the results of a neurological evaluation and VR 

counselor’s belief that the client did not have the capacity to succeed at his requested goal 

of a court interpreter. The consumer refused to sign his IPE due to the disagreement of 

services needed to obtain his vocational goal. 

The CAP advocate reviewed the neurological assessment used to deny the consumer’s 

participation in the training program, which did not include current and previous relevant 

medical information available from the consumer’s treating neurologist at a rehabilitation 

center that the consumer had been attending for the prior three years since sustaining the 

TBI. The CAP advocate discussed these findings with the VR agency and noted that State 

and Federal regulations require that the VR agency request all available medical 

documentation when determining eligibility and the provision of services. The CAP advocate 

suggested that the consumer be allowed the opportunity to take the program entrance 

screening prior to the VR agency making any determination. 

After considering the CAP advocate’s findings and recommendation, the VR agency agreed 

to fund a certificate program at a local State university extension program contingent on the 

consumer passing the screening exam required for admission to the program. The 

consumer passed the screening exam and was accepted into the interpreter program. 

Subsequently, the consumer’s IPE was developed to provide services and supports 

consistent with the consumer’s employment goal. The consumer likewise agreed to 

maintain passing grades in all classes and report any issues that may inhibit his progress 

towards certification consistent with the State agency’s policy.

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

Measures 2013 2014 2015 

Information inquiries/referrals 47,100 47,100 47,100

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

NOTE: Data for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 are projected from actual data collected for fiscal year 2012 in 

which CAPs responded to 47,109 requests for information and provided extensive services to 7,005 individuals. 

Data for fiscal year 2013 will be available in December of 2014. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Client assistance State grants

K-35

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 

2015 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 

2010 60% 64%

2011 65 87

2012 70 80

2013 70

2014 72

2015 74

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, 

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. 

Based on fiscal year 2009 performance on this measure, the Administration increased the 

performance target from 65 to 70 percent for 2012. While the number of CAPs reporting 

success for this measure decreased in fiscal year 2010, performance improved in fiscal year 

2011 to 87 percent—the highest percentage since this measure was established in 1999. 

Performance on this measure for fiscal year 2012 decreased, but remains above the target for 

the year. Performance data for fiscal year 2013 will be available in December 2014.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Client assistance State grants

K-36

Objective: Resolve cases at lowest possible level. 

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

(ADR).

Year Target Actual 

2010 86% 98%

2011 93 97

2012 93 98

2013 98

2014 98

2015 98

Additional information: Since fiscal year 2007, the percentage of cases being resolved 

through the use of ADR has ranged from about 97 to 99 percent and the program has 

consistently met the performance targets established for this measure. Targets for fiscal year 

2013 and future years were raised to reflect the high level of performance. Performance data 

for fiscal year 2013 will be available in December 2014
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-37

Supported employment State grants

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title VI, Part B)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2015 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority: 

2014 2015 Change

$27,548 0 -$27,548

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. No appropriations language or reauthorizing language is 

sought for fiscal year 2015.

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. 

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.

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. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-38

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. 

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 2013 allotments were based on the 

July 1, 2011 estimates published in December 2011. The fiscal year 2014 State allotments are 

based on the July 1, 2012 estimates published in December 2012. 

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

Year (dollars in thousands)

2010...........................................................$29,181

2011.............................................................29,123

2012.............................................................29,068

2013.............................................................27,548

2014.............................................................27,5481

FY 2015 BUDGET REQUEST

No funds are requested for fiscal year 2015 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 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-39

supplemental source of dedicated funds, the SE State Grants 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; 

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 FY 2012 RSA-911 Case Service Report show that approximately 35,700

individuals whose cases were closed that year after receiving services had a goal of supported 

employment on their individualized plan for employment at some time during their participation 

in the VR program. Of those individuals, about 57 percent had their supported employment 

services paid solely with VR State Grant funds and about 43 percent received at least some 

support for their supported employment services from Title VI-B Supported Employment funds. 

These numbers do not include those individuals who were still receiving supported employment 

services at the close of the fiscal year. On a national level, individuals who had a goal of 

supported employment represented about 11 percentof the total individuals whose cases were 

closed after receiving VR services in FY 2012. However, RSA-911 2012 State data indicate 

there is variation among State agencies in the percentage of individuals who have supported 

employment (SE) as an employment goal.

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 is unavailable 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. 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 recent re-design of the RSA 911 data collection, the Rehabilitation 

Services Administration (RSA) 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 revised data collection form went into effect on 

October 1, 2013.

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 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-40

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 2015 through the VR State Grants program to at least as many individuals as they did 

under the two separate authorities. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands)

Measures 2013 2014 2015

Individuals with a supported 

employment IPE goal who received 

services and exited the program.

35,720 35,720 35,720

Employment outcomes: 1 18,610 18,610 18,610

Supported employment outcomes 2 16,970 16,970 16,970

Employment without supports in an 

integrated setting3 1,570 1,570 1,570

Other employment outcomes4 70 70 70

Minority outreach $275 $275 0

Note: Estimates for FYs 2013, 2014, and 2015 are based on actual 2010, 2011, and 2012 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). Under the Administration’s FY 2015 request, all VR services, 

including SE services, would be provided with VR State Grants funds.

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. 

Goal: Individuals with significant disabilities with a goal of supported employment will 

achieve high quality employment.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-41

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

2010 94% 92%

2011 94 93

2012 94 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 2012, 18,613 individuals, or 

53 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, 94 percent of 

individuals with a supported employment goal achieved a competitive employment outcome, a 

slight increase over the prior year, and the performance target was met. 

Fiscal year 2012 RSA 911 Case Service Report data show that the total number of individuals 

with a supported employment goal who achieved an employment outcome (employment in the 

integrated labor market and receiving ongoing supports) increased from 17,566 to 18,613, or 

about 6 percent over the prior year. The percentage of individuals with a supported employment 

goal achieving an employment outcome who obtained a supported employment outcome was 

91 percent in fiscal year 2012. Data for fiscal year 2013 are expected to be available in April

2014. 

Measure: Average weekly earnings for individuals with significant disabilities who achieved a 

supported employment outcome.

Year Target Actual

2010 $203 $208

2011 203 205

2012 203 211

2013 205

2014 208
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-42

Additional information: The Department established a 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 2012 data show that the average weekly earnings of 

individuals with significant disabilities who achieved a supported employment outcome was 

$211, an increase of about 2.9 percent from the previous year ($205). The performance target 

was exceeded for the third consecutive year. As a result, targets for 2013 and subsequent 

years have been increased.

Efficiency Measure

Objective: Ensure that State VR agencies effectively use Supported Employment Grant funds 

to achieve supported employment outcomes.

