National Disability Policy:

A Progress Report

November 1999%November 2000

National Council on Disability
National Council on Disability

1331 F Street, NW, Suite 1050

Washington, DC 20004-1107

National Disability Policy: A Progress Report, November 1999%November 2000

This report is also available in alternative formats and on NCD’s award-winning Web site

(www.ncd.gov).

Publication date: June 14, 2001

202-272-2004 Voice

202-272-2074 TTY

202-272-2022 Fax

The views contained in the report do not necessarily represent those of the Administration, as this

document has not been subjected to the A-19 Executive Branch review process.
ii

Letter of Transmittal

June 14, 2001

The President

The White House

Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

On behalf of the National Council on Disability (NCD), I am pleased to submit NCD’s National

Disability Policy: A Progress Report, as required by Section 401 (b)(1) of the Rehabilitation Act

of 1973, as amended. The report uses as benchmarks the recommendations for change made by

disability leaders from throughout the country and captured in the 1996 NCD document

Achieving Independence. These recommendations&elaborated upon in the ensuing annual

Progress Reports& reflect a wide array of public policy areas designed to advance inclusion,

empowerment, and independence of people with disabilities of all ages from diverse

backgrounds consistent with the vision of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).

The attached report covers the period November 1999 through November 2000, the end of the

2nd Session of the 106th Congress. It reviews federal policy activities by major issue areas,

noting progress where it has occurred and making further recommendations where necessary.

The recommendations apply to the executive and legislative branches of the Federal

Government.

NCD believes that Americans with disabilities have witnessed incremental expansion of selfsufficiency and inclusion this past year. However, far too much of our time is spent in defending

the bedrock civil and human rights protections of the past 30 years against attempts to weaken

laws such as ADA and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The change in

responsibility for the development of policy and program implementation from the Federal

Government to state government offers opportunities for innovation. At the same time it adds

tension and complexities to policy for people with disabilities who rely on such programs, rather

than ensuring their promise. 

In your New Freedom Initiative, you laid out a blueprint to increase investment in and access to

assistive technologies and a high-quality education, and to help integrate Americans with

disabilities into the workforce and into community life. This initiative comes at a time when

many disability advocates are expressing concern about the future of disability policy. NCD will

work with the your administration and Congress to ensure that every individual with a disability

has access to the American dream. 

With strong, representative, and experienced leadership and open, ongoing input from the

disability community, the challenge to make the most of the opportunities facing us at the start of

your new Administration can be met. NCD has completed civil rights policy evaluations over the

past several years directly related to the disability policy areas addressed in the New Freedom
iii

Initiative. We have also submitted to you NCD’s transition recommendations in a document

entitled Investing in Independence: Transition Recommendations for President George W. Bush

related to your New Freedom Initiative. NCD invites you and your Administration to draw on the

research and studies conducted by our agency for information on how and where executive

agencies can act to the maximum benefit of their consumers.

NCD stands ready to work with you and stakeholders inside and outside the government to see

that the public policy agenda set out in the attached report, in Achieving Independence, in a series

of civil rights monitoring studies published as NCD reports, and in the New Freedom Initiative is

implemented.

Sincerely,

Marca Bristo

Chairperson

(The same letter of transmittal was sent to the President Pro Tempore of the U.S. Senate and the

Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.)
iv

National Council on Disability Members and Staff

Members

Marca Bristo, Chairperson

Hughey Walker, First Vice Chairperson

Kate Pew Wolters, Second Vice Chairperson

Yerker Andersson, Ph.D.

Dave N. Brown

Edward Correia

John D. Kemp

Audrey McCrimon

Gina McDonald

Bonnie O’Day, Ph.D.

Lilliam Rangel-Diaz

Debra Robinson

Gerald S. Segal

Ela Yazzie-King

Staff

Ethel D. Briggs, Executive Director

Jeffrey T. Rosen, General Counsel and Director of Policy

Mark S. Quigley, Director of Communications

Kathleen A. Blank, Attorney/Adviser

Gerrie Drake Hawkins, Ph.D., Program Specialist

Martin Gould, Ed.D., Research Specialist

Pamela O’Leary, Interpreter

Allan W. Holland, Accountant Officer

Brenda Bratton, Executive Secretary

Stacey S. Brown, Staff Assistant

Carla Nelson, Office Assistant

Edward J. Heaton, Fellow
v

Dedication

Dedicated to Rae Unzicker, whose service as a member of the National Council on Disability

from 1995 to her death on March 22, 2001, helped to significantly advance the issues of people

with disabilities, particularly those with psychiatric disabilities. We have been blessed and

enlightened by Rae’s fierce and unwavering passion in supporting the rights of people with

psychiatric disabilities to exercise free choice in all aspects of their lives.
vi

Foreword

A number of significant disability policy events occurred outside the time period covered by this

report but before the report went to press. We would be remiss in not briefly mentioning those

events now. On January 20, 2001, the new administration issued a memorandum to all federal

agencies indicating the possibility of delays in implementation of last-minute executive orders or

eleventh hour regulation making attempted by the Clinton administration. Some of these orders

and regulations affect people with disabilities. 

On February 1, 2001, President George W. Bush released his New Freedom Initiative, which lays

out a blueprint to increase investment in and access to assistive technologies and a high-quality

education and to help integrate Americans with disabilities into the workforce and into

community life. On February 21, in a 5 to 4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in University

of Alabama v. Garrett (No. 99-1240) that state workers cannot file employment discrimination

suits for money damages against state governments under Title I of the Americans with

Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. The majority opinion, written by Chief Justice William H.

Rehnquist, said that the evidence of state discrimination against people with disabilities

assembled by Congress when it passed ADA was insufficient to establish its authority to allow

workers to sue their state employers for damages. We will present much more in-depth

information about those events in NCD’s next Progress Report.
vii
viii

Contents

Executive Summary ............................................................1

PART I

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Disability Statistics and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Civil Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Health Care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Long-Term Services and Supports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Youth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Welfare Reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Technology and Telecommunications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

International Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

PART II

Major Activities Summary&FY 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

Appendix

Mission of the National Council on Disability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
1

Executive Summary

In 2000, America celebrated the 10th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

and the 25th anniversary of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). From the

vantage point of these milestones, America has reason to be proud. Americans used these two

anniversaries to launch hundreds of outstanding ADA birthday events. A two-day celebration in

the Washington, DC, area included events on Capitol Hill, the FDR Memorial, Gallaudet

University, and the Endependence Center of Northern Virginia. The Washington events were

part of a national "Spirit of ADA" Torch Relay, covering 24 U.S. cities, that commemorated the

two important anniversaries. The torch, which began its journey June 11 in Houston, entered the

nation’s capital on July 25 and departed for destinations along the northeastern seaboard on July

27.

Yet looking at the gap between the experiences of Americans with disabilities and the standards

established by civil rights laws makes it clear that much more remains to be accomplished. As a

result of its policy work in fiscal year 2000&including a series of civil rights evaluations,

leadership summits, and grassroots community briefings&the National Council on Disability

(NCD) has confirmed that despite great strides toward equality, people with disabilities still

confront major barriers of discrimination and suffer the consequences of weak federal

enforcement. These result in outcomes such as these:

 National rates for high school graduation with a diploma for students who receive special

education and related services have stagnated at 27 percent for the past three years, while

rates are 75 percent for students who do not rely on special education.

 Unemployment rates for working-age adults with disabilities have hovered at the 70

percent level for at least the past 12 years, while rates are in the low single digits for

working-age adults without disabilities.

