Assistive Technology 

Act of 1998 

Title I: State Grant Program 

Annual Report to Congress: 

Fiscal Years 2001, 2002, and 2003 

Assistive Technology 

Act of 1998 

Title I: State Grant Program 

Annual Report to Congress: 

Fiscal Years 2001, 2002, and 2003 

February 2005 

Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services 

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

i 
This combined 3-year annual report has been produced by staff of the National Institute on 

Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). 

U.S. Department of Education 

Margaret Spellings 

Secretary 

Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services 

John H. Hager 

Assistant Secretary 

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

Steven James Tingus, M.S., C. Phil. 

Director

February 2005 

This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. 

While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: U.S. 

Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, National 

Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, Assistive Technology Act of 1998, Title I: 

State Grant Program, Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Years 2001, 2002, and 2003, 

Washington, D.C., 2005. 

To order copies of this report, 

write to: ED Pubs, Education Publications Center, U.S. Department of Education, P. O. Box 

1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398; 

or fax your request to: (301) 470-1244; 

or e-mail your request to: edpubs@inet.ed.gov. 

or call in your request toll-free: 1-877-433-7827 (1-877-4-ED-PUBS). If 877 service is not yet 

available in your area, call 1-800-872-5327 (1-800-USA-LEARN). Those who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a teletypewriter (TTY), should call 1-800-437-

0833. 

or order online at: www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html. 

This report is also available on the Department’s Web site at: 

http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/nidrr/. 

On request, this publication is available in alternate formats, such as Braille, large print, 

audiotape, or computer diskette. For more information, please contact the Department’s 

Alternate Format Center at (202) 260-9895 or (202) 205-8113. 
CONTENTS 

Section Page 

Acknowledgements................................................................................................................. vii 

Executive Summary................................................................................................................. ix 

Interagency Coordination................................................................................................... ix 

Demonstration Activities.....................................................................................................x 

Education and Training........................................................................................................x 

Research............................................................................................................................. xi

Outreach Activities to Rural and Inner-City Areas Targeted to Reach 

Underrepresented Populations and Rural Populations................................................. xi 

Consumer Involvement Activities Carried Out Through The Funded Activities............. xii 

Introduction............................................................................................................................ xiii 

Data Sources .................................................................................................................... xiv 

Overview of Data Quality and Limitations..............................................................................xv 

Data Quality.......................................................................................................................xv 

Limitations.........................................................................................................................xv 

Findings......................................................................................................................................1 

Demonstrated Successes of the Funded Activities in Improving 

Interagency Coordination Relating to Assistive Technology, 

Streamlining Access to Funding for Assistive Technology, and 

Producing Beneficial Outcomes for Users of Assistive Technology.......................1 

Demonstration Activities Carried Out Through the Funded Activities to —......................5

(A) Promote Access to Such Funding in Public Programs That Were in 

Existence on the Date of the Initiation of the Demonstration 

Activities; and ..........................................................................................................5 

(B) Establish Additional Options for Obtaining Such Funding .....................................5 

iii 
CONTENTS

Education and Training Activities Carried Out Through the Funded 

Activities to Educate And Train Targeted Individuals About 

Assistive Technology, Including Increasing Awareness of Funding 

Through Public Programs for Assistive Technology...............................................8 

The Research Activities Carried Out Through the Funded Activities to 

Improve Understanding of the Costs and Benefits of Access to 

Assistive Technology for Individuals With Disabilities who 

Represent a Variety of Ages and Types of Disabilities.........................................15 

The Program Outreach Activities to Rural and Inner-City Areas That Are 

Carried Out Through the Funded Activities and Funded Activities 

Targeted to Reach Underrepresented Populations and Rural 

Populations.............................................................................................................16 

Consumer Involvement Activities Carried Out Through The Funded 

Activities................................................................................................................18 

Summary..................................................................................................................................21 

 

iv 
CONTENTS

EXHIBITS

Number Page 

Exhibit 1. Organizations Most Frequently Involved in Interagency Activitiesa.................2 

Exhibit 2. Focus of Interagency Activities

a

........................................................................3 

Exhibit 3. Capacity Building/Systems Change Activities Resulting From

Legislative and Policy Changes a, b ....................................................................4 

Exhibit 4. Individuals Served at Demonstration Sitesa.......................................................5 

Exhibit 5. Numbers of Consumers and Family Members Receiving Information 

From Selected Sources a, b..................................................................................6 

Exhibit 6. Number of Demonstration Sites Offering Various Servicesa ............................7 

Exhibit 7. Grantees Conducting Demonstrations by Locationa..........................................8 

Exhibit 8. Technical Assistance/Training Participants, by Selected Categorya, b.............10 

Exhibit 9. Topics Addressed by Technical Assistance/Training Sessionsa......................11 

Exhibit 10. Methods Frequently Used to Increase Public Awareness and 

Disseminate Informationa ................................................................................12 

Exhibit 11. Web Site Characteristicsa

.................................................................................13 

Exhibit 12. Number of Individuals Receiving Information From Selected Sourcesa

.........14 

Exhibit 13. Underrepresented Groups Targeted by Any Outreach Activitya, b...................17 

v 
CONTENTS

 

vi 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

The National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) wishes to 

acknowledge the Research Triangle Institute’s (RTI) contribution to this report. The data 

provided to NIDRR for this report was collected by RTI, under grant number H224B03001. The 

RTI-developed Web-based data collection instrument was used to secure information 

summarized by RTI and submitted to NIDRR for further analysis and reporting.

vii 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 

viii 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

This report constitutes a combined 3-year annual report for the Assistive Technology (AT) State 

Grant Program, authorized under Title I of the AT Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-394). The AT 

Act requires that an annual report containing the following information on the AT State Grant 

program be submitted by the Department of Education to the President and to Congress: 

• the demonstrated successes of the funded activities in improving interagency 

coordination relating to assistive technology, streamlining access to funding for assistive 

technology, and producing beneficial outcomes for users of assistive technology; 

• the demonstration activities carried out through the funded activities to — (a) promote 

access to such funding in public programs that were in existence on the date of the 

initiation of the demonstration activities; and (b) establish additional options for 

obtaining such funding; 

• the education and training activities carried out through the funded activities to educate 

and train targeted individuals about assistive technology, including increasing awareness 

of funding through public programs for assistive technology; 

• the research activities carried out through the funded activities to improve understanding 

of the costs and benefits of access to assistive technology for individuals with disabilities 

who represent a variety of ages and types of disabilities; 

• the program outreach activities to rural and inner-city areas that are carried out through 

the funded activities; 

• the activities carried out through the funded activities that are targeted to reach 

underrepresented populations and rural populations; and 

• the consumer involvement activities carried out through the funded activities. 