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

2010 75% 67%

2011 70 81

2012 75 75

2013 75

2014 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 the 4 territories because they receive less than $100,000 in SE Grants 

funds. In fiscal year 2010, performance remained at 67 percent, the same as in fiscal year 

2009. As a result, the performance targets for fiscal year 2011 and fiscal year 2012 were 

adjusted to reflect expectations for improvement from that level. However, in FY 2011 

performance increased significantly and exceeded the target with 81 percent of the performance 

group achieving at least 30 supported employment outcomes per $100,000. In FY 2012, 

performance decreased to 75 percent; however, the target was still met. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-43

The average number of supported employment outcomes per $100,000 remained unchanged at

75 in fiscal years 2011 and 2012, with a median of 56 supported employment outcomes per 

$100,000. However it should be noted that there is significant variation among agencies in the 

performance group, with the average number in fiscal year 2012 ranging from 3 (Hawaii) to 232

(New Jersey), 

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 

State agencies have with regard to SE. 

The Department recently completed 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 final step 

in data collection was 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, released in August, 2013, contained the 

following findings:

• The majority of individuals with an SE goal had cognitive disabilities (53.5 percent). More 

than half (55.7 percent) of individuals with an SE goal were age 25 and older.

• Compared to other individuals receiving VR services without an SE goal, individuals with 

an SE goal were more likely to be under age 25 (44.3 percent compared to 33.9 percent) 

and more likely to have public support as their primary support at application 

(49.2 percent compared to 27.0 percent).

• Supported employment (Title VI-B) spending was a very small percentage of all agency 

expenditures on services: 5.5 percent in general agencies, 2.5 percent in combined 

agencies, and 2.1 percent in blind agencies.

• 32 agencies limited the use of supported employment funds to specific services, 

including on-site job coaching, job development, job placement, and supplemental 

assessments.

• Among the 38 responding agencies that used multiple methods to reimburse SE service 

providers, 15 agencies said performance-based methods resulted in more competitive 

employment outcomes; 10 said fee-for-service; 4 said contract/slot-based, 7 said other, 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-44

and 6 said the methods are not comparable. The other 28 agencies did not use multiple 

methods to reimburse SE service providers. 

• Agencies that purchased more of their services tended to have a higher concentration of 

SE outcomes among all employment outcomes.

• Employment rates ranged from a low of 41.5 percent for physical impairments to a high 

of 54.3 percent for communicative impairments and for cognitive impairments.

• Average weekly earnings ranged from $157.70 for individuals with visual impairments to 

$209.30 for individuals with communicative impairments.

• Overall and for general and combined agencies, most limits on availability of SE services 

were external. Insufficient funding from other partners or agencies was ranked as the 

most common limit of availability of program services.

This study was 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 study 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
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Supported employment State grants

K-45

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. 

• 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.” 

In addition, the report recommended that RSA and Medicaid 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-46

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title III, Section 304)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2015 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority: 

2014 2015 Change

$1,196 0 -$1,196

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. No appropriations language or new reauthorizing legislation 

is sought for FY 2015. 

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 with emphasis 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)

2010.................................................................$2,239

2011...................................................................1,856

2012...................................................................1,262

2013................................................................... 1,196 

2014................................................................... 1,196 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers

K-47

FY 2015 BUDGET REQUEST

No funds are requested for the MSFW program in fiscal year 2015, as the four current grantees 

will receive their final year of support in fiscal year 2014. As in previous years, the 

Administration proposes to eliminate funding for this small, duplicative competitive grants 

program as services can be provided under the larger VR State grants program. The 

Administration believes that elimination of this separate program improves administrative 

inefficiencies and helps 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 

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. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers

K-48

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. State VR 

agencies should have resources to provide services that would benefit migrant or seasonal 

farmworkers, along with other unserved or underserved populations under the Administration’s 

request for the VR State grants program. 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 2013 2014 2015

Program funding:

Continuation projects $797 1$569 0

Minority outreach 399 2 627 3 0

Funding Total 1,196 1,196 0

Number of projects:

Continuation projects 4 4 0

_________________

1 This amount includes $121,889 that was used to cover a portion of FY 2014 continuation costs. 2 The Rehabilitation Act allows the RSA Commissioner flexibility in determining how it will meet the1 percent setaside for Minority Outreach activities required under section 21 of the Rehabilitation Act. 3 The FY 2014 appropriation of $1.196 million for this program exceeds the amount needed to fully fund 

continuation costs. The excess funds provided in FY 2014 will be used to support the Minority Outreach set-aside.

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(MSFWs) with disabilities 

receive Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services and achieve employment.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers

K-49

Measure: The percentage of migrant or seasonal farmworkers with disabilities served by both

the VR State Grants program and the VR Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers projects who 

were placed in employment.

Year Target Actual 

2010 65% 60%

2011 65 52

2012 65 62

2013 65

2014 65

Additional information:

This measure is calculated by dividing the number of MSFWs who obtained employment by the 

total number of MSFWs served by both the VR agencies and the projects funded under this 

program. In fiscal year 2011, 65 MSFWs were served and 34 obtained employment –

52.4 percent, which did not meet our target of 65 percent. Fiscal year 2012 data indicate that 

the target was not met with 62.3 percent of individuals served under these programs (VR State 

Grants and MSFW projects) being placed in employment. 

A fiscal year 2015 performance target was not set for this measure because the Administration 

is proposing to eliminate the separate funding authority for the MSFW program in fiscal year 

2015.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-50

Training

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title III, Section 302 (a)-(g)(2), (h)-(i), Section 303(c)-(d))

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2015 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority: 

2014 2015 Change

$33,657 $30,188 -$3,469 _________________

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

program in FY 2015 through appropriations language. 

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

Long-Term 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-51

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

2010................................................................................... $37,766

2011..................................................................................... 35,582

2012..................................................................................... 35,515

2013..................................................................................... 33,657

2014..................................................................................... 33,657

FY 2015 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $30.188 million for the Training program in fiscal year 2015, a 

decrease of $3.469 million from the fiscal year 2014 appropriation. This reduction from the 

2014 level reflects the elimination of funding for the In-Service Training program. The 

Administration does not seek funding for this program because in-service training activities can 

be carried out under the larger Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants program. In fiscal 

year 2015, 76 percent of the funds requested would be used to support continuation costs.

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 Department 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 

been to address the shortage of qualified State VR agency staff by supporting long-term training 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-52

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 2013 data from State VR agencies, there 

were 1,622 vacancies out of the 17,655 total positions nationwide in these offices. Over the 

next 5 years, these agencies projected an additional 5,201 vacancies. This would mean that, in 

the next 5 years, State VR agencies may need to hire as much as 39 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.