 Home ownership rates for people with disabilities are in the single digits, while rates for

people without disabilities are about 71 percent.

 Computer use and Internet access of people with disabilities is half that of people without

disabilities. 
2

Because of the persistency of these barriers to equal opportunity, NCD believes that the President

 and Congress must set a standard of greater federal commitment to deliver on the promises of

disability and other civil and human rights laws. The candidates in the recent presidential

campaign recognized the importance of including people with disabilities in the nation’s agenda

by directly addressing their issues in an unprecedented way. In various campaign speeches and in

his New Freedom Initiative, then-Governor George W. Bush articulated a number of specific

proposals for greatly expanded resources for technology assistance, high-quality education,

innovative transportation programs, and a promise of strong enforcement of ADA, among other

things. The vitality of ADA, IDEA, Sections 504 and 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Fair

Housing Act, and other critical civil rights laws depends in large measure on the long-term vision

and leadership of the Federal Government.

During the past year, America celebrated the anniversary of two cornerstone and foundational

disability civil rights statutes&IDEA and ADA. In addition, Congress considered a number of

disability-related laws and enacted a few of them.

IDEA

In 1975, when Congress enacted the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, P.L. 94-142

(now titled Part B of IDEA), it found that the special education needs of more than eight million

students with disabilities were not being met. Some students were entirely excluded from school;

others were not receiving an appropriate education; still others had unidentified disabilities or

were misclassified. Of those who did receive educational services, many were educated far away

from their local schools (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1400(b)(1)-(6)). Still, Congress recognized that

educators had the ability to instruct these students (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1400(b)(7)).

In the more than two decades since its enactment, IDEA implementation has produced important

improvements in the quality and effectiveness of the public education received by millions of

American children with disabilities. IDEA’s basic premise is that all children with disabilities
3

have a federally protected civil right to have available to them a free appropriate public education

that meets their schooling and related service needs in the least restrictive environment, in

regular classes, and in the school they would attend if not disabled. Today almost six million

children and young people with disabilities ages 3 through 21 qualify for educational

interventions under Part B of IDEA. Some of these students are being educated in their

neighborhood schools in regular classrooms. These children have a right to appropriate support

services and devices such as assistive listening systems, braille textbooks, paraprofessional

supports, curricular modifications, talking computers, and speech synthesizers, made available to

them as needed to facilitate their learning side-by-side with their nondisabled peers.

In January 2000, NCD released its evaluation of nearly two and a half decades of federal

enforcement of IDEA. Entitled Back to School on Civil Rights, this report analyzed the data

contained in the Department of Education’s state monitoring reports from 1975 to 1998 to

determine what has been happening over time. The study measured compliance in the areas of

free appropriate public education (FAPE), least restrictive environment (LRE), individualized

education plans (IEPs), transition services, general supervision, procedural safeguards, and

protection in evaluation of students with disabilities. 

Back to School on Civil Rights reports that all states and the District of Columbia were found to

be out of compliance with IDEA requirements to some degree. Federal efforts over several

administrations to enforce IDEA in states where noncompliance persists were found to be

inconsistent, often ineffective, and without any real teeth. While the statutory framework of

IDEA envisioned states as the primary implementers of IDEA, the Federal Government has

fallen short over five administrations in its efforts to ensure that the protections of the law for

children with disabilities are enforced. This study confirmed what students with disabilities and

their parents have repeatedly told NCD&that while they are enthusiastic supporters of IDEA,

noncompliance with the law has persisted in some states over many years, placing enormous

burdens on children and families.
4

As the nation celebrates 25 years of IDEA implementation, it is important to note that Congress

crafted a statute in 1975 that, if faithfully implemented and enforced, will consistently produce

quality outcomes for students with disabilities. It is also important to note that parents of children

with disabilities are enthusiastic supporters of the law. They think it is a good law.

ADA

On July 26, 2000, the nation celebrated the 10th anniversary of ADA. In the years since its

enactment, great strides have been made in accessing equal opportunity for Americans with

disabilities and their families. That is because ADA&along with other advances in the law, health

care, education, and technology&is enabling many Americans with disabilities to be more active

in the community. This is good news, not only for people with disabilities but also for our entire

nation. 

As intended, ADA has helped to remove many of the physical and attitudinal barriers that have

prevented Americans with disabilities from reaching their full potential. It has also focused the

attention of public officials and private citizens on the importance of making sure that

communities do not overlook or lose out on the talent of any person. So, as we mark the 10th

anniversary of ADA, we can truly celebrate how far we have come in ending discrimination and

tapping the skills and energy of Americans with disabilities. Nevertheless, threats to the vitality

and rigor of ADA cannot be ignored. 

During the year 2000, NCD released its report entitled Promises to Keep: A Decade of Federal

Enforcement of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This report concluded that the overall

impact of ADA has been diminished by a lack of sufficient leadership in developing a vision for

ADA enforcement across the various federal agencies. NCD’s main conclusion was that chronic

underfunding and understaffing of responsible agencies, undue caution, and the absence of a

coherent strategy have undermined federal enforcement of ADA in its first decade. NCD also

concluded that:
5

 Although Congress has recently increased funding for some agencies’ ADA enforcement

activities, the long period of inadequate funding by Congress has reduced the

effectiveness of ADA.

 The Department of Justice (DOJ) has not exercised enough oversight in tracking Title I

complaints, and other agencies have not sufficiently cooperated with DOJ in preparing

and referring cases that would advance the interpretation of ADA. 

NCD’s recommendations include robust and assertive leadership by the Federal Government

spearheaded by DOJ in developing a coherent national strategy for enforcement in implementing

ADA, and strengthening ADA discrimination complaint handling by the Departments of Justice

and Transportation, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and ADA Title II referral

agencies.

On the judicial front, in October 2000, a long standing controversy over the constitutional basis

of ADA as applied to states led the Supreme Court to hear the issues in University of Alabama v.

Garrett. In Garrett, Alabama argued that ADA does not meet the criteria for Fourteenth

Amendment protection on two grounds: (1) Congress lacked enough evidence of states’ failure to

extend equal protection of the law to people with disabilities and (2) the requirements of ADA

were not a proportionate response to the problem the statute addresses. In late September 2000,

the Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari for PGA Tour, Inc. v. Casey Martin. The PGA

Tour is arguing that Title III does not apply to people competing in a professional sports event

and that, even if it did, ADA does not require the competition to be "fundamentally altered" by

allowing different competitors to play by different substantive rules. In deciding these cases, the

Supreme Court will fundamentally shape the federal judiciary’s interpretation of the breadth and

reach of ADA in our lifetimes.

In Congress, several amendments to ADA were proposed. The ADA Notification Act (H.R.3590)

would have required people alleging a Title III violation to provide 90 days notice prior to filing
6

a lawsuit and would impose penalties if the rule were not followed. H.R. 3590 was referred to

committee. A second bill introduced in the House (H.R. 3170) would have amended ADA

(among other civil rights laws) to eliminate protections for individuals unlawfully present in the

United States by excluding them from the definition of "employee" with regard to employment

in the United States. It also was referred to committee. A third bill, introduced in both the House

(H.R. 3836) and the Senate (S. 1922), would have facilitated ADA compliance by modifying the

Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a tax credit for modifications to intercity buses

making them accessible as required under ADA. Both the ADA notification bill and the

exclusion of undocumented workers bill would perpetuate disability discrimination by

minimizing or eliminating the consequences of persistent noncompliance. 