Interagency Coordination 

In Fiscal Year 2003, 55 of 56 (98 percent) grantees conducted interagency coordination 

activities. Forty-nine of 51 (96 percent) grantees conducted interagency coordination activities in 

FY 2001, and 55 of 56 (98 percent) grantees conducted such activities in FY 2002. Nearly all 

grantees (96 percent or more) have reported conducting interagency coordination in at least one 

of the past 3 years. The number of agencies with which the AT grantees coordinated activities 

increased over these fiscal years, from 1,003 agencies in FY 2001, to 1,377 agencies in FY 2002, 

and 1,412 agencies in FY 2003. In FY 2001, grantees most frequently coordinated with Centers 

ix 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

for Independent Living. In FYs 2002 and 2003, they most frequently coordinated with the state 

vocational rehabilitation (VR) agency. AT grantees coordinated with agencies serving people 

with disabilities of all ages. Annually, a minimum of 43 grantees cited coordination with their 

states’ K–12 school system. Over the 3-year period, interagency activities most commonly 

focused on training personnel to assist individuals with disabilities to use AT and activities 

aimed at increasing program capacities. Grantees conducted activities that led to improved 

consumer access to assistive technology funding. In FY 2003 forty-eight grantees concentrated 

their interagency activities on efforts to acquire financing for AT devices and services. During 

the same FY grantees reported improvements in AT financing resulting from 42 legislative and 

policy changes. 

Demonstration Activities 

In FY 2003, 50 of 56 (89 percent) grantees reported AT demonstration activities. Forty-seven of 

51 (92 percent) grantees reported demonstration activities in FY 2001 and 52 of 56 (93 percent) 

reported demonstration activities in FY 2002. Across the 3-year period, a majority of grantees (at 

least 89 percent) have conducted demonstrations of AT. In two out of the 3 years, AT

demonstration sites served between 104,000 to 105,000 persons, of whom 48,000 to 50,000 were 

persons with disabilities. Other than newsletters, AT demonstrations were the second largest 

means that grantees used to provide information to all individuals and to individuals with 

disabilities across the 3-year period. In FY 2003, grantees served 104,891 individuals at 

demonstration sites; of these, 50,473 were individuals with disabilities. Between FYs 2001–

2003, grantees served a total of 639,270 individuals at demonstration sites; of these, 146,841 

(23 percent) were individuals with disabilities. Conferences, expos and fairs have consistently 

been the most common venues for AT demonstrations. The most frequent service offered at 

demonstration sites was AT equipment lending. 

Education and Training 

In FY 2003, 54 of 56 (96 percent) grantees conducted technical assistance and training activities. 

Forty-nine of 51 (96 percent) grantees reported conducting such activities in FY 2001 and 55 of 

56 (98 percent) grantees conducted such activities in FY 2002. Most grantees (at least 96 

percent) have cited conduct of technical assistance and training activities in FYs 2001, 2002, 

and 2003. Over these 3 years, grantees conducted more than 43,000 technical assistance and 

training activities, with approximately 360,000 participants. More than two-thirds of grantees 

provided detailed information on the individuals they served through these activities. 

x 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Professionals consistently made up at least 40 percent of all participants in AT grantees’ training 

activities. Individuals with disabilities, together with their families, accounted for 34 to 40 

percent of participants. The most frequent topics of grantee training sessions were devicespecific training, AT evaluation and assessment, and obtaining funding for AT. 

Research 

Although the AT grantees have not had any significant role in research on the availability of 

assistive technology devices and assistive technology services, the National Institute on 

Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) has elected to fund additional studies under 

Title II of the Rehabilitation Act to collect this information. For example, the California 

Foundation for Independent Living Centers was awarded a grant to collect research on access to 

and use of assistive technology. Duke University received funding to examine issues within the 

field of AT outcomes measurement. In addition, the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee is 

conducting grant activities that will ultimately lead to enhanced understanding about the 

relationships of AT outcomes factors that produce a better understanding of AT use and 

abandonment. A full description of these and other assistive technology research grants can be 

found at http://www.ncddr.org. The results of these and other research grants and related grantee 

publications are available from at http://naricdev.heitechservices.com/. 

Outreach Activities to Rural and Inner-City Areas Targeted to Reach Underrepresented 

Populations and Rural Populations 

AT grantees support statewide and community-based organizations that provide AT devices and 

services or that assist persons with disabilities in using AT devices and services, “including a 

focus on organizations assisting individuals from underrepresented and rural populations.” In FY 

2003, 44 of 56 (79 percent) of grantees conducted outreach activities. This percentage represents 

a decrease in outreach activities. Of all the required activities, outreach efforts fluctuated the 

most from FY 2001 to 2003, with 90 percent of grantees (46 of 51) conducting these activities in 

FY 2001, rising to 100 percent (56 grantees) in FY 2002, and dropping to 79 percent (44 of 56 

grantees) in FY 2003. The decline in outreach activities in FY 2003 cuts across all 

underrepresented populations. 

The largest relative decrease in outreach emphasis over the 3-year period has been outreach to 

minorities. In FY 2001, forty-one of 51 (80 percent) conducted outreach to minorities. Outreach 

activities to minorities decreased to 41 of 56 (73 percent) in FY 2002 and to 32 of 56 (57 

percent) in FY 2003. Additionally, individuals with low-incidence disabilities were not a 

common target of outreach efforts in FY 2001. By FY 2003, however, they were the group most 

xi 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

likely to be targeted for outreach. Each year, persons from rural areas were among the two 

groups most likely to be targeted by grantee outreach efforts. Persons with limited English 

proficiency were least likely to be the focus of grantee outreach efforts throughout the 3-year 

period (FYs 2001–2003). 