In fiscal year 2015, the Administration 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 2015 would be used to support awards in this area and in the Long-Term Training 

program. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands)

Program Funding: 2013 2014 2015 footnote

Long-Term Training:

Long-Ter m New 0 $13,010 TBD

Long-Ter m Continuations $17,119 1 4,233 $14,544

Long-Ter m Subtotal 17,119 17,243 TBD

Technical Assistance & Continuing 

Education:

TACE New 0 8,000 TBD

TACE Continuations 9,190 0 8,000

TACE Subtotal 9,190 8,000 TBD

Short-Term Training:

Short-Ter m New 0 0 TBD

Short-Ter m Continuations 200 200 0

Short-Ter m Subtotal 200 200 TBD

Unit In-Service Training: 2

In-Ser vice New 0 5,256 0

In-Ser vice Continuations 5,048 0 0

In-Ser vice Subtotal 5,048 5,256 0
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-53

Program Funding: 2013 2014 2015 footnote

Training for Interpreters for Individuals 

who are Deaf and Deaf-Blind:

Interpr eter Trai ning New 0 0 TBD

Interpr eter Trai ning Continuations $2,100 $2,100 0

Interpr eter Trai ning Subtotal 2,100 2,100 TBD

General Training:

Gener al New 0 500 TBD

Gener al Continuations 0 0 $500

Gener al Subtotal 0 0 TBD

Program Totals:

Total New 0 26,766 6,827

Total Continuations 33,657 6,533 23,044

Peer review of new award applications 0 21 15

Minority Outreach 3 0 337 302

Program Total 33,657 33,657 30,188

_________________________

NOTE: Amounts listed as “TBD” in FY 2015 reflect topical areas for which decisions on FY 2015 

competitions are not yet final. 1 The FY 2013 awards total includes approximately $3,144 thousand in FY 2013 funds used to 

support FY 2014 continuation costs. 2 Under the Administration’s FY 2015 proposal, funding would no longer be provided for this activity 

under the Training program. 3 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.

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 2015 and future years, and 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.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-54

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 

2010 53% 39%

2011 53 37

2012 53 35

2013 55

2014 45

2015 47

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 decreased more 

slowly from 2009 through 2012. While program graduates are not mandated to meet their 

service obligation by working in State VR agencies, the Administration believes that these

agencies should be the main employer of these graduates, especially given the current and 

future shortages outlined above. This overall downward trend may have been 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 Masters-level graduates, 81 percent were fulfilling their service 

obligation in some form of acceptable employment in 2012, with roughly 57 percent of the 

employed graduates opting to work in settings other than the State VR agency. Over the past 

eight years, the proportion of graduates fulfilling their payback requirements in settings other 

than the State VR agency has, in general, been slowly increasing. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-55

Measure: The percentage of RSA-supported graduates fulfilling their payback requirements 

through acceptable employment.

Year Target Actual 

2010 86% 83%

2011 87 83

2012 87 81

2013 87

2014 85

2015 85

Additional Information: Using the annual Payback Reporting Form, grantees are required to 

report the number of Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA)-supported graduates fulfilling 

their payback requirements through acceptable employment. This measure captures all 

program graduates who received RSA-supported 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. The Department 

does not expect data on this issue from the revised form to be available until winter 2015 at the 

earliest.

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 

2010 75% 84%

2011 76 86

2012 77

2013 78

2014 78

2015 80
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-56

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. Performance on this measure increased by 9 percentage 

points in 2010, which the Department believes 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. The Department has recently changed the way it collects data on this measure and, as 

a result, will not be collecting data on this measure for 2012. Data for 2013 will be available in 

summer 2014.

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 

2010 $10,702 $23,477

2011 10,702 23,721

2012 10,702 20,275

2013 24,000

2014 24,000

2015 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 

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 2010 measure using the revised methodology in order to allow cross-year 

comparisons. The targets for 2010 through 2012 are based on the previous methodology. The 

higher Federal cost per RSA-supported graduate under the new methodology is in line with 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Training

K-57

similar measures in other programs supporting training at the Masters level. However, there 

remains wide variation across types of programs and projects. The decrease in Federal cost 

in 2012 is because only one project qualified for inclusion in this measure in that year, and may 

not actually reflect any improvements in efficiency. The Department is currently reviewing its 

methodology for calculating this measure to ensure that it accurately and reliably reflects the 

Federal cost per Masters-level graduate. Data for 2013 are expected to be available in 

fall 2014.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-58

Demonstration and training programs

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title III, Section 303)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2015 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority:

2014 2015 Change

$5,796 $5,796 0

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2004. The Department proposes to continue funding this program 

in FY 2015 through appropriations language.

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-59

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

.................................... (dollars in thousands)

2010...................................................................$11,601

2011.......................................................................6,459

2012.......................................................................5,325

2013.......................................................................5,046

2014.......................................................................5,796

FY 2015 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $5.796 million for the Demonstration and Training programs in 

fiscal year 2015, the same as the fiscal year 2014 level. The request includes about $4 milion 

for new awards and the remaining funds would be used to support continuation costs for awards 

made in fiscal year 2014. 

Fiscal year 2014 is the last year of Federal support for the 5-year Social Security Disability 

Insurance/Supplemental Security Income (SSDI/SSI) demonstration project that began in fiscal 

year 2010, and was designed to identify State VR agency best practices for improving the 

employment outcomes of SSDI/SSI beneficiaries. In fiscal year 2015, the Office of Special 

Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) plans to propose a new priority that would 

support demonstration grants to assist State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) agencies and their 

partner programs to improve employment outcomes for youths with significant disabilities 

transitioning from secondary school to postsecondary education and employment. Five-year 

grants would be awarded to develop and implement model VR strategies and services for 

youths with significant disabilities that will lead to increased college completion and preparation 

for employment. State VR agencies would be required to collaborate with State and local 

partners, such as State and local education agencies, postsecondary education institutions, 

employers, and community rehabilitation providers to demonstrate promising strategies and 

practices that would prepare individuals with significant disabilities to make informed decisions 

about postsecondary education and employment, improve access to postsecondary education 

and training, as well as assist such individuals to be successful during the early critical period 

following their transition from secondary education. 