As Americans mark the 10th anniversary of ADA, we can truly celebrate how far we have come

in ending discrimination and tapping the skills and energy of Americans with disabilities. On the

other hand, we still have a lot of vital work ahead of us if the spirit and intent of ADA are to be

realized. 

Census 2000

Preliminary indications are that the undercount problem for certain population groups has

improved from the 1990 census to last year’s national count. It remains to be seen whether and to

what degree this improvement has occurred for African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans,

children under 18, and people with disabilities. The Census Bureau is expected to release its

preliminary analyses of this issue during the first quarter of 2001.

Hate Crimes

The Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999, introduced in both the House (H.R. 77) and the Senate

(S. 622), would extend the present hate crimes statutes to cover disability, gender, and sexual

orientation. The Act would have allowed federal officials to prosecute hate crimes even when the

victim is not engaged in "federally protected activity." These bills were referred to subcommittee

in both the House and Senate.
7

Genetic Discrimination

Two separate measures were introduced in the House and Senate to prohibit discrimination

against individuals and their family members on the basis of genetic information. The first

measure was the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination in Health Insurance Act of 1999 (H.R.

306 and S. 543); the second measure was the Genetic Discrimination in Health Insurance and

Employment Act of 1999 (H.R. 2457 and S. 1322). No hearings were held on either measure.

Voting Accessibility

A bill to amend the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act was introduced in

the Senate in early 1999. The amendments provided for ensuring that all polling methods used

for federal elections are accessible to disabled and elderly voters. The bill was referred to Senate

committee.

Protections in Managed Care

Legislation to protect the rights of all people with disabilities and their families who need access

to quality health care was introduced but not enacted by the 106th Congress. The primary area of

controversy among proponents and opponents continues to focus on how to define and who

determines "medical necessity." 

Long-Term Services and Supports

A series of promising events have occurred in this area. First, in 1999, the Supreme Court

affirmed the Americans with Disabilities Act’s integration mandate under Title II in Olmstead v.

L. C., 119 S.Ct. 2176 (1999) by declaring unnecessary segregation and institutionalization of

people with disabilities a form of discrimination. Second, as a result of Olmstead, the

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has offered grant and demonstration programs

as well as technical assistance to states to develop plans for implementing Olmstead. Third,

legislators introduced several bills, including the Family Opportunity Act and the Older
8

Americans Act Amendments of 2000, to create more avenues for accessing community-based

supports necessary to meet the Olmstead mandate.

MiCASSA

In November 1999, the Medicaid Community Attendant Services and Supports Act

(MiCASSA)(S. 1935), was referred to committee, where it remains. MiCASSA, which proposes

to amend Title XIX of the Social Security Act, would provide coverage for community attendant

services and supports under the Medicaid program. This bill would allow the dollars to follow

the person and would allow eligible individuals, or their representatives, to choose where they

would receive services and supports. Any individual who is entitled to nursing home or other

institutional services would have the choice of where and how these services are provided. The

millions of Americans currently residing in nursing homes and other institutions would finally

have a viable option.

Youth

From a national perspective, the post-school outcomes for many of our youth and young adults

with disabilities remain poor, despite a number of advances realized by other people through

education, disability rights policy, the support of federal mandates, and the funding of programs

and initiatives intended to affect all youth. Among the changes needed to address these serious

issues is a serious and protracted emphasis by government at all levels on the positive skills and

attributes of youth with disabilities, and the promotion of business involvement in the

educational lives of students with disabilities.

Outreach to Diverse Cultural Groups

For a large segment of the population, particularly those from diverse racial, cultural, and ethnic

communities, exclusion continues to hinder their participation in all aspects of American society.

Years of model programs, technical assistance, and other federal initiatives have left unchanged

the status of the most disenfranchised&people with disabilities from diverse cultures. Overall

concerns include (1) unequal protection and benefits under the same federal laws that have seen
9

at least some level of implementation for the larger disability community and (2) the persistence

of dual discrimination as a barrier to people with disabilities from diverse cultures. 

The President signed an Executive Order in 1999 establishing a 15-member Advisory

Commission on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. The commission studied ways to

increase public sector, private sector, and community involvement in improving the health and

well-being of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders; increase their participation in federal

programs where they may be underserved; and foster research and data collection, including

information on public health.

Employment

The Federal Government undertook a number of initiatives this year. Some initiatives focused on

removing disincentives to work through the use of certain Supplemental Security Income (SSI)

and Supplemental Security Disability Income (SSDI) benefits, through the Ticket to Work and

Work Incentives Improvement Act (TWWIIA); some, such as the administration’s Digital Divide

Initiative, involved the use of new assistive technology or information technology programs. It is

too early to tell what, if any, impact these initiatives will have on the unacceptably high rate of

unemployment among people with disabilities. Along with other key agencies, the Presidential

Task Force on Employment of Adults with Disabilities worked to ensure that in the FY 2001

budget, Congress approved a new Office of Disability Employment Policy for the Department of

Labor. Programs and staff of the former President’s Committee on Employment of People with

Disabilities have been integrated into this new office.

Housing

During the past decade, the lack of affordable and accessible housing has reached crisis

proportions. According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s most recent

Annual Performance Report, estimates of home ownership indicate that only 2 percent of people

with disabilities are homeowners and less than 5 percent of the 6.5 million people with

disabilities living on SSI and SSDI are homeowners. In addition, the availability, affordability,
10

and accessibility of the nation’s housing/rental stock is in jeopardy. Both the administration and

Congress provided increases in the budget.

Transportation

Progress was noted in several areas of transportation this year. In March 2000, Congress enacted

the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century, containing

important changes to the Federal Aviation Act (FA Act) and the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA).

These changes strengthened the mandates of nondiscrimination against air travelers with

disabilities in both laws. In late summer 2000, the Office of the Inspector General initiated an air

travel customer survey to determine how well the airline industry has fulfilled its pledge to meet

higher customer service standards. 

The Department of Justice entered a settlement agreement with Greyhound last year that obliges 

intercity or over-the-road bus (OTRB) services to put more accessible buses (equipped with

operating lifts and other boarding devices) with properly trained operators on the road. Despite

progress in the Greyhound case, however, persistent noncompliance perpetuates accessibility

problems in many communities.

Technology

The Federal Government and Congress have undertaken a number of efforts to promote the

development of new, accessible technology. These efforts include conducting a government-wide

review of assistive technology activities; completing the work of the Web-based Education

Commission; issuing new standards and regulations for electronic and information technology;

securing commitments from technology companies, research firms, and nonprofit organizations

to improve the accessibility and affordability of technology for people with disabilities; and the

release of a DOJ report, Information Technology and People with Disabilities: The Current State

of Federal Accessibility, that required self-reports from federal agencies detailing the extent to

which agency electronic and information technology is accessible to, and usable by, people with

disabilities. 
11

International

In February, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) released its

second annual report on the implementation of the USAID disability policy first announced in

1998. The second annual report looked at the policy recommendations from 1998 to assess to

what extent they had been implemented in 1999. The report stated that overall efforts to promote

USAID’s disability policy "have been disjointed and minimally effective despite some areas of

internal support." 