In FY 2003, a total of 854,179 individuals received information on assistive technology from the 

AT State grantees from activities in public awareness, demonstrations and TA/training. Over the 

last three years, a total of 2.6 million individuals received AT information from the AT State 

grantees. 

Consumer Involvement Activities Carried Out Through The Funded Activities 

Over the past three years the number of individuals with disabilities who participated in 

sponsored technical assistance and training events has continued to increase, while the number of 

family members participating in such events has decreased. In FY 2003 participation counts 

reached 27,365 individuals with disabilities, while the number of family members for FY 2003 

was 10,798. 

In FY 2003, 289,737 consumers and family members received information from the selected 

sources, including newsletters, demonstrations, technical assistance/training activities, 

presentations, and public forums. Overall, newsletters reached the largest number of consumers 

and family members, accounting for almost half of the over 700,000 consumer and family 

member recipients during the 3-year period. 

xii 
INTRODUCTION 

The purpose of this report is to comply with the legislative mandate of the Assistive Technology 

(AT) Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-394) requiring the Secretary of Education to report annually 

on the activities funded under this Act (Section 103(c)). 

Section 103(c) of the AT Act of 1998 requires the following information on the AT State Grant 

program be submitted to the president and to Congress: 

• the demonstrated successes of the funded activities in improving interagency 

coordination relating to assistive technology, streamlining access to funding for assistive 

technology, and producing beneficial outcomes for users of assistive technology; 

• the demonstration activities carried out through the funded activities to — (a) promote 

access to such funding in public programs that were in existence on the date of the 

initiation of the demonstration activities; and (b) establish additional options for 

obtaining such funding; 

• the education and training activities carried out through the funded activities to educate 

and train targeted individuals about assistive technology, including increasing awareness 

of funding through public programs for assistive technology; 

• the research activities carried out through the funded activities to improve understanding 

of the costs and benefits of access to assistive technology for individuals with disabilities 

who represent a variety of ages and types of disabilities; 

• the program outreach activities to rural and inner-city areas that are carried out through 

the funded activities; 

• the activities carried out through the funded activities that are targeted to reach 

underrepresented populations and rural populations; and 

• the consumer involvement activities carried out through the funded activities. 

In addition, the law requires the Department of Education to report on the availability of assistive 

technology devices and assistive technology services, as soon as practicable. While the AT 

grantees have not had any significant role in research addressing the availability of assistive 

technology devices and services, NIDRR has funded other grant projects focusing on AT 

research. As a result, the ongoing work of these AT research grants, as well as publications and 

reports resulting from their activities, are available at http://naricdev.heitechservices.com/. A 

more detailed discussion of some of the research activities of these projects will be provided in 

this report. 

xiii 
INTRODUCTION

Data Sources 

All data reported in this report are from individual state AT grantee annual progress reports 

covering activities in fiscal years (FYs) 2001–2003. Use of the Web-based reporting system was 

not mandatory during the first year of its availability; hence, only 51 grantees provided reports 

on FY 2001 activities through that system.

1

 In FYs 2002 and 2003, all 56 grantees completed 

their annual reports via the Internet. This report presents data from FYs 2001–2003 and includes 

a limited comparative analysis for data reported for all three years. 

 

1 The five remaining grantees submitted paper copies of their reports to NIDRR. Data from these grantees (Ala., 

Ga., Ky., Penn., and American Samoa) are not included in this report. 

xiv 
OVERVIEW OF DATA QUALITY AND LIMITATIONS 

Data Quality 

Several mechanisms are in place to improve the consistency and quality of the data reported by 

grantees. Grantees use a uniform reporting instrument, consisting primarily of closed-ended

questions, to document their activities. The Web-based system has internal checks to catch some of 

the mathematical miscalculations. An online instruction manual for grantee use presents numerous 

examples of the types of information that should be included in narrative responses. Each section of 

the reporting form also contains links to important definitions and instructions so that grantees can 

quickly obtain pertinent information without having to look through the entire instruction manual. 

Research Triangle Institute (RTI) staff made presentations on data collection and reporting at the 

annual state AT directors’ conference sponsored by the Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive

Technology Society of North America (RESNA) Technical Assistance (TA) Project. For example,

during a presentation at the Summer 2001 conference, grantees received a copy of the reporting form

and training on each item on the form. In addition to the online instruction manual, RTI staff 

provides ongoing technical assistance to grantees via e-mail or telephone. 

NIDRR and RTI developed data cleaning procedures for the analysis of the state AT grantee 

data. The data cleaning procedures were designed to improve the quality of data. RTI reviews 

each state report and compiles a report for NIDRR addressing data inconsistencies and 

miscalculations. Grantees are asked to clarify information or address inconsistencies, 

miscalculations or other problems with the data, as appropriate. These issues are corrected prior 

to submitting data to NIDRR. 

Limitations

Since the initial development of the reporting form in FY 2000, the focus of program performance

and evaluation has changed to emphasize outcomes versus outputs. Hence, the current reporting 

form provides few opportunities for grantees to report outcomes. The data collection instrument 

contains six items requiring narrative responses that include some outcome data. 

All grantees did not submit data on their program activities conducted in FY 2001 in the Webbased data collection system. Fifty-one of the 56 (91 percent) grantees submitted data on their 

project activities conducted in FY 2001 using the Web-based data collection system while five 

grantees chose to report on paper. All grantees submitted data in the Web-based data collection 

system in FYs 2002 and 2003. This report only includes data reported in the Web-based data 

xv 
OVERVIEW OF DATA QUALITY AND LIMITATIONS

collection system. Therefore, in general, the percentages of grantees instead of the number of 

grantees conducting activities and reporting outcomes are used to compare data across years. 

xvi 
FINDINGS 

This report focuses on demonstrated program outcomes for required reporting activities. The AT 

Act of 1998 requires that an annual report containing the following information on the AT State 

Grant program be submitted to the president and to Congress: 

Demonstrated Successes of the Funded Activities in Improving Interagency Coordination 

Relating to Assistive Technology, Streamlining Access to Funding for Assistive Technology, 

and Producing Beneficial Outcomes for Users of Assistive Technology 

Fifty-five of 56 (98 percent) grantees conducted interagency coordination activities in FY 2003. 