Projects would be required to document and report uniform cross-project data that would be 

used to evaluate the results of the projects consistent with project measures that would be 

published in the final priority. The knowledge gained from the outcomes and results of these 

projects would be translated for use in providing technical assistance and professional 

development to State VR agency and other key personnel that work in coordination with VR 

agencies to assist individuals with significant disabilities to achieve their postsecondary 

education and employment goals. This activity supports the White House focus on college to 

career emphasis and the Secretary’s goals related to college access, college completion, and 

preparing students for college and career.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Demonstration and training programs

K-60

In fiscal year 2015, funds ($1.715 million) would also be used to pay the continuation costs of 

projects that the Administration plans to award under this program during fiscal year 2014, 

including parent information and training, braille training, and technical assistance grants. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands) 

Program funding and number of awards: 2013 2014 2015

Program funding:

Demonstration projects

 New Transition projects 0 0 $3967

 SSDI/SSI Continuations $4,746 $4,025 0

Technical assistance activities

TAContinuation award 0 0 400

TANew award 0 400 1 0

A Subtotal 0 400 400

Braille training 

Braille Continuation awards 300 0 330

Braille New awards 0 330 0

BrailleSubtotal 300 330 330

Parent information and training

Par ent Continuation awards 0 0 985

Par ent New awards 2 0 985 0

Par ent Subtotal 0 985 985

Program improvement activities 0 50 50

Peer review of new award applications 0 6 6

Minority Outreach 0 3 0 3 58

Total---Program funding 5,046 5,796 5,796

Number of awards:

 Continuation awards 4 1 11

 New awards 0 11 1

 Total---Number of awards 4 12 12 __________________________

1 These funds will be used to jointly fund a new Transition Technical Assistance Center with the 

Office of Special Education Programs.

2 In FY 2014, the Department intends to award 6 Parent Information and Training Centers as well 

one National Parent Technical Assistance Center. 3 The Rehabilitation Act allows the RSA Commissioner flexibility in determining how it will meet the 1 

percent set-aside for Minority Outreach activities required under section 21 of the Rehabilitation Act. In FYs 

2013 and 2014, no funds will be used from this program to meet this requirement.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Demonstration and training programs

K-61

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 2013, 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 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 SSDI served by 

State VR 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.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-62

Independent living

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title VII, Parts B and C, and Chapter 2)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2015 Authorization: 01

Budget Authority: 

2014 2015 Change

Independent living State grants $22,878 $22,878 0

Centers for independent living 78,305 78,305 0

Services for older individuals 

who are blind

33,317 33,317 0

_________________

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

program in FY 2015 through appropriations language.

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 2013 State allotments were based on the 

July 1, 2011 population estimates released by the Census Bureau in December 2011. The 

fiscal year 2014 State distributions are based on the July 1, 2012 estimates released in 

December 2012. The fiscal year 2015 allotments would be based on the July 1, 2013 estimates 

published by the Census Bureau in December 2013. 

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-63

• 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 2013, 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-64

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 2013 allotments were based on the July 1, 2011 estimates of the 

population of individuals age 55 and older published by the Census Bureau in December 2011. 

The fiscal year 2014 and 2015 State allotments are based on the July 1, 2012 population 

estimates released in December 2012. The fiscal year 2015 allotments will be revised when 

new population estimates by age group become available. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-65

Funding levels for the past 5 fiscal years were:

Independent living State grants

Year (dollars in thousands)

2010..........................................................$23,450

2011............................................................23,403

2012............................................................23,359

2013............................................................22,137

2014............................................................22,878

Centers for independent living

Year (dollars in thousands)

2010..........................................................$80,266

2011............................................................80,105

2012............................................................79,953

2013............................................................75,772

2014............................................................78,305

Services for older individuals who are blind

Year (dollars in thousands)

2010..........................................................$34,151

2011............................................................34,083

2012............................................................34,018

2013............................................................32,239

2014............................................................33,317

FY 2015 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $22.88 million for the Independent Living State Grants (IL State 

Grants) program, $78.31 million for the Centers for Independent Living program (CIL), and 

$33.32 million for the Independent Living Services for Older Individuals Who are Blind 

(Older Blind) program. The request for each of these programs is the same as the fiscal 

year 2014 appropriation.

Independent Living State Grants and Centers for Independent Living

The Administration requests $22.88 million for the State Grants program and $78.31 million for 

the CIL program, the same level as the fiscal year 2014 appropriation. Funds requested for the 

State Grants program would continue the Department's support of 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. A majority of State Grant funds are used to provide independent living 

services, either directly or through grants and contracts with centers for independent living and 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-66

other providers. These services include independent living skills training, communication 

services, and the provision of assistive technology devices and equipment.

The request for the CIL program would continue support for existing centers, including any new 

center grants awarded in 2015. As funding for this program has increased, approximately 75 

new centers have been funded since 2000, particularly in the years immediately following the 

Recovery Act. These new and existing centers provide essential services that help individuals 

with disabilities to live independently and participate as productive members of their 

communities.

Independent Living Services for Older Individuals Who Are Blind 

The Administration requests $33.32 million for the Independent Living Services for Older 

Individuals who are Blind program for fiscal year 2015, the same as the fiscal year 2014 

appropriation. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2012 American Community Survey, 

6.5 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 comprise a larger 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 older 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. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands)

Measures: 2013 2014 2015

Centers for Independent Living: (CIL)

CILNumber of Grantees 356 356 356

CILMinimum State Allocation $813 $839 $839

CIL Average State allocation $1,405 $1,452 $1,452

CIL Minority outreach $758 $783 $783

CIL Training and Technical Assistance $1,364 $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 $611 $631 $631

OIB Minority outreach $322 $333 $333
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-67

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands) (continued)

Measures: 2013 2014 2015

Independent Living State Grants: (IL)

IL Number of Grantees 77 77 77

IL Minimum State award $295 $295 $295

IL Average State award $419 $433 $433

IL Minority outreach $221 $229 $229

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 2015 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.

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

2010 69% 60%

2011 70 62

2012 70 61

2013 71

2014 71

2015 71
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-68

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

2010 74% 69%

2011 76 67

2012 76 70

2013 76

2014 76

2015 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

2010 86% 69%

2011 87 92

2012 87 70

2013 87

2014 87

2015 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 

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 2012 indicate that targets were not met for all the three outcome areas reported under 

these measures. However, performance on one of the measures (access to assistive 

technology) showed progress compared to the previous year. The measure on access to 

transportation returned to historically normal levels in 2012 after an unexplained spike in 2011. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-69

The third measure (access to health care) showed a slight decline in 2012. Data for 2013 are 

expected in April 2014. 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. 

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

2010 56% 54%

2011 57 54

2012 57 56

2013 58

2014 58

2015 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 (4,314 / 7,686 = 56%). The percentage of consumers who met their 

community living goal increased to 56 percent in 2012 and is slightly below the target. Data for 

2013 are expected in April 2014.

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.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-70

Measure: The percentage of Independent Living Older Blind program consumers who have 

access to previously unavailable assistive technology aids and devices.

Year Target Actual

2010 56% 57%

2011 58 52

2012 58 50

2013 58

2014 58

2015 58

Additional information: The percentage of consumers reporting access to previously 

unavailable assistive technology in 2012 declined from the prior year and fell below the target 

level for the second consecutive year. 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 by the total number of Older Blind 

program consumers (32,596 / 65,055 = 50%). Data for 2013 are expected by April 2014. 