The United Nations held a Special Session of the General Assembly June 5%9, 2000, (known as

Beijing+5) to follow up on the Fourth World Conference on Women held in Beijing in

September 1995. Member governments in attendance reaffirmed their commitments to the

Beijing Declaration and Platform of Action adopted to reduce the gap in equality between men

and women that causes higher rates of infant mortality and higher levels of malnutrition. The

final report of Beijing+5 recognized the need to address the concerns of women with disabilities

in all policymaking and programming, including "special measures at all levels" to integrate

women with disabilities "into the mainstream of development." Overall, the worldwide

movement toward full inclusion and independence of people with disabilities has sparked a

renewed call for an international convention on the human rights of people with disabilities.

International disability organizations explored the usefulness of such a convention in promoting

the goals of inclusion at the Rehabilitation International XIX World Congress held in Rio de

Janeiro August 25%29, 2000.

In summary, NCD believes that Americans with disabilities have witnessed an incremental

expansion of self-sufficiency and inclusion this past year. However, far too much of their time is

spent defending the bedrock civil and human rights protections of the past 30 years against

attempts to weaken laws such as ADA and IDEA. The shift in responsibility for the development

of policy and program implementation from federal to state government may offer opportunities

for innovation. At the same time, however, it adds tension and complexities to policies for people
12

with disabilities who rely on such programs as Social Security benefits, vocational rehabilitation,

Medicaid, Medicare, special education, and workforce development.
13

PART I

Introduction

At the dawn of a new millennium, many Americans are reevaluating how they live, learn, work,

and play. It is a natural time to question whether policies, programs, products, and practices that

empower and include Americans with disabilities characterize the public and private systems that

provide services. 

During the second half of the past century, developments in public policy led to unprecedented

statutory affirmation of the civil rights of people with disabilities, raising expectations of access,

inclusion, and participation in the mainstream of American society. NCD believes that now is the

time to transform systems to make good on the promise.

Part I of this document, which updates the Progress Report issued by NCD in 1999, will describe

significant policy developments in the past year and offer recommendations for the President and

the members of the 107th Congress of the United States of America.

Part II of the document will describe significant accomplishments of NCD and represents, in

effect, NCD’s Annual Report to the U.S. Congress.

Disability Statistics and Research

1. Census 2000

Every 10 years, the U.S. Census Bureau conducts a complete accounting of every resident in the

United States. Individuals with disabilities will be affected if the 2000 Census is inaccurate.

Census data are used by educators, policymakers, and community leaders and directly affect

funding for many programs critical to individuals with disabilities, including programs for health

care, transportation, employment training, and housing. Federal, state, and county governments

use Census information to guide the annual distribution of $180 billion in critical services.

Census information is used by state and county agencies to plan for eligible recipients under the
14

Medicare, Medicaid, and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) programs; to distribute funds and

develop programs for people with disabilities and the elderly under the Rehabilitation Act; to

distribute funds for housing for people with disabilities under the Housing and Urban

Development Act; to allocate funds to states and local areas for employment and job training

programs for veterans under the Job Training Partnership Act, Disabled Veterans Outreach

Programs; to ensure that comparable public transportation services are available for all segments

of the population; to award federal grants under the Older Americans Act based on the number of

elderly people with physical and mental disabilities; to allocate funds for mass transit systems to

provide facilities for disabled persons under the Federal Transit Act; for a collection of job

development services for disabled veterans, including counseling, job training, and placement

services under the Disabled Veterans Outreach Program; to provide housing assistance and

supportive services for low-income persons with HIV/AIDS and their families under the Housing

Opportunities for Persons with AIDS program; and for Special Education Preschool Grants that

make available special education for children ages 3 through 5. 

Census questions about disability are designed to provide information that helps to define

disability as a limitation in the ability to perform one or more major life activities. The two

disability items included in Census 2000 aim to obtain information about health conditions that

limit an individual in activities such as working at a job, going outside the home alone, and

taking care of personal needs such as bathing, dressing or getting around inside the home. The

individual activities are themselves of interest, and Census officials believe that the ability to

identify persons with a limitation in one or more activities helps determine a valid overall

measure of disability status. The two disability questions contained in Census 2000 were newly

designed to address acknowledged shortcomings in the two disability questions contained in

Census 1990. 

NCD recommends that the U.S. Census Bureau immediately identify whether or not the newly

redesigned Census 2000 disability questions corrected the shortcomings of the Census 1990

disability questions, and make that determination public.
15

It is reported on the Census Bureau Web site that Census 2000 data will be disseminated mainly

using a new data retrieval system called the American FactFinder (AFF). Census 2000 data

products are expected to be available beginning January 2001. The Census Bureau reports that

the AFF will be accessible to the widest possible array of users through the Internet, including

nearly 1,800 State Data Centers and affiliates; 1,400 federal depository libraries, and other

libraries, universities, and private organizations. The AFF will locate and retrieve the information

needed at the location of choice from some of the largest census databases. The American

FactFinder is available directly from the Census Bureau’s Web site

(http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/BasicFactsServlet).

NCD recommends that the U.S. Census Bureau verify that the AFF is accessible to people with

disabilities, and that the Bureau not post any Census 2000 data products on its Web site until

such time as the AFF (or some alternative search tool) is deemed accessible.

Materials that the Census Bureau disseminates to the public on its census activities generally do

not list any text telephone (TTY, also referred to as TDD) numbers or contain any information on

the Relay Services. For example, the telephone numbers listed in the Census Bureau’s guide on

the Census 2000 and the Census in Schools Project are voice numbers only. It appears that the

Census Bureau makes information on its TTY numbers available in just a few of its publications,

as in its guide entitled People with Disabilities Answer the Census. Such segregation of

telecommunications information may not only cause difficulty for people with disabilities in

contacting the Census Bureau, it could also detract from the public’s perception of the Census

Bureau’s commitment to the full participation of people with disabilities in Census 2000. 

NCD recommends that any telephone numbers that the U.S. Census Bureau generally publicizes

for information or assistance in its print, electronic, television, and other media outlets should

always be accompanied by TTY or Relay information to ensure that "We All Count."

Furthermore, the Census Bureau should regularly test its public TTY numbers to ensure that all

calls from TTY users are promptly answered. Finally, the Census Bureau should also ensure that
16

its Telephone Questionnaire Assistance program operators are trained on telecommunications

accessibility and that such information is provided to the public as part of the Bureau’s program

activities.

2. Research Challenges

The United States has a variety of databases&national, state and private&on people with

disabilities. The collection of data and research on people with disabilities has made incremental

progress, at best, over the past year. As mentioned above, Census 2000 data products that will

become available may shed light on the status of millions of Americans with disabilities. In

addition, the Clinton administration has shown marked research interest in the areas of assistive

technology and information technology. On the other hand, some current and major methods

used to track employment changes over time (e.g., the Current Population Survey or CPS),

according to key government researchers, are not appropriate tools to use to measure

employment of people with disabilities over time. For example, there are no questions in the CPS

that identify the group that is commonly thought of as the disability population. To attribute any

change (increase or decline) to a specific statute or federal agency when there are no data from

the survey that would provide empirical evidence linking the decline to that specific agency or

statute is a common flaw. Therefore, because current CPS questions do not provide a valid

measure of the disability population in the first place, researchers’ conclusions about the

employment rate trend for the disabled population and its underlying causes are not empirically

supported. Nevertheless, federal funding is still supporting the production of research reports

regarding employment of people with disabilities that rely exclusively on CPS data. This

misplaced reliance is occurring despite the fact that the Presidential Task Force on Employment

of Adults with Disabilities was specifically charged with the design and implementation of a

statistically reliable and accurate method to measure the employment rate of adults with

disabilities as soon as possible but no later than July 2002, the date of termination of the task

force. Data derived from this methodology shall be published on as frequent a basis as possible. 
17

NCD strongly recommends that the administration support the work of the Presidential Task

Force on Employment of Adults with Disabilities and its collaborating agencies in the design

and implementation of a statistically reliable and accurate method to measure the employment

rate of adults with disabilities.