Forty-nine of 51 (96 percent) grantees conducted this activity in FY 2001 and 55 of 56 (98 

percent) grantees conducted interagency coordination activities in FY 2002. Therefore, nearly all 

grantees conducted interagency coordination activities during the last 3 years. The total number 

of agencies with which the AT grantees coordinated activities increased over the 3 fiscal years, 

from 1,003 agencies in FY 2001 to 1,377 agencies in FY 2002, and 1,412 agencies in FY 2003. 

In FYs 2001–2003, the six types of organizations with which AT grantees most commonly 

coordinated their activities are shown in Exhibit 1. In FY 2001, grantees most frequently 

coordinated with independent living centers, followed closely by postsecondary institutions, VR 

agencies, and disability-related nonprofits. In FYs 2002 and 2003, VR agencies led the way, 

followed by coordination efforts with independent living centers and postsecondary institutions. 

Grantees also coordinated with a wide variety of disability-related nonprofit organizations. For 

example, grantees often worked with agencies such as Easter Seals to maintain AT 

demonstration centers and, in some cases, equipment loan closets. 

1 
FINDINGS

Exhibit 1. Organizations Most Frequently Involved in Interagency Activitiesa

Number of Grantees 

Type of Organization 

FY 2001

(N = 49) 

FY 2002

(N = 55) 

FY 2003

(N = 55) 

Vocational rehabilitation 44 53 53

Centers for Independent Living 46 50 50 

Postsecondary education (colleges, training programs) 45 50 51 

Disability-related nonprofit organizations 44 50 50

Schools (K–12) 43 51 47

Senior services/aging 42 48 50

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FYs 2001–2003.

AT State program grantees coordinated with agencies serving people with disabilities of all ages. 

A sizable majority of AT grantees, at least 43 in each year, reported coordination with their 

states’ K-12 school system. Grantees provide critical information to school districts and 

individual special education teachers on AT that might be appropriate to ensure compliance with 

the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requirements. Grantees also 

reported coordinating activities with their states’ senior services agencies.

Over the 3-year period, interagency activities most commonly focused on training personnel to 

assist individuals with disabilities to use AT and activities aimed at increasing program 

capacities (Exhibit 2). Conducting outreach to underrepresented populations and disseminating 

information about AT have increased in importance to become the most common foci of 

interagency activities in FY 2003, whereas in FYs 2001 and 2002 those activities were less 

frequently cited by grantees. 

2 
FINDINGS

Exhibit 2. Focus of Interagency Activitiesa

Number of Grantees 

Focus 

FY 2001

(N = 49) 

FY 2002

(N = 55) 

FY 2003

(N = 55) 

Train personnel to assist individuals with disabilities to use AT 45 53 52

Increase program capacity to provide technology-related assistance 46 52 51

Conduct outreach to underrepresented populations and rural 

populations

44 49 54

Provide/disseminate information about the availability and potential of AT 39 54 54

Improve coordination between state human service programs and 

private entities 

45 50 47

Obtain financing to pay for AT devices and services 43 51 48 

Change systems to ensure timely acquisition and delivery of AT 

devices and services 

42 50 48

Improve accessibility of computer IT for persons with disabilitiesb — 49 46

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FY 2001–2003. 

b Response category was added to the reporting form in FY 2002, based on analysis of “other specify” answers in 

FY 2001. 

Grantees were also involved in activities that improved consumer access to assistive technology 

funding. Forty-eight grantees in FY 2003 focused their interagency activities on efforts to obtain 

financing for AT devices and services (Exhibit 2). In addition, during FY 2003, grantees reported 

42 legislative and policy changes resulting in the financing of AT devices and services, and 

improved access to services, devices and information (Exhibit 3). 

3 
FINDINGS

Exhibit 3. Capacity Building/Systems Change Activities Resulting From Legislative and 

Policy Changes a, b

Total Number of Changes 

by Fiscal Year 

Capacity Building/Systems Change Activities 

FY 2001

(N = 174) 

FY 2002

(N = 157) 

FY 2003

(N = 152) 

Improved coordination among state human service programs 103 88 84 

Increased program capacity to provide technology-related assistance 81 74 77 

Provided/disseminated information about the availability and potential 

of AT 

83 91 81

Provided outreach to underrepresented populations and rural populations 56 47 55

Changed systems to ensure timely acquisition and delivery of AT

devices and services 

75 76 73

Obtained financing to pay for AT devices and services 69 50 42 

Improved access to telecommunications and information technology 42 44 49 

Trained personnel to assist individuals with disabilities to use AT 41 52 49

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FY 2001–2003. 

b Counts are duplicated as grantees can report more than one result for each type of change.

Overall, interagency efforts of grantees had impact across a wide range of areas. Grantees were 

asked to describe the outcomes of their interagency coordination activities.2 A few examples of 

such outcomes in FY 2003 include the following: 

 Coordinated with the state’s VR agency to identify unemployed Georgians who 

might avoid institutionalization and obtain employment with the help of AT. 

Sixty individuals were evaluated and 30 were selected to receive services; 15 of those 

who received services obtained employment. 

 Worked with the State Independent Living Council in a program that led to 

homeownership for 25 individuals with disabilities. 

 Collaborated with a pharmacy association to provide medication management devices for 

seniors, allowing them to remain living at home. 

 

2 The AT annual progress report contains very limited opportunities for grantees to report on the outcomes of their 

activities. For a detailed discussion of grantee outcomes, see Jans, 2004. 

4 
FINDINGS

 Worked with its state One-Stop system3

 to ensure the accessibility of programs at 

21 locations. 

Demonstration Activities Carried Out Through the Funded Activities to — 

(A) Promote Access to Such Funding in Public Programs That Were in Existence on 

the Date of the Initiation of the Demonstration Activities; and 

(B) Establish Additional Options for Obtaining Such Funding 

In FY 2003, 50 of 56 (89 percent) grantees reported demonstration activities. Forty-seven of 51 

(92 percent) grantees reported demonstration activities in FY 2001 and 52 of 56 (93 percent) 

grantees conducted demonstrations in FY 2002. In 2 out of the 3 years, demonstration sites 

served between 104,000 and 105,000 persons, of whom 48,000 to 50,000 were persons with 

disabilities (Exhibit 4). 