Measure: The percentage of Independent Living Older Blind program consumers who report 

an improvement in daily living skills.

Year Target Actual

2010 58% 60%

2011 59 52

2012 59 51

2013 60

2014 60

2015 60

Additional information: The percentage of consumers reporting improvement in their daily 

living skills for 2012 declined slightly from the prior year and fell below the target level for the 

second consecutive year. This measure is calculated by dividing the number of Older Blind 

program consumers who reported improvement in daily living skills by the total number of Older 

Blind program consumers (33,331 / 65,055 = 51%). 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 2013 are 

expected by April 2014.

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 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Independent living

K-71

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 2015 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority: 

2014 2015 Change

$17,650 $17,650 0

_________________

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

program in FY 2015 through appropriations language.

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 2013 State distributions were

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. The 

fiscal year 2015 State distributions would be based on the July 1, 2013 estimates published on 

December 30, 2013.

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)

2010...........................................................$18,101

2011.............................................................18,065

2012.............................................................18,031

2013.............................................................17,088

2014.............................................................17,650

FY 2015 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $17.650 million for the PAIR program in fiscal year 2015, the same 

as the fiscal year 2014 level. The Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights (PAIR) program 

supports a state-wide 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.

During fiscal year 2012, PAIR programs reported handling 14,464 cases and responding to 

48,738 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 (15 percent), health care (13 percent), employment (12 percent), and 

housing (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 2012, 55 out of the 57 PAIR 

programs (96 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 2012 illustrate how PAIR 

programs assist individuals and bring about systemic change: 

• Arizona Center for Disability Law provided assistance to a woman with digestive disorders 

who recently moved into a semi-independent apartment that did not include a dietician as 

part of the agreed upon housing arrangement. The woman submitted follow-up letters to 

document the medical condition, but the facility would not provide the appropriate meals or 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Protection and advocacy of individual rights

K-74

waive the paid meal plans. The Center assisted the woman to file a complaint through the 

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The outcome is that the 

individual was waived from the meal plan requirement, reimbursed for all the monthly meal 

plan payments, and the facility agreed to make accommodations impacting future 

consumers with disabilities. 

• Disability Rights North Carolina (DRNC) provided assistance to a deaf individual after 

visiting a large estate tourist attraction. The individual requested in advance an interpreter

for the tour of the mansion and grounds, but was informed that they did not provide 

interpreters and could only provide a transcript of the audio tour of the house. DRNC 

provided advocacy services in meeting with estate management to explain accessibility 

requirements. The outcome is that the estate modified its accessibility policies to provide 

interpreters with advance notice, educated their customer service representatives of the new 

requirements, and developed a page within its website welcoming guests with special needs 

and how they can receive assistance. The client was personally invited back to tour the 

estate with an interpreter. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

Measures 2013 2014 2015 

Information inquiries/referrals 48,700 48,700 48,700

Individuals provided case services 14,400 14,400 14,400

________________

NOTE: Data for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 are projected from actual data collected for fiscal 

year 2012. Data for fiscal year 2013 will be available in April 2014. 

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 

2015 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.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Protection and advocacy of individual rights

K-75

Measure: The percentage of PAIR programs that reported that their systemic advocacy 

resulted in a change in policy or practice. 

Year Target Actual 

2010 85% 93%

2011 89 89

2012 91 96

2013 91

2014 91

2015 92

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. Successful performance under this measure is 

measured by the number of PAIR programs reporting a change in policy or practice that is a 

result from their intervention. The target was met in fiscal year 2012 with 55 out of the 

57 (96 percent) PAIR programs reporting success, 4 programs more than in fiscal year 2011. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-76

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

(Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2015 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority: 

2014 2015 Change

$103,970 $108,000 +$4,030

_________________

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

program in FY 2015 through appropriations language.

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 operates under a Long-Range Plan 

(LRP), published April 4, 2013 in the Federal Register, entitled “Long-Range Plan for Fiscal 

Years 2013—2017”. This plan outlines four long-term performance goals and its strategies for 

achieving these goals. These goals are:

• 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. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-77

• 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. In addition, RRTCs provide training, including graduate, pre-service, and inservice 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 

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. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-78

• 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. 

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 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-79

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)

2010.........................................................$109,241

2011...........................................................109,023

2012...........................................................108,817

2013........................................................... 103,125

2014........................................................... 103,970

FY 2015 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $108 million for the National Institute on Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research in fiscal year 2015, an increase of $4 million over the fiscal year 2014 

level for this program. About 81 percent of the funds requested would be used to cover the 

costs of grants that began in previous fiscal years ($87 million). In addition, an estimated $15.4

million would be used to fund new grant awards under a new regulatory framework that NIDRR 

intends to have in place for its research activities in fiscal year 2015. 

Through absolute priorities published in the Federal Register in fiscal year 2013 based on 

NIDRR’s revised Long-Range Plan (published in final in April 2013), NIDRR established three 

domains—employment, health and function, and community living and participation. In light of 

the need to learn more about employment practices that improve outcomes for people with 

disabilities, the Administration will expand NIDRR’s employment portfolio. For fiscal year 2015, 

NIDRR is considering announcing applications for RRTCs in the following employment areas:

• Employer Practices in Successful Employment;

• Employment Policy Research;
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-80

• Employment Outcomes for Individuals with Psychiatric Disabilities;

• Employment for Individuals who are Blind or Visually Impaired; and

• Knowledge Translation in Employment 

In fiscal year 2015, NIDRR is considering announcing applications for new RERCs in the 

following broad priority areas:

• Rehabilitation Strategies, Techniques, and Interventions; 

• Information and Communication Technologies; 

• Individual Mobility and Manipulation; and 

• Physical Access and Transportation. 

In fiscal year 2014, the Department plans to publish proposed regulations that would amend 34 

CFR Part 350 governing NIDRR’s Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers 

Program and publish final regulations in time for fiscal year 2015 competitions. NIDRR believes 

that these regulations will strengthen its overall research portfolio by expanding opportunities for 

field-initiated work within a clear framework that is designed to both encourage innovation and 

promote rigorous research, and by allowing for a regular schedule of competitions in preestablished 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 the following four types of projects. 

• 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. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-81

• 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.

These regulations would also specify the priority areas in which NIDRR plans to support new 

research. The broad priority areas, which are based on the domains in NIDRR’s recently 

published 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. 

Within each domain, NIDRR plans to structure its competitions to target its 

research/investments in four broad disability categories—physical, psychiatric, 

developmental/intellectual, and sensory disabilities. 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 rulemaking. 