Our democracy and economy demand that public and private leaders have unbiased, relevant,

accurate, and timely information on which to base critical decisions that have significant impact

on the lives of Americans. The U.S. federal statistical system comprises some 70 agencies that

collect, analyze, and disseminate information for use by governments, businesses, researchers,

and the public. Statistics produced by the Federal Government on demographic, economic, and

social conditions and trends are essential to inform decisions that are made by virtually every

organization and household. 

NCD strongly recommends that Congress conduct an extensive review of the scope and quality

of federal disability statistical research activity under the aegis of the congressionally mandated

Interagency Council on Statistical Policy. The goal would be to ensure that the principal

statistical agencies continue to extend their collaborative endeavors to improve the overall

performance and efficiency of the federal statistical system as it relates to, and includes, 54

million Americans with disabilities. NCD also strongly recommends that federal agencies review

their current research-funded grants and contracts to ensure that research reports regarding

employment of people with disabilities do not use unreliable databases (e.g., the CPS).

Civil Rights

1. ADA&10 Years Later

In July 2000, celebrations around the country marked the 10th anniversary of the Americans with

Disabilities Act (ADA). These celebrations hailed the many gains for people with disabilities

over the past 10 years, while recalling the sober reality of the many remaining barriers. While

city streets in most places are more accessible than ever before, public transportation in many

places remains inaccessible, unreliable, inconvenient, or untimely in varying degrees. Millions of
18

people using wheelchairs now have barrier-free entry to more buildings. It should be noted that

much more work needs to be done, particularly for people with cognitive or mental impairments,

who continue to fight for accessible programs offered to the public by both public and private

entities. The victory celebration was decidedly mixed, as this year also brought the most

aggressive court battles against ADA to date.

Recognizing the need to address these ongoing barriers, the Clinton administration issued a

flurry of executive orders and regulations in commemoration of ADA’s 10th anniversary. These

measures included increasing federal employment opportunities and extending Social Security

benefits for people with disabilities returning to work as well as establishing effective procedures

for addressing disability-based discrimination in federal agencies. Another series of initiatives

directed the improvement of Medicaid coverage and increased opportunities for youth with

disabilities to successfully transition to the world of work and independence. Still other

initiatives were aimed at creating home- and community-based service options for people with

disabilities who live in nursing homes.

In late June 2000, the National Council on Disability issued a report entitled Promises to Keep: A

Decade of Federal Enforcement of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which analyzed ADA

enforcement efforts of the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Department of Transportation, the

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the Federal Communications Commission. In

addition to recognizing the initiatives and positive action of these agencies, NCD’s report

identified significant shortcomings in enforcement. The lack of a coherent unified and unifying

national enforcement strategy was a major weakness. Enforcement efforts have been shaped

largely by an approach based on case-by-case complaint handling rather than compliance

monitoring and follow-up technical assistance. Our research findings revealed that agencies, to

varying degrees, have been hesitant to exercise leadership in litigating difficult or controversial

cases or even in referring cases to DOJ for litigation. The efficiency of complaint handling has

varied greatly across agencies. The process has been slow even in the best performing agencies,

with unreasonably long delays in the worst. Despite several funding increases in the past decade,
19

no federal agency has an enforcement budget commensurate with the scope of its ADA

mandates. Another significant finding was that agencies have provided few opportunities for

appropriate input from people with disabilities in setting overall priorities for policy development

and enforcement activities. 

NCD recommended that the DOJ assert strong leadership in bringing together the federal

enforcement agencies to develop a strategic vision and plan for ADA enforcement across the

Federal Government, including a well-coordinated litigation strategy. All the agencies must look

at how to focus their enforcement resources to increase the consumer-responsiveness of key

operations such as complaint handling. All these actions should be undertaken with appropriate

input and collaboration with people with disabilities.

Despite weaknesses in its enforcement efforts, DOJ has acted decisively to promote inclusion

and accessibility for Americans with disabilities. In July 2000, DOJ released a report

documenting the decade’s many advances in access to public and private facilities and programs

through enforcement action and negotiated settlements initiated by DOJ, as well as through

voluntary compliance. Throughout FY 2000, DOJ intervened to help strengthen the legal

foundation of ADA and to defend it from the onslaught of lawsuits attacking the very basis of the

law. Seeking to strengthen a weak provision of ADA, DOJ continues the battle to establish

insurance as a public accommodation under Title III, filing amicus briefs in two cases heard by

the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In the first, Pallozzi v. Allstate Life Insurance

Co. (198 F. 3rd 28, Dec. 1, 1999), the Second Circuit agreed with DOJ, ruling that since ADA

specifically relates to the insurance business and no other federal law prevents it from covering

underwriting, ADA may cover the underwriter’s decision not to issue a policy. In a second case,

Leonard v. Israel Discount Bank of New York (199 F. 3rd 99, Dec. 8, 1999), however, the same

Second Circuit court ruled that an insurance practice is protected by ADA’s insurance

exemption, whether or not it has an actuarial justification, when it complies with state law, and is

not a subterfuge to evade the purposes of ADA. The court further ruled that a practice could not

be deemed a subterfuge unless it was adopted after ADA became law.
20

DOJ also intervened to challenge discriminatory state practices in Nored v. Weakley County 9-1-

1 Emergency Communications District. This lawsuit challenged a Tennessee state statute that

prohibits people with "any apparent mental disorder," even the most minor, from occupying

positions as public safety dispatchers. DOJ will broaden the suit to challenge five state statutes

that prohibit people with apparent mental disorders from serving as public safety dispatchers,

police officers, corrections officers, youth service officers, and sheriffs, and will seek relief for

all persons injured by these laws.

NCD commends DOJ on its efforts to establish constructive policy positions in the context of

litigation. The Department of Justice should make use of regulations, subregulatory guidance,

and technical assistance documents to take a leadership role on policy issues in Title II and Title

III enforcement and to help covered entities understand and comply with their responsibilities.

Between October 1999 and March 2000, DOJ intervened in six cases defending the

constitutionality of ADA in permitting lawsuits directly against state governments alleged to

have discriminated against people with disabilities. A case heard by the Court of Appeals in the

Second U.S. Circuit was decided in favor of ADA constitutionality; a case in the Seventh U.S.

Circuit was decided in favor of the state. The other four cases are pending. In October 2000, the

widening controversy led the Supreme Court to address the constitutional issues in Garrett v.

University of Alabama. 

From its enactment, the constitutional basis of ADA has been the Fourteenth Amendment. In

Garrett, Alabama argued that ADA does not meet the criteria for Fourteenth Amendment

protection on two grounds: (1) Congress lacked enough evidence of states’ failure to extend

equal protection of the law to people with disabilities and (2) the requirements of ADA were not

a proportionate response to the problem the statute addresses. Besides guaranteeing all citizens

equal protection of the law and due process of law, the Fourteenth Amendment gives Congress

the right to require states to pay money damages for equal protection violations. Amicus briefs

filed by seven states argued that ADA’s remedies for discrimination are disproportionate and go
21

beyond the equal protection rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. Congress,

therefore, lacked the authority to subject states to lawsuits under Title I and Title II of ADA.