Exhibit 4. Individuals Served at Demonstration Sitesa

Individuals Served at Demonstration Sites FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003

Total number of individuals served at demonstration sites 103,969 430,410b 104,891 

Number of individuals with disabilities served at demonstration sites 48,855 47,513 50,473

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FYs 2001–2003. In FY 2001, 47 grantees 

reported conducting demonstrations, in FY 2002, 52 grantees, and in FY 2003, 50 grantees. b Arizona accounted for 349,092 of this total. 

In FY 2002, 430,410 individuals visited demonstration sites, with Arizona accounting for 81 

percent of all individuals served. For FYs 2001–2003, a total of 639,270 individuals attended 

demonstrations of AT, with 55 percent of the total persons from Arizona. Other than newsletters, 

demonstrations were the second largest means grantees used to provide information to all 

individuals and to individuals with disabilities across the 3-year period (Exhibits 4 and 5). 

 

3 The One-Stop system was created by the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) as a means to provide 

individuals seeking employment with as many employment-related services as possible at a single location. OneStop locations serve a high number of individuals with disabilities. VR agencies and some of the AT grantees 

work with One-Stops in order to meet the needs of those individuals and ensure the accessibility of One-Stop 

locations. For example, in FY 2003, a total of 42 AT grantees reported some form of interagency coordination 

with One-Stop locations. 

5 
FINDINGS

Exhibit 5. Numbers of Consumers and Family Members Receiving Information From 

Selected Sources a, b 

Number of Consumers and Family Members 

Methodc FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 Total 

Newsletters 90,555 97,916 161,265 349,736

Demonstrations 48,855 47,513 50,473 146,841

TA/training activities 31,895 30,694 37,965 100,554

Presentations 29,318 30,270 38,052 97,640

Public forums 6,357 7,587 1,982 15,926

Total 206,980 213,980 289,737 710,697

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FYs 2001–2003. b Counts may be duplicated. c Some grantees using particular methods to provide information were not able to report the total number of

consumers and family members receiving information. 

In all 3 years, subcontractors administered the majority of demonstration sites (54% of sites in 

FY 2001, 75% in FY 2002, and 68% in FY 2003). Data reported by the grantees indicate that 

there were 238 demonstration sites in FY 2001, 334 in FY 2002 and 242 in FY 2003. Part of the 

increase in FY 2002 was due to Iowa, which reported four demonstration sites in FY 2001 and in 

FY 2003, but 62 in FY 2002. The five grantees reporting in FY 2002 that had not reported using 

the Web-based system in FY 2001 accounted for another 26 demonstration sites. Twenty 

grantees reported a decrease between FY 2002 and FY 2003 in the number of demonstration 

settings in operation, 12 reported an increase and 24 reported no change. 

As Exhibit 6 indicates, the most common service offered at demonstration sites was 

AT equipment lending, available at 131 sites in FY 2001, 161 sites in FY 2002 and 143 sites in 

FY 2003. The number of grantees reporting equipment loan programs was 41 in FYs 2001 and 

2003 and 46 in FY 2002. 

The total number of demonstration sites with recycling programs rose from 61 in FY 2001 to 78 

in FY 2003 (despite the fact that the number of grantees with recycling programs fell slightly 

from 28 in FYs 2001 and 2002 to 25 in FY 2003). 

The number of demonstration sites with equipment exchange programs rose from 51 in FY 2001 

to 65 in FY 2002, and then declined to 61 in FY 2003. The number of grantees reporting 

exchange programs was 21 in FY 2001, 23 in FY 2002, and 15 in FY 2003. 

6 
FINDINGS

Grantees conducted demonstrations at a wide variety of locations, the most frequent of which are 

shown in Exhibit 7. Conferences, expos and fairs have consistently been the most common venues 

for AT demonstrations. Other demonstration sites regularly used by grantees and their subcontractors

included AT regional centers and university and college campuses. Locations grantees used less 

frequently to conduct demonstrations include: churches/synagogues, community-based employer 

organizations, community centers, federal agencies, lending centers, libraries, rehabilitation centers, 

Web-based demonstrations and workforce development resource centers.

Exhibit 6. Number of Demonstration Sites Offering Various Servicesa

131

61

51

161

80

65

143

78

61

0

40

80

120

160

200

Equipment Lending Recycling Programs Equipment Exchange

Services Offered

Number of Sites

FY 2001 (N = 47)

FY 2002 (N = 52)

FY 2003 (N = 50)

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FYs 2001–2003. In FY 2001, 47 grantees 

conducted demonstrations, 52 in FY 2002 and 50 in FY 2003.

7 
FINDINGS

Exhibit 7. Grantees Conducting Demonstrations by Locationa

Number of Grantees 

Location

FY 2001

(N = 47) 

FY 2002

(N = 52) 

FY 2003

(N = 50) 

Conferences/expos/fairs/exhibits 44 45 43

AT regional centers 40 45 38

Nonprofit organizations 37 34 36

Schools 37 40 35

State agencies 37 31 31

Senior citizen centers 32 37 34

Health clinics/hospitals 31 30 32

University/college/community college campusesb — 36 39

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FYs 2001–2003. 

b Response category was added to the reporting form in FY 2002 based on analysis of “other ― specify” responses 

in FY 2001. 

Education and Training Activities Carried Out Through the Funded Activities to Educate And 

Train Targeted Individuals About Assistive Technology, Including Increasing Awareness of 

Funding Through Public Programs for Assistive Technology 

The AT Act of 1998 specifies that the Department of Education’s annual report on the AT grantee 

program shall contain information on activities carried out “to educate and train targeted 

individuals about assistive technology, including increasing awareness of funding through public

programs for assistive technology.” As shown in the following text and exhibits, AT grantees 

provided training on AT to 361,574 individuals over the 3-year period (Exhibit 8). In each year, the

majority of grantees provided training specifically related to funding sources and the acquisition of 

AT (Exhibit 9). In FY 2003, 48 of 56 (86 percent) grantees provided training specifically related to

funding sources and the acquisition of AT. Forty-four of 51 (89 percent) grantees provided such 

training in FY 2001 and 51 of 56 (93 percent) grantees provided such training in FY 2002. 

In FY 2003, 54 of 56 (96 percent) grantees conducted technical assistance and training activities. 