NIDRR established the use of these domains beginning in fiscal year 2012 through rule-making 

on individual grant priorities under the DRRP, RRTC, and RERC programs. During fiscal year 

2015, NIDRR plans to use its new regulation for the following broad priority topics in its domain 

areas:

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.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-82

• 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. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands)

Project Type Amount of Funding Number of Awards

Project Type 2013 2014 2015 2013 2014 2015

Research Domains

Employment

Empl oyment Research: Continuations $1,000 $3,466 $5,446 2 7 11

Empl oyment Research: New awards 1,000 2,000 TBD 2 4 TBD

Subtotal 2,000 5,466 TBD 4 11 TBD

Health and Function

alth and F unction R esearch: Continuations 0 950 2,450 0 2 5

Health and Functi on R esearch: New awards 1,000 1,500 TBD 2 3 TBD

ealth and Functi on R esearch: Subtotal 1,000 2,450 TBD 0 5 TBD
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-83

Project Type Amount of Funding Number of Awards

2013 2014 2015 2013 2014 2015

Community Living and Participation

Community Li vi ng Research: Continuations 0 $950 $2,450 0 2 5

Community Li vi ng Research: New awards $1,000 1,500 TBD 2 3 TBD

ommunity Li vi ng Research: Subtotal 1,000 2,450 TBD 2 5 TBD

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Centers (RRTC)

RRTC: Continuations 12,669 15,415 16,575 18 18 20

RRTC: New awards 8,250 5,700 TBD 9 8 

 

TBD 

C: Subtotal 20,919 21,115 TBD 27 26 TBD

Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers 

(RERC)

RERC: Continuations 5,700 11,174 12,174 9 13 14

RERC: New awards 6,650 1,900 TBD 7 2

 

TBD 

RRERC: Subtotal 12,350 13,074 TBD 16 15 TBD

Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems (SCI)

SCI: Continuations 8,019 8,018 8,018 16 16 16

SCI: New awards 0 0 0 0 0 0 

SSCI: Subtotal 8,017 8,018 8,018 16 16 16

Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems (TBI)

TBI: Continuations 8,125 8,224 8,224 17 18 18

TBI: New awards 850 0 0 1 0 0

TBI: Subtotal 8,975 8,224 8,224 18 18 18

Burn Model Systems

Burn M odel: Continuations 1,850 1,850 1,850 5 5 5

Burn M odel: New awards 0 0 0 0 0 0

Burn M odel: Subtotal 1,850 1,850 1,850 5 5 5 FIP:

Field Initiated Projects (FIP)

Field Initiated: Continuations 7,621 7,191 7,800 46 43 41

FIP: Fiel d Initi ated: New awards 4,000 4,000 TBD 17 23 TBD

FIP: Fiel d Initi ated: Subtotal 11,621 11,191 TBD 63 66 TBD

Disability and Rehabilitation Research 

Projects (DRRP)

DRRP: Continuations 4,550 2,299 2,750 8 4 5

DRRP: New awards 750 1,500 TBD 1 3 TBD

DRRP: Subtotal 5,300 3,799 TBD 9 7 TBD
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-84

Project Type Amount of Funding Number of Awards

2013 2014 2015 2013 2014 2015

Advanced Rehabilitation Research and Training 

(ARRT)

ARRTContinuations $2,397 $2,250 $2,250 16 16 16

ARRTNew awards 600 600 TBD 4 4 TBD

ARRTSubtotal 2,997 2,850 TBD 20 20 TBD

Minority Outreach (Minority)

MinorityContinuations 0 1,110 1,110 0 3 3

MinorityNew awards 1,031 0 0 3 0 0

MinoritySubtotal 1,031 1,110 1,110 3 3 3

Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)

SBIR : Continuations 1,250 1,150 1,438 5 4 5

SBIR : New awards 2,375 2,188 TBD 20 15 TBD 

SBIR : Subtotal 3,625 3,338 TBD 25 19 TBD

Switzer Research Fellowships

Fellowships: New awards 505 500 430 7 7 6

ADA National Network

ADA: Continuations 12,534 12,532 12.532 12 12 12

ADA: New awards 0 0 0 0 0 0

ADA: Subtotal 12,534 12,532 12,532 12 12 12

Knowledge Translation (KT)

KT: Continuations 2,600 3,525 2,475 4 5 3

KT: New awards

 

1,000 0 TBD 1 0

 

TBD

KT: Subtotal 3,600 3,525 TBD 5 5 TBD

Subtotals

Subtotal, continuation grants 68,754 77,324 86,980 158 165 176

Subtotal new grants

 

28,629 20,919 15,392 80 72 

 

TBD

Total grants 97,383 98,243 102,372 238 237 TBD

Other Activities (Contracts) 4,803 4,927 4,728

Peer review of new grant applications

 

939 800 900 

Subtotal 5,742 5,727 5,628

Total, NIDRR 103,125 103,970 108,000
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-85

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 

2015 and future years, as well as the resources and efforts invested by those served by this 

program.

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

2010 9%

2011 15.8

2012 17.1

2013 8%

2014 8

2015 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 2012, there 

were a total of 516 currently supported NIDRR fellows, post-doc trainees and doctoral students

that produced 88 publications; of these, 17.1 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 2012 students will not appear until 2013 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 SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-86

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 2013 will be available in December 2014. Targets may be revised for 2015 after 2013

data have been compiled and reviewed. 

Measure: Percentage of NIDRR-funded grant applications that receive an average peer review 

score of 85 or higher. 

Year Target Actual

2010 96% 94%

2011 96 93

2012 96 100

2013 96

2014 96

2015 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 fiscal year 2012, one 

hundred percent of the eighty-six new awards received ratings of 85 or higher. Fiscal year 2013 

data will be available in late March 2014. 

Measure: Percentage of new grants that assess the effectiveness of interventions, programs, 

and devices using rigorous methods.

Year Target Actual

2010 60% 32%

2011 56 35

2012 61 33

2013 62

2014 36

2015 36

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. Targets for fiscal years 

2010 through 2013 were set as ambitious goals based on fiscal year 2008 data. However, 

performance on this measure has been lower than expected for a number of reasons, including 

the variation in the mix of the types of projects awarded in a particular year. 

In 2012, 247 of the total 741 newly funded NIDRR projects (33.3 percent) were reported to be 

using rigorous research methodologies, such as true experimental, quasi-experimental or single 

subject designs. Targets have been reduced for fiscal years 2014 and 2015 to reflect more 

realistic expectations. Fiscal year 2013 data will be available in April 2014. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-87

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.

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

2010 27 15

2011 15 16

2012 16 22

2013 29 21

2014 20

2015 20

Additional information: In fiscal year 2013, 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 2013, NIDRR grantees reported one hundred forty-six development projects, of these 21 or 

14.4 percent 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. In 2010, an overly ambitious target was set for 2013 

based on 2009 data. The targets for fiscal years 2014 and 2015 have been established based 

on actual performance for fiscal years 2011 through 2013. 