Fourteen states, however, countered with an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to hold

ADA’s express abrogation of the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity to be a proper exercise

of Congress’ power to enforce the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The

amicus brief filed by DOJ argued that ADA is constitutionally appropriate legislation providing a

proportionate remedy for the well-documented history of pervasive discrimination by states

against people with disabilities. The Supreme Court will announce its decision in early 2001.

The Court’s decision will have a crucial bearing on the future of disability rights. If ADA were

found to be unconstitutional as applied to states, the enforceability of its requirements regarding

integration of state governmental programs, state architectural/program accessibility, and state

employment could be severely undermined. Potentially even more devastating consequences

could ensue with similar Court decisions striking down other provisions of ADA, Section 504 of

the Rehabilitation Act, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and other

essential civil rights protections. 

The National Council on Disability gives its strongest recommendation to the Federal

Government and Congress to preserve the goals embodied in ADA and ensure full enforcement

of the law. Continuing barriers to inclusion and integration at every level attest to the ongoing

need for federal protection of disability civil rights.

In late September 2000, the Supreme Court granted writ of certiorari for PGA Tour, Inc. v. Casey

Martin. The PGA Tour is arguing that Title III does not apply to people competing in a

professional sports event and that, even if it did, ADA does not require the competition to be

"fundamentally altered" by allowing different competitors to play by different substantive rules.

DOJ filed an amicus brief when this case was heard at the appellate level, arguing that the nocarts rule could be challenged under Title III and that waiving the rule in this case would be a
22

reasonable modification required by ADA. The Supreme Court heard the argument on January

17, 2001.

Regardless of the outcomes of Garrett and Martin, ADA protections already have been

substantially eroded by Supreme Court decisions of 1999. In a series of cases, Sutton v. United

Airlines (19 S.Ct. 2139 (1999)), Murphy v. United Parcel Service (119 S.Ct. 2133 (1999)), and

Albertsons, Inc. v. Kirkingburg (119 S.Ct. 2162 (1999)), the Court substantially limited access to

ADA protection from disability discrimination by employees with disabilities who use corrective

measures to mitigate the effects of their disabilities. As a result of these decisions, a person who

uses a device or medication to correct or minimize the impairment of a major life activity might

no longer be protected from discrimination on the basis of that impairment. In other words, the

court may find that the plaintiff is not a person with a disability within the meaning of the statute

when corrective measures sufficiently offset the impact of his or her impairment. The

implications of these decisions are broad, as these individuals may no longer qualify for

protection under ADA even when an employer discriminates against them precisely because of a

real or perceived disability. As a result of these cases, there has been a steady stream of federal

court decisions that have severely constricted the breadth and reach of ADA.

In Congress, several amendments to ADA were proposed. The ADA Notification Act (H.R.3590)

would have required people alleging a Title III violation to provide 90 days notice prior to filing

a lawsuit and would impose penalties if the rule were not followed. H.R. 3590 was referred to

committee. A second bill introduced in the House (H.R. 3170) would have amended ADA

(among other civil rights laws) to eliminate protections for individuals unlawfully present in the

United States by excluding them from the definition of "employee" with regard to employment

in the United States. It also was referred to committee. A third bill, introduced in both the House

(H.R. 3836) and the Senate (S. 1922), would have facilitated ADA compliance by modifying the

Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a tax credit for modifications to intercity buses,

making them accessible as required under ADA. The bill has been referred to committee in both

the House and Senate. None of the bills were scheduled for hearings. 
23

NCD strongly recommends that the ADA Notification Act and the exclusion of undocumented

workers from the scope of ADA coverage be dropped from the legislative agenda and additional

resources be appropriated to strengthen ADA Title III technical assistance for better compliance.

2. Hate Crimes

Early last year, the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999 was introduced in both the House (H.R.

77) and the Senate (S. 622). These bills proposed to extend the present hate crimes statutes to

cover disability, gender, and sexual orientation; create federal criminal penalties for hate crimes;

and increase appropriations for preventing and responding to alleged violations involving certain

federally protected activities. The bills were referred to subcommittee in both houses and no

hearings were scheduled. While legislative action has lagged during several congressional

sessions, the DOJ, Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), began responding to the rising occurrence

of hate crimes in 1997 with the National Hate Crimes Training initiative. Since then, curricula

for officers, investigators, detectives, supervisors, and other law enforcement officers have been

developed. BJA instructed 78 training teams in 1998 and supported local training teams with

personnel and funding. During 1999, more than 4,000 law enforcement professionals received

training. This year, BJA produced a video covering the major features of the training and sent a

total of 14,000 copies to every state, county, and municipal law enforcement agency nationwide. 

NCD commends the Bureau of Justice Assistance for its proactive work to combat hate crimes.

NCD urges Congress to address the rising occurrence of hate crimes by reintroducing the

initiatives of the 106th Congress in the new Congress. In addition, NCD recommends that

hearings be held early in the term. 

3. Genetic Discrimination

In 1999, separate measures were introduced in the House and Senate to prohibit discrimination

against individuals and their family members on the basis of genetic information or a request for

genetic information. The first of the two measures (H.R. 306 and S. 543), known as the Genetic
24

Information Nondiscrimination in Health Insurance Act of 1999, broadly prohibited genetic

discrimination by health insurers and provided for compensatory, consequential, and punitive

damages. The second measure, Genetic Nondiscrimination in Health Insurance and Employment

Act of 1999 (H.R. 2457 and S. 1322), provided more specifics on prohibited discriminatory

conduct by health insurers and prohibited employers, labor organizations, and training programs

from genetic discrimination. Employers may request or obtain genetic information for very

limited purposes. The bill authorizes appropriate legal and equitable relief for violations. Both

measures were referred to subcommittees in both houses of Congress. No hearings were held on

either measure in either house.

The administration, however, did take action. President Clinton issued Executive Order 13145

early in 2000 prohibiting every federal agency from using genetic testing in any hiring or

promotion action. In instances in which a federal employer must obtain genetic information

about an employee, all federal and state privacy protections will apply to ensure the

confidentiality of such information. 

NCD applauds the administration’s strong stance and urges that legislation requiring

nondiscrimination by both health insurers and employers be reintroduced and hearings

scheduled as soon as possible after the 107th Congress convenes.

4. Voting Accessibility

S. 511, a bill to amend the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act, was

introduced in the Senate on March 2, 1999. The amendments provided for ensuring that all

polling methods used for federal elections be accessible to disabled and elderly voters, and that

accessible voting procedures are in place to allow eligible voters to register at home, by mail, or

by other means. The bill was referred to Senate committee, and no hearings were scheduled.

Despite a significant increase in electoral participation by people with disabilities in the past

decade, the November 2000 elections presented major barriers in many districts (inaccessible

polling places, lack of assistance in casting ballots, etc.). 
25

NCD urges the reintroduction of legislation in the 107th Congress that provides direction,

incentives and flexibility to states in making federal elections accessible to people with

disabilities.

5. Congressional Accountability Act

In 1995, Congress passed the Congressional Accountability Act (CAA) (P.L. 104-1), which

extended the rights and protections of 11 employment and civil rights laws. Two of the eleven

laws are the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

The CAA also created the Office of Compliance, which is responsible for reviewing on a

biannual basis which provisions of these 11 laws should apply to Congress. Unfortunately, the

CAA does not apply to all instrumentalities of Congress. Specifically, it does not apply to the

General Accounting Office, the Government Printing Office, or the Library of Congress.