Fifty-four of 56 (96 percent) grantees conducted TA and training activities in FY 2001. In FY 

2001, 49 of 51 (96 percent) grantees conducted TA and training activities and 55 of 56 

(98 percent) grantees carried out these activities in FY 2002. Therefore, most grantees have 

8 
FINDINGS

conducted technical assistance (TA) and training activities during the 3 years NIDRR has used a 

Web-based reporting form. Over the 3-year period, grantees conducted more than 43,000 TA and 

training activities, involving approximately 360,000 participants. 

In each of the 3 years, more than two-thirds of grantees provided detailed information on 

individuals served through TA and training activities.4

 This data provides the basis for Exhibit 8. 

Professionals (including educators, counselors, case managers, health professionals and 

technology experts) consistently made up at least 40 percent of all participants in TA and 

training activities. Individuals with disabilities, together with their family members, 

accounted for 34 to 40 percent of participants. The large increase in “general public” training 

participants in FY 2003 is attributable to one grantee, which reported 7,430 general public 

training participants. 

The most frequent topics of AT grantee training sessions included device-specific training, AT 

evaluation and assessment, and obtaining funding for AT (see Exhibit 9). In the two most recent 

reporting periods, all reporting grantees cited training sessions focused on specific AT devices or 

services. Device-specific training sessions most often addressed include: 

 Aids for daily living. 

 Computers and computer adaptations. 

 Environmental modifications. 

 Recreational devices. 

 Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices. 

In FY 2003, 53 of 56 (95 percent) grantees reported conducting some form of follow-up with 

attendees of the training activities: 

 Thirty-seven grantees collected consumer satisfaction data on their training activities. 

 Thirty-five grantees followed up with a telephone call, e-mail or other personal contact 

with participants. 

 Thirty-four grantees provided additional technical assistance. 

 Thirty-four grantees sent additional printed materials to training participants. 

 

4 Over all 3 years, there were 158 “Yes” responses to the question of whether a grantee conducted training

activities. Of these, there were 115 instances when grantees were able to include data on the types of training

participants. 

9 
FINDINGS

 Twenty-eight grantees provided additional direct training. 

Exhibit 8. Technical Assistance/Training Participants, by Selected Categorya, b

TA/Training Participants 

FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003

Selected Types 

of Participants Number Percent

c Number Percentc Number Percentc

Uncategorized participants 24,374 — 42,258 — 23,820 — 

Categorized participants 80,166 — 87,040 — 103,916 — 

Professionals 34,446 43 38,376 44 41,350 40

Individuals with disabilities 20,834 26 16,150 21 27,365 26

Family members 11,061 14 11,011 13 10,798 10

Students (all levels)

d — — 4,308 5 5,330 5

General public

d — — 2,102 2 10,161 10

Policymakers/state agency personnel 1,790 2 1,680 2 2,467 2

Employers 1,556 2 1,497 2 713 1

Other 10,479 13 8,284 10 4,155 4

Total

e 104,540 100 129,298 100 127,736 100

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FYs 2001–2003. 

b Forty-nine grantees reported on technical assistance and training in FY 2001, 55 in FY 2002 and 54 in FY 2003.

c The percentages of grantees in each category are based on the data reported by grantees able to provide detailed 

breakdowns of participant types.

d Response categories were added to the reporting form in FY 2002.

e Totals represent all persons receiving technical assistance/training, including grantees unable to provide details of

training participant types. Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding. 

10 
FINDINGS

Exhibit 9. Topics Addressed by Technical Assistance/Training Sessionsa

Number of Grantees 

Topic 

FY 2001

(N = 49) 

FY 2002

(N = 55) 

FY 2003

(N = 54) 

Modifications/device-specific training 47 55 54

AT evaluation/assessment/practice/AT devices 47 51 51 

Funding/acquisition of AT devices or services 44 51 48 

Advocacy/consumer rights issues/laws/informed consumer choice 44 49 47

Development and implementation of laws, regulations, policies, 

practices, procedures or organizational structures that promote access 

to AT devices and services 

39 41 42

Web accessibility/ITb — 45 41

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FYs 2001–2003. 

b Response category was added to the reporting form in FY 2002. 

Public awareness activities focus on developing and disseminating information on AT devices 

and services, and facilitating communication between AT providers and targeted individuals. All 

grantees conducted public awareness activities in FY 2003. All grantees also conducted public 

awareness activities in FY 2001 and FY 2002. While grantees employed an array of methods and 

approaches to increase public awareness, several methods were used more extensively and 

consistently than others over the 3-year period, (see Exhibit 10). Grantees most often used 

information fact sheets or flyers for the public to increase public awareness in FYs 2002 and 

2003; in FY 2001, this method was one of the second most commonly used by grantees. 

11 
FINDINGS

Exhibit 10. Methods Frequently Used to Increase Public Awareness and Disseminate 

Informationa

Grantees Using Method

Method

FY 2001

(N = 51) 

FY 2002

(N = 56) 

FY 2003

(N = 56) 

Informational fact sheets/flyers for public 48 55 55 

Web site 48 54 54

Drop-ins to office and/or demonstration center 49 52 54 

Exhibits/fairs in public areas 47 53 54 

Articles/notifications in other agency publications 47 53 53 

Telephone calls 47 53 52

Mailings 48 49 53

Presentations 47 50 49

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FYs 2001–2003. 

b Counts are duplicated; grantees can report all methods used.

Other methods grantees use to increase awareness and disseminate information about AT devices 

and related services include: Internet discussion lists, public service announcements, establishing 

reference libraries for public use, radio/TV/newspapers, maintaining a database for the public 

with AT information, manuals/guides/booklets, producing videos, sponsoring an AT conference, 

responding to e-mail requests and maintaining listservs. Grantees use an array of public 

awareness methods to reach multiple audiences. 

NIDRR supports a National Public Internet Site authorized under section 104(c)(1) of the AT 

Act of 1998. In FYs 2001, 2002 and 2003, the majority of grantees (over 90 percent) also 

reported having a Web site. Most grantee Web sites were linked to the National Public Internet 

Site, http://assistivetech.net. The characteristics of the grantee Web sites have remained fairly 

constant for the last two reporting periods (see Exhibit 11).5 Other than one Web site under 

construction, all grantees reported that their Web sites were accessible to individuals with 

disabilities. The majority of grantees’ Web sites have links to primary sources for information 

 

5 In FY 2002, the questions about electronic dissemination of information were revised slightly to be consistent

with changes to the reporting forms for other NIDRR programs. Hence, these questions were not asked of 

grantees in FY 2001. 