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

2010 3.0 1.5

2011 1.4 1.7

2012 1.4 1.7

2013 1.5

2014 1.5

2015 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 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

K-88

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 FY 2012, two hundred and sixty-seven 

NIDRR grantees published a total of 458 publications in refereed publications or an average of 

1.7 publications per grant. This rate was similar to the previous year. Fiscal year 2013 data for 

this measure will be available by December 2014.

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). 

Performance information: As in the previous three fiscal years, NIDRR was unable to 

announce any of its fiscal year 2013 competitions by October 1 of the new fiscal year. NIDRR’s 

goal of announcing competitions by October 1 has not been achievable for a number of 

reasons, including uncertainly about the budget due to late appropriations, changes in the 

Department’s spending plan process, and the number of priorities that require rule-making

before the competition can be announced. While the Department believes that the changes 

NIDRR is putting into place to reduce the number of priorities that require rule-making will 

improve its ability to announce competitions earlier in the fiscal year, consideration is also being 

given to whether the criterion for meeting this measure (October 1) should be revised. 

Measure: The percentage of grant awards issued within 6 months of the competition closing 

date.

Year Target Actual

2010 85% 94%

2011 85 40

2012 50 82

2013 60

2014 72

2015 72

Additional information: This measure assesses the timeliness of the process of reviewing 

new applications, identifying and reviewing a slate of awards recommended for funding, and 

notifying applicants whether they have received an award. As in FY 2012, NIDRR made 14 of 

its 17 (82 percent) grant competition awards within 6 months of the closing date, and exceeded 

its target for this measure. The targets for fiscal years 2014 and 2015 have been established 

based on actual performance for fiscal years 2010 through 2012.
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

K-89

Helen Keller National Center

(Helen Keller National Center Act)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2015 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority: 

2014 2015 Change

$9,127 $9,127 0

_________________

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

program in FY 2015 through appropriations language.

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 

individuals who are deaf-blind and their families to assist them to live and work independently. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-90

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)

2010..................................................................$9,181

2011....................................................................9,163

2012....................................................................9,145

2013....................................................................8,667

2014....................................................................9,127

FY 2015 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration’s request for the Helen Keller National Center is $9.127 million, the same as 

the fiscal year 2014 level. The request would support the Center’s educational and training 

programs that expand independent living and employment opportunities for individuals who are 

deaf-blind. Most of the Center’s budget supports operations and programs associated with 

serving clients in the headquarters program. In 2013, the Center served 52 adult clients in the 

intensive training program and 14 short-term clients at headquarters. HKNC also served 1,755 

consumers through its regional offices.

In fiscal year 2015, 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 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. HKNC helps to address a critical shortage of 

professionals qualified to meet the unique needs of individuals who are deaf-blind by training 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-91

personnel such as teachers and vocational rehabilitation counselors in the specialized skills 

necessary to serve these consumers.

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 to operate a 

Community Services Program 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 2011-2012.

1

 1 2011-2012 total sources of funds exceed expenses because of pension accounting adjustments and the timing 

of grant receipts. These do not reflect real surpluses.

Federal 

Appropriation 

(47%) Other Government 

Grants (28%)

Vocational 

Rehabilitation 

Training Fees 

(11%)

Private Grants, 

Fundraising, and 

Investments (14%)

2011-2012 Program Year Sources of Funds ($19.59 million) 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-92

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES 

Measures1 2013 2014 2015

Number of individuals served at headquarters:

Adult training program clients 52 65 65

Specialized training services:

Transition for high school students 8 11 11

Senior citizens 4 3 3

Targeted skills training 2 2 2

Community Services Program (CSP) 2

Number of individuals served through regional 

representatives: 3

Consumers 1,755 1,500 1,500

Families 453 350 350

Agencies/organizations 802 800 800

HKNC FTE staff 121 144 144

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 In 2013, HKNC began tracking consumers served off-campus through the NYS Community Services Program, 

which is supported by federal funds similar to other state contracts. In fiscal year 2013, 52 consumers were served 

by the HKNC CSP program. 3 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.

Training and 

Rehabiliation 

Program Services 

(90%) 

Management and 

Administration 

(7%)

Fundraising and 

Public Relations 

(3%)

2011-2012 Program Year Expenses ($14.17 million) 

(all funds)
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-93

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 2015 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 

2010 95 68 75% 93% 90% 92% 45% 43%

2011 90 85 1 75 81 90 94 45 43

2012 90 52 75 89 90 89 45 38

2013 68 52 85 83 95 96 46 36

2014 70 86 95 47

2015 71 87 95 48

______________________________________

1 Program year change- statistic includes period from July 2010 – September 2011.

Additional information: The number of adult clients attending the HKNC on-campus 

rehabilitation training center in fiscal year 2013, 52, was below the target of 68. HKNC points 

out that the number of consumers served may fluctuate from year to year due to factors beyond 

the control of the Center. For example, the length of time an individual participates in training 

may vary anywhere from two weeks to beyond one year due to the level of intensity of training 

needs. 

In addition to traditional adult consumers, HKNC also provided training for eight high school 

students, seven homemakers and six participated in an eight week evaluation. The high school 

students participate in career exploration, college preparation, and other services offered by the 

Center and returned to high school after their training. The high school students are not 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-94

included in the counts of adult consumers, consumers placed in employment or less restrictive 

settings, or consumers who meet their individualized training goals. 

The Center evaluates the progress of consumers 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 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 consumers enrolled in the long-term formal program and the targeted skills training 

program. Consumers in the short-term programs for high school students are not included in 

the calculation. In 2013, 96 percent of adult consumers achieved their training goals, an 

increase 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. In addition this measure 

includes participants who achieved a less restrictive living environment by successfully acquiring 

skills in two or more core areas resulting in the ability to maintain a home and more fully 

participate in community life. In 2013, 83 percent of clients moved into, or remained in, less 

restrictive settings, which was slightly below the target set for this measure.

The percent placed in employment measure refers to outcomes for those individuals who had 

determined an employment objective. In the year 2013, 16 of the 52 individuals who terminated 

training had a desire to achieve a vocational outcome. Of the 16, 5 achieved this goal, 9 are 

home seeking competitive or supportive employment, and 2 individuals suspended their job 

search due to serious medical issues. Among the 34 individuals not seeking a vocational 

outcome, 7 were homemakers and 6 are continuing their education, and 5 did not complete the 

program and/or took a leave of absence. In addition HKNC served 8 high school consumers;

6 participated in an 8 week evaluation, 2 attended a day habilitation program; 9 individuals 

completed the Community Service Program (CSP) with an employment goal; and 6 of these 

individuals are successfully employed in competitive positions. These outcomes contribute to 

the 49 percent successfully placed in employment. The percentage for individuals successfully 

employed who participated in HKNC’s on-campus program is 36 percent. 