To date, the Office of Compliance has not made a recommendation to extend this all-important

civil rights coverage to all instrumentalities of Congress. In its recent report, Review and Report

on the Applicability to the Legislative Branch of Federal Laws Relating to Terms and Conditions

of Employment and Access to Public Services and Public Accommodations, the Office of

Compliance stated, "Section 102(a) of Congressional Accountability Act (CAA) lists the eleven

laws that shall apply, as prescribed by this Act, to the legislative branch of the Federal

Government." The last page of the report further notes that "[W]hile the current Board Members

are mindful of the institutional benefits of providing Congress with a clear recommendation as to

coverage of the instrumentalities, the Board is of the view that further study and consideration of

the questions presented is warranted in light of the complexity of the issues and the substantial

impact that a modification would have on the instrumentalities and their employees." The report

concludes by saying, "[T]he Board believes that Congress, and the instrumentalities and their

employees, would derive greater benefit from a recommendation based upon further study,

consideration and experience on the part of the Board Members. Therefore, the Board has

determined not to make any recommendations with respect to coverage of General Accounting
26

Office, Government Printing Office, and the Library of Congress. under the CAA laws at this

time."

NCD recommends that the Office of Compliance ensure that full coverage of the Americans with

Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act is extended to all instrumentalities of Congress,

including the General Accounting Office, the Government Printing Office, and the Library of

Congress. 

6. Outreach to Diverse Cultural Groups 

A large segment of the population, particularly those from diverse racial, cultural, and ethnic

communities, continues to be excluded from full participation in all aspects of American society.

Years of model programs, technical assistance, and other federal initiatives have left unchanged

the status of the most disenfranchised&people with disabilities from diverse cultures. Overall

concerns include (1) unequal protection and benefits under the same federal laws that have seen

at least some level of implementation for the larger disability community and (2) the persistence

of dual discrimination as a barrier to people with disabilities from diverse cultures. America’s

diverse population requires us to make a conscious effort to ensure that the needs of all people

are addressed. NCD commends the leadership shown by the Clinton administration in elevating

issues of cultural diversity to national focus. 

6a. Think Tank 2000 on Diverse Cultures and Summary Report

Congressional representatives, national civil and human rights leaders, people with disabilities,

and people from diverse cultures participated in NCD’s May 2000 Think Tank project to refine a

more inclusive public policy agenda pertaining to the needs of people from diverse cultures. The

participants reached consensus on at least three areas for strategic action: (1) promote leadership

development and include emerging leaders in public policy decisionmaking; (2) disseminate

"user-friendly" and culturally sensitive information on rights and responsibilities; and (3) work to

build and strengthen alliances with civil and human rights groups in the broader community.

NCD was asked to continue assisting with dialogue around these issues. A summary paper from
27

the May 2000 work, Carrying on the Good Fight: Summary Paper from Think Tank

2000&Advancing the Civil and Human Rights of People with Disabilities from Diverse Cultures,

can be accessed on the NCD Web site. 

6b. President’s Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders

The President signed an Executive Order in 1999 aimed at increasing the participation of Asian

Americans and Pacific Islanders in federal programs; on May 4, 2000, he named 15 members to

the Advisory Commission on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. The commission studied

ways to increase public sector, private sector, and community involvement in improving the

health and well being of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, increase their participation in

federal programs where they may be underserved, and foster research and data collection,

including information on public health. This outreach effort elevated key issues to the White

House level. 

NCD commends this White House initiative and the determination of the affected communities to

continue the work that was begun on behalf of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, including

people with disabilities.

6c. New Legislation: Amendment to the Oath for Naturalization

The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) issued field guidance and policy

modifications for naturalization processing and adjudication to INS field adjudicators on April 7,

2000. The guidance was unclear on how to accommodate applicants with severe disabilities with

respect to the requirement that they understand the oath of allegiance. On November 6, 2000, the

bill that was passed to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act (S.2812) became Public Law

106-448. The new law provides a waiver of the oath of renunciation and allegiance for

naturalization of aliens having certain disabilities.
28

NCD commends the 106th Congress for taking this action. NCD recommends that

 The INS should ensure timely processing of naturalization applications for applicants

with disabilities.

 The Disability Rights Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice,

NCD, and the INS should work together to monitor implementation of recent INS efforts

to address long-standing problems with its naturalization process regarding access for

people with disabilities, and to proactively address issues that impact their citizenship

applications.

6d. Underserved and Unserved Diverse Communities: American Indian Disability 

 Technical Assistance Center (AIDTAC)

In October 2000, the U.S. Department of Education funded a competitive grant for the first

national Native American center, American Indian Disability Technical Assistance Center

(AIDTAC). Located in Montana, the center helps American Indians and Alaskan Natives with

disabilities to live integrated lives in their native communities. AIDTAC is committed to helping

tribes build their capacity to develop and implement culturally appropriate laws and policies,

crosscutting infrastructure, and direct program services.

NCD commends the Department of Education for funding this priority. 

6e. Eliminating Language Barriers to Federal Programs (Executive Order 13166)

After decades of court struggles, on August 11, 2000, Executive Order 13166 was issued

requiring that all federal programs using federal funds ensure that language barriers do not

prevent participation in or benefit from these programs for non-English speakers and people with

limited English proficiency. The order is intended to ensure that people from diverse cultures

with disabilities and their families can take full advantage of federal laws, programs, and services
29

by providing them with easy-to-understand, culturally appropriate information about their rights 

under various federal laws and how to exercise these rights. 

NCD recommends that the administration support the formation of an interagency team

composed of representatives from the Departments of Education, Labor, Health and Human

Services, Justice, and Housing and Urban Development, along with the Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission, Small Business Administration, and Federal Communications

Commission, to develop and implement a large-scale outreach and training program. NCD also

recommends that the interagency team recruit, train, and contract with a core group composed

of people with disabilities from diverse cultural backgrounds and their family members to help

(1) develop the written materials and programs that will be used for the trainings; (2) translate

materials into many languages with sensitivity to cultural appropriateness of terminology; and

(3) conduct the trainings once the appropriate materials are translated, field-tested on sample

groups, and produced for dissemination in communities.

NCD also recommends that Congress provide funding support to the federal partners and

sponsors of the trainings in order to eliminate potential financial barriers to participation. 

Education

1. NCD’s Assessment Study of IDEA

In January 2000, NCD released a report that focused attention on public concerns about 25 years

of monitoring and enforcement of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Overall, NCD

found that federal efforts to enforce IDEA over several administrations have been inconsistent

and ineffective. Enforcement is too often the burden of parents, who must invoke formal

complaint procedures and request due process hearings to obtain the services and supports to

which their children are entitled under law. 
30

Back to School on Civil Rights included findings based on the Department of Education’s (ED’s)

monitoring reports that 90 percent (n = 45) of states were out of compliance with required

general supervision to ensure that local educational agencies carry out their responsibilities under

IDEA. In addition, 88 percent (n = 44) did not provide appropriate transition services to help

students move from high school to post-school and adult living activities, and 80 percent (n = 40)

failed to provide a free appropriate public education to students with disabilities. Despite longstanding noncompliance with these and other IDEA provisions in some states, ED made limited

use of enforcement through its sanction authority. Although ED began to carry out a revised

monitoring system (continuous monitoring improvement process), it failed to clearly include

elements that addressed public concerns about the lack of consistent criteria for making

noncompliance findings and for applying effective enforcement strategies, including triggers for

the use of sanctions. At the writing of this Progress Report, NCD was working with the ED and

students with disabilities, their parents, and other stakeholders to address a number of issues

connected to improved IDEA monitoring and enforcement.