12 
FINDINGS

(for example, the Social Security Ticket to Work bulletin or regional resource centers) and 

downloadable products that often include grantee-produced information on various aspects of 

AT (e.g., alternative financing, AT for various populations, home modifications and Web access 

guidelines), searchable databases and information in a language other than English. Over a third 

of the Web sites provide an online order form for products. 

Exhibit 11. Web Site Characteristicsa

Number of Grantees 

Web Site Characteristics 

FY 2002

(N = 54) 

FY 2003

(N = 54) 

Web site accessible to individuals with disabilities 53 53 

Web site assists in distribution of materials 50 50 

Links to primary sources 48 48 

Online order form 19 18 

Downloadable products 38 41 

Web site linked to assistivetech.net 43 47 

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FYs 2002–2003. 

NIDRR’s annual progress reporting form asks grantees to provide information on the number of 

individuals (including consumers and family members) receiving information by specific source 

(Exhibit 12). These sources include selected public awareness activities, demonstrations, and 

technical assistance and training. In FY 2003, a total of 854,179 individuals received information 

about assistive technology from grantees through public awareness, demonstration and TA/training 

activities. A total of 2.6 million individuals received information during FYs 2001–2003 from 

activities in these three areas. Over 1.5 million individuals received information through public 

awareness activities (61 percent), with newsletters accounting for 830,817 of all recipients. The 

second most frequently used source of information was demonstrations, which accounted for 

639,270 recipients (25 percent), followed by toll-free telephone calls (17 percent) and TA/training 

activities (14 percent). Ten percent of individuals received information through presentations and 

about 1 percent received information from public forums. The number of individuals served 

13 
FINDINGS

through the most common methods of public awareness increased across all categories from FYs 

2002–2003, with the exception of public forums, which declined by two-thirds.6

 

Exhibit 12. Number of Individuals Receiving Information From Selected Sourcesa

Number of Individualsc

Methodb FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 Totals 

Grantees reporting public awareness activities (N = 51) (N = 56) (N = 56) 

Newsletters 232,581 240,275 357,961 830,817

Toll-free telephone calls 123,260 150,338 153,853 427,451

Presentations 77,112 82,606 104,416 264,134

Public forums 12,010 15,853 5,322 33,185

Subtotal 1,555,587

Grantees reporting demonstrations (N = 47) (N = 45) (N = 50) 

Demonstrations 103,969 430,410d 104,891 639,270

Grantees reporting TA/training (N = 49) (N = 55) (N = 54) 

TA/training activities 104,540 129,298 127,736 361,574

Total 653,472 1,048,780 854,179 2,556,431

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FYs 2001–2003. 

b The data in this table are collected from different sections of the annual report; in FY 2001 through FY 2003 all 

grantees using the reporting system reported on public awareness activities, while fewer grantees reported on TA 

and training. Within each type of public awareness activity, the number of grantees that were able to provide 

specific counts on the number and type of recipients by method varied by year. 

c Totals include individuals with disabilities and their families. 

d In FY 2002, Arizona reported 349,092 participants for demonstrations or 81 percent of the total. 

 

6 Without the data from the five grantees that chose not to use the Web-based reporting system in FY 2001,

NIDRR cannot say with certainty that there was an increase in the number of individuals served from these 

public awareness methods from FY 2001 to FY2002. 

14 
FINDINGS

The Research Activities Carried Out Through the Funded Activities to Improve 

Understanding of the Costs and Benefits of Access to Assistive Technology for Individuals 

With Disabilities who Represent a Variety of Ages and Types of Disabilities 

No research studies on the availability of assistive technology devices and assistive technology 

services were conducted as part of the activities of these grantees. However, under Title II of the 

Rehabilitation Act, NIDRR has funded an array of AT research grants. A sampling of the entire 

portfolio of NIDRR funded AT research projects is highlighted in this report. 

As part of the effort to collect research on access to and use of assistive technology, NIDRR 

awarded funding to the California Foundation for Independent Living Centers (CFILC). As part 

of their project, CFILC is working with the independent living community to develop cumulative 

research data on the use of and access to AT by people with disabilities. As a result of their work 

the grantee has published a report on its findings, reviewing the success and barriers of AT. A 

copy of this report is available at 

http://www.atnet.org/CR4AT/PositionPapers/Position_Papers.html. 

Duke University was awarded a grant to fund the Consortium for Assistive Technology 

Outcomes Research. The consortium is comprised of assistive technology professionals from AT 

programs and organizations in the United States and Canada. As part of their grant activities, 

Duke University is focusing on improving measurement science for assistive technology and 

understanding the processes for the adoption and use or discontinuance of assistive technology. 

Among the research activities associated with this project, the grantee will review existing 

approaches and identify barriers to the use of assistive technology outcomes measurement and 

examine factors related to assistive technology abandonment. More information on grant 

activities and publications associated with this project are available at

http://www.atoutcomes.com/ATOCdefault.htm.

Grant funding was also awarded to the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee to conduct grant 

activities that will also lead to enhanced understanding of AT use and abandonment. The 

Assistive Technology Outcomes Measurement System Project (ATOMS Project) endeavors to 

conduct a comprehensive needs assessment, develop a prototype instrument and hold consensus 

building activities in an effort to address the critical need to identify components of a future AT 

outcomes measurement system. A number of publications on assistive technology have emanated 

from the ATOMS project. For a complete description of grant activities and publications, visit 

http://www.uwm.edu/CHS/r2d2/atoms/. 

15 
FINDINGS

The Program Outreach Activities to Rural and Inner-City Areas That Are Carried Out 

Through the Funded Activities and Funded Activities Targeted to Reach Underrepresented 

Populations and Rural Populations

Grantees provided information on the support they extended to statewide and community-based 

organizations that provide AT devices and services or that assist persons with disabilities in 

using AT devices and services, “including a focus on organizations assisting individuals from

underrepresented and rural populations” (Section 101(b)(2)(D)). This support may include 

outreach to consumer organizations and other groups to coordinate efforts to assist individuals 

with disabilities in obtaining AT devices and services. Underrepresented groups to be considered 

for outreach efforts are defined in the AT Act of 1998, and include: persons from rural areas; 

minorities; older individuals; poor persons; persons with low-incidence disabilities; and persons 

with limited English proficiency. 