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 

2010 272

2011 239

2012 300

2013 245 898

2014 265

2015 285
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-95

Additional information: The increase in performance in 2013 is due to the regional 

representatives’ involvement in four state-wide needs assessments and services rendered as 

part of the National Deaf-Blind Equipment Distribution Program (NDBEDP). Other contributing 

factors are varied. Examples of activities include one state supporting the initiative for systems 

change resulting in VR hiring a Deaf-blind specialist. In one state the Deaf-blind state 

organization held various awareness and training events titled “No Deaf-blind Left Behind”. The 

members advocated consistently at VR and DBS regional meetings via public comment with 

most activities supported by the HKNC regional representative.

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 

2010 63%

2011 63

2012 74

2013 66% 66

2014 67

2015 68

Additional information: 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 deaf-blindness 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. No targets were 

established prior to 2013 because the Department only began collecting actual data for these 

measures in 2009. 

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 

2010 131

2011 32

2012 57

2013 84 62

2014 88

2015 92
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-96

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 

2010 24%

2011 28

2012 45

2013 28% 32

2014 30

2015 32

Additional information: HKNC plays an important role in connecting individuals who are deafblind 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. 

However the number of referrals to VR agencies is somewhat limited by the fact that not all 

consumers served by HKNC field staff have vocational goals. 

For the measure on the percentage of individuals who achieved employment outcomes, the 

numerator is the number of clients served by HKNC regional representatives who achieved 

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. The denominator is 

the total number of clients served by HKNC regional representatives who achieved employment 

outcomes. In 2013, performance on this measure was 32 percent and exceeded the target. No 

targets were established for these measures prior to 2013 because the Department only began 

collecting actual data in 2009. Data for 2014 is expected in January 2015.

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 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. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-97

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 percent) and 

audiology received the lowest helpfulness rating (50 percent). 

• Overall, the study found that HKNC is meeting its legislative mandate of providing 

specialized intensive services to maximize personal development of deaf-blind 

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. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Helen Keller National Center

K-98

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-99

Assistive technology

(Assistive Technology Act of 1998)

(dollars in thousands)

FY 2015 Authorization: 0 1

Budget Authority: 

2014 2015 Change

$33,000 $31,000 -$2,000

_________________

1 The GEPA extension expired September 30, 2011. The Administration proposes to continue funding this 

program in FY 2015 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.

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-100

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 2013 State distributions were 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. The fiscal year 2015 State distributions would be based on 

the July 1, 2013 estimates published on December 30, 2013.

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-101

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 2013 State distributions were 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. The fiscal year 

2015 State distributions would be based on the July 1, 2013 estimates published on December 

30, 2013.

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-102

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 2014 appropriations bill provided $2 million for an alternative financing program 

authorized under appropriations language. Competitive grants will be 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 will be 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 will be eligible to compete.

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

Year (dollars in thousands)

2010.............................................................. $30,960

2011................................................................ 30,898

2012................................................................ 32,836

2013................................................................ 31,118

2014................................................................ 33,000

FY 2015 BUDGET REQUEST

The Administration requests $31 million in fiscal year 2015 for Assistive Technology (AT) 

programs, $2 million less than the fiscal year 2014 appropriation level. The request does not 

include funds for an alternative financing program (AFP), a one-year competitive grant program 

that was authorized through appropriations language in fiscal year 2014. 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 in 2015 for the duplicate competitive grant program 

funded in 2014. 

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-103

Assistive Technology (AT) State grant program 

The request includes $25.704 million for the AT State grant program, the same as the fiscal 

year 2014 level. These funds will be used by States to carry out the first 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 2015 request includes $4.3 million for the Protection and Advocacy for Assistive 

Technology (PAAT) program, the same as the fiscal year 2014 level, 28 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 2015 request also includes $996,000 for National Activities, the same as the 

fiscal year 2014 level. The Act requires support for State training, technical assistance, data 

collection, and reporting assistance, and authorizes a one-time grant to provide national public 

awareness about AT, and support for AT research and development activities. To support 

these activities, RSA competitively awards 3 grants. In fiscal year 2015, funds would be used 

for 2 new competitions in order to award a grant for State training and technical assistance, and 

a grant award for the AT Act informational website. Funds would also be used to continue 

support for the AT Act data collection activities in fiscal year 2015. 

PROGRAM OUTPUT MEASURES (dollars in thousands) 

Program Funding 2013 2014 2015

AT State grant program $24,223 $25,704 $25,704

Protection and advocacy program 4,059 4,300 4,300

National activities 944 996 996

Alternative financing program 1,892 2,000 0

Total 31,118 33,000 31,000

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 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Assistive technology

K-104

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 

2015 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 Administration 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 the target for the percentage of 

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 

2010 75% 79%

2011 69 87

2012 75 92

2013 75

2014 75

2015 75

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding the target for the percentage of 

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 

2010 75% 77%

2011 64 79

2012 75 87

2013 75

2014 75

2015 75
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Assistive technology

K-105

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding the target for the percentage of 

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 

2010 90% 77%

2011 81 81

2012 75 94

2013 75

2014 75

2015 75

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 represent the proportion of the States for which at least 75 percent of surveyed 

consumers who obtained assistive technology devices or services through State financing 

activities or reutilization programs reported that they would not have otherwise obtained the AT 

device or service. In fiscal year 2012, the 75 percent performance target was met or exceeded 

for all three acquisition measures. 

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 Administration 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). 

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. 
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Assistive technology

K-106

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding the target for the percentage of 

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 

2010 90% 71%

2011 79 85

2012 70 93

2013 70

2014 70

2015 70

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding the target for the percentage of 

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 

2010 85% 84%

2011 75 84

2012 70 85

2013 70

2014 70

2015 70

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding the target for the percentage of 

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 

2010 90% 71%

2011 79 82

2012 70 91

2013 70

2014 70

2015 70
REHABILITATION SERVICES AND DISABILITY RESEARCH

Assistive technology

K-107

Measure: The percentage of States meeting or exceeding the target for the percentage of 

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 

2010 80% 68%

2011 69 84

2012 70 83

2013 70

2014 70

2015 70

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 represent the proportion of the States for which at least 70 percent of 

consumers, who accessed assistive technology device demonstrations and/or device loan 

programs, reported that they made a decision about the assistive technology device or services 

as a result of the assistance they received from the Assistive Technology Program. In fiscal year 

2012, the 70 percent performance target was met or exceeded for all four access measures.
K-108

State Tables