NCD recommends that the U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs 

(1) establish and use national compliance standards and objective measures for assessing state

progress toward better performance outcomes for children with disabilities and for states

achieving full compliance with Part B; (2) establish objective criteria that would trigger federal

enforcement action, including sanctions, when states fail to comply; (3) consult with

stakeholders to develop objective criteria for defining "substantial noncompliance;" and (4)

develop and implement a range of enforcement sanctions linked to specific indicators and

measures indicating thresholds that could signal failure to comply with IDEA requirements. 

NCD also recommends that Congress authorize and fund the Department of Justice to

independently investigate and litigate IDEA cases, as well as administer a federal system for

handling pattern and practice complaints filed by individuals.
31

NCD recommends that as the new administration and Congress look at appropriations, they

include the additional IDEA funding and the 10 percent set-aside provision for complaint

processing, as described in the Back to School report. Joint agreement among the Department of

Education, Department of Justice, General Accounting Office, and Office of the Inspector

General will enable regular and independent audits and greatly enhance efforts to decrease the

burden of enforcement parents of children with disabilities have endured in expensive due

process and court procedures over the past 25 years.

2. Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)

The Educational Excellence for All Children Act proposed in 1999 supported improving

educational outcomes for students with disabilities by (1) firmly committing to high standards in

every classroom; (2) improving teacher and principal quality to ensure quality instruction for all

children; (3) strengthening accountability for results coupled with flexibility for achieving them;

and (4) ensuring safe, healthy, disciplined, and drug-free school environments where all children

feel connected, motivated, and challenged to learn and where parents are welcomed and

involved. The ESEA bill proposed that states receiving grants under the Act adopt policies and

programs that incorporate these themes. The House of Representatives passed its version of the

bill in 2000, but no major Senate floor action had occurred at the writing of this Progress Report. 

NCD recommends that the new administration work with Congress to develop a comprehensive

reauthorization of ESEA that meets the needs of all students, including students with disabilities.

NCD urges Congress to support initiatives that research has shown to work: smaller classes,

safe and modern schools, and qualified, well- trained teachers. Federal money set aside in ESEA

should be used to support these types of programs and should not be sent back to states in the

form of block grants.

NCD also recommends that the various administering offices and divisions within the

Department of Education work together to ensure that the new administration and Congress are
32

well informed about the impact of ESEA legislation on a substantial segment of students with

disabilities whose families are living at or below the poverty level.

3. Department of Education Assessment Guidance 

Overall accountability for educational results has been at the core of reform efforts undertaken by

the vast majority of states and local education agencies in recent years. Among the many

challenges faced in these efforts are (1) how to effectively measure and report student

performance and (2) how to meet IDEA 1997 requirements to include students with disabilities.

On August 24, 2000, the Office of Special Education Programs issued a guidance document,

Questions and Answers about Provisions in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

Amendments of 1997 Related to Students with Disabilities and State and District-wide

Assessment. The guidance addresses issues such as (a) when a state (or local education agency)

needs to conduct an alternate assessment; (b) what an alternate assessment is; and (c) whether

individualized education program (IEP) teams may exempt children with disabilities from

participating in the state or district-wide assessment program.

NCD commends the Department of Education for its response to the previously unanswered

questions of practitioners, administrators, and policymakers responsible for improving

educational results for children and youth with disabilities.

NCD recommends that the Department of Education provide leadership for the new

administration and Congress on a coordinated perspective on meeting the assessment and

educational accountability needs of all students, including students with disabilities.

4. Letter on Disability Harassment 

On July 25, 2000, the Department of Education’s Office on Civil Rights and Office of Special

Education and Rehabilitative Services issued a document pertaining to disability harassment. The
33

document addresses (1) why disability harassment is such an important issue; (2) what laws

apply; (3) how to prevent occurrences and how to respond; and (4) where technical assistance is

available to the public. The information provides examples of harassment that could cause a

hostile environment, resulting in adverse effects on a student’s ability to participate in and

benefit from the educational program. In addition, the document includes examples of

harassment prevention and elimination measures that may be effective. 

NCD commends the Department for its proactive dissemination of useful guidance to the public

on this emerging issue. 

Health Care

People with disabilities and chronic conditions have historically faced major hurdles in obtaining

and maintaining private health insurance. NCD’s 1993 report Perspectives on Access to Health

Insurance and Health-Related Services found that while private health insurance is difficult to

obtain and keep for many in the disability community, particularly in the individual insurance

market, it is still the major source of coverage for people with disabilities.

A patients’ bill of rights, therefore, should cover all 161 million individuals with private health

insurance in order to ensure that its protections apply to all people with disabilities. Application

of the patients’ bill of rights to all privately insured people will have the added benefit of

establishing a uniform set of protections on which all privately insured Americans can rely,

regardless of their employer or the laws in states in which they reside. Privately insured people

include the 48 million Americans who receive group health coverage from their employers who

self-insure as well as the additional 113 million Americans whose group or individual health

coverage is subject to state law. 
34

1. Protections in Managed Care

Legislation to protect the rights of all people with disabilities and their families who need access

to quality health care was introduced, but not enacted, by the 106th Congress. The primary area

of controversy among proponents and opponents continues to focus on how to define and who

determines "medical necessity." 

The October 2000 release of a Harvard Medical School-led study (funded by the U.S. Agency for

Healthcare Research and Quality) reported that people enrolled in managed health care plans in

locations with relatively high percentages of residents on welfare or who are African American

or Hispanic received generally poorer quality health care than other people. Previous studies

have also shown the link among poverty, disability, and patterns of inequality of benefit for

underserved populations in our country.

NCD calls upon Congress to formulate a comprehensive Patients’ Bill of Rights that will cover

health care concerns of people with disabilities, including provisions that appropriately define

"medical necessity" and address issues pertaining to quality of care and who makes

determinations about medical necessity.

2. America’s Law Enforcement and Mental Health Project

America’s Law Enforcement and Mental Health Project (P.L. 106-515) was signed into law on

November 13, 2000. Among other things, the law authorizes the U.S. Attorney General to make

grants to state and local governments to establish demonstration judicial diversion programs that

involve (1) continuing judicial supervision, including periodic review, over preliminarily

qualified offenders with mental illness, mental retardation, or co-occurring mental illness and

substance abuse disorders who are charged with misdemeanors or nonviolent offenses and (2) the

coordinated delivery of services. The law provides that the coordinated delivery of services
35

includes (1) specialized training of law enforcement and judicial personnel to identify and

address the unique needs of a mentally ill or mentally retarded offender; (2) voluntary outpatient

or inpatient mental health treatment in the least restrictive manner appropriate, as determined by

the court, that carries with it the possibility of dismissal of charges or reduced sentencing upon

successful completion of treatment; (3) centralized case management, involving the

consolidation of all of a mentally ill or mentally retarded defendant’s cases (including violations

of probation) and the coordination of all mental health treatment plans and social services,

including life skills training; and (4) continuing supervision of treatment plan compliance for a

term not to exceed the maximum allowable sentence or probation for the charged or relevant

offense and continuity of psychiatric care at the end of the supervised period.

NCD heard from a number of individuals with psychiatric disabilities who belong to

organizations that represent millions of psychiatric survivors expressing a deep concern and fear

that once an offender with psychiatric disability enters a diversion program, he or she would be

judicially required to abide by the mental health treatment program even if it later proves to be

inappropriate. Such an outcome would be inconsistent with the findings and recommendations of