As seen in Exhibit 13, 79 percent (44 of 56) of grantees reported conducting outreach activities 

in FY 2003. In FY 2001, 90 percent (46 of 51) of grantees reported conducting some type of 

outreach that targeted underrepresented groups.7 In FY 2002, there was an increase when all 56 

grantees reported some form of outreach activity. The percentage of grantees conducting 

outreach activities decreased to 78 in FY 2003. The decline in outreach activities in FY 2003 cut 

across all underrepresented populations. 

 

7 On the NIDRR annual progress reporting form, grantees can cite outreach activities they conduct in combination

with other activities such as, interagency coordination activities, training or technical assistance activities, 

legislative or policy changes, or outreach conducted as a separate activity. Exhibit 12 provides an unduplicated

count of outreach efforts across all types of activities. 

16 
FINDINGS

Exhibit 13. Underrepresented Groups Targeted by Any Outreach Activitya, b

Number of Grantees 

Population 

FY 2001

(N = 46) 

FY 2002

(N = 56) 

FY 2003

(N = 44) 

Persons from rural areas 41 42 35 

Minorities 41 41 32

Older individuals 40 41 35

Poor persons 38 41 33

Persons with low-incidence disabilities 34 42 38

Persons with limited English proficiency 34 28 24 

a Data source: AT State grant program annual progress reports for FYs 2001–2003. 

b Outreach could be coordinated TA and training, with interagency coordination, or conducted with other activities 

or on its own.

In analyzing the data for outreach activities for the 3-year period, the following observations 

were made: 

 Individuals with low-incidence disabilities were not a common target of outreach 

activities in FY 2001. By FY 2003, however, they were the group most likely to be 

targeted by outreach activities. 

 Each year, persons from rural areas were among the two groups most likely to be targeted 

by outreach efforts. 

 The largest relative decrease in outreach emphasis has been among minorities. Forty-one 

of 46 (89 percent) grantees reporting outreach activities focused on minorities in FY 

2001, decreasing to 32 of 44 (73 percent) grantees in FY 2003. 

 Persons with limited English proficiency were least likely to be the focus of grantee 

outreach efforts throughout the 3-year period; in FY 2003, only 24 grantees reported 

outreach to this underrepresented group. 

In their annual reports, grantees are asked to describe their primary outreach strategy or focus. 

Examples of outreach activities reported by grantees in FY 2003 include the following: 

 Operated mobile loan closets to conduct outreach in rural areas of the state. 

 Worked with a coalition, including its Protection and Advocacy agency and a disabilityrelated nonprofit organization, to identify individuals in nursing homes in need of AT. 

17 
FINDINGS

 Conducted AT awareness activities at libraries throughout the state during Senior 

Citizens Month. 

 Produced all materials in Spanish as well as English in order to conduct outreach in the 

Hispanic community. 

 Displayed assistive technology at minority health conferences and AgrAbility conferences. 

 Delivered AT presentations on a variety of devices and daily living aids to American 

Indian leadership meetings. 

 Trained teachers across the state to meet the needs of individuals with low-incidence 

disabilities. 

The AT Act of 1998 specifies that the annual report on the AT State grant program shall contain 

information on outreach activities aimed at providing information and services to 

underrepresented populations. As shown in Exhibit 13, in FY 2003, 79 percent of grantees 

conducted outreach aimed at providing information and services to underrepresented 

populations. A sizable majority of grantees (90 percent) reported conducting outreach in FY 

2001 and all grantees conducted outreach in FY 2002. For all six underrepresented populations 

identified in the Act, at least 50 percent of grantees conducted outreach to improve AT access in 

all 3 years. 

Consumer Involvement Activities Carried Out Through The Funded Activities 

The AT Act of 1998 states that the annual report on the AT grantee program shall 

contain information on “the consumer involvement activities carried out through funded 

activities” (P.L. 105-394, Title I, Section 103(c)(2)(G)). 

Exhibit 8 shows that 27,365 individuals with disabilities participated in grantee-sponsored TA 

and training events in FY 2003 and over the last 3 years, 64,349 individuals with disabilities 

participated in grantee-sponsored TA and training events. The number of family members who 

engaged in these activities was 10,798 in FY 2003 and 32,870 over the last 3 years. 

Grantees are also asked to report the numbers of consumers and family members who obtain 

information from various sources, if possible (see Exhibit 5). In FY 2003, 289,737 consumers 

and family members received information from the selected sources identified in Exhibit 5. 

The number of consumer and family members who received information increased from 206,980 

in FY 2001 to 213,980 in FY 2002, and 289,737 in FY 2003. 

18 
FINDINGS

Overall, newsletters reached the largest number of consumers and family members, accounting 

for almost half of the over 700,000 consumer and family member recipients during the 3-year 

period. Consumers and family members represented about 28 percent of all individuals who 

received information from public awareness activities, demonstrations, and TA/training (see 

Exhibit 7). Demonstrations were the second largest venue for providing information to 

consumers and family members, in FYs 2001–2003 reaching nearly 150,000 individuals. 

TA/training activities followed, providing resources to more than 100,000 individuals. 

19 
FINDINGS

20 
SUMMARY 

During FY 2003, the state AT State grant program grantees reported activities designed to 

increase and promote coordination among state agencies, with such efforts among grantees 

increasing over the past three fiscal years. Grantees also focused their efforts on activities that 

led to an increase in the availability of funding for AT devices and services, including initiating 

changes in public policy. 

AT State grantees also provided education and training activities to increase awareness and 

knowledge of assistive technology devices and services. Grantees have identified consumer 

benefits and outcomes resulting from grant activities, as well as those activities benefiting 

individuals with disabilities from rural and inner-city areas, and underrepresented populations. 

In conducting these activities and the other activities described in this report, the AT state 

grantees under Title I of the Act have implemented programs that are addressing the assistive 

technology needs of individuals with disabilities in the United States and its territories. 

21 
SUMMARY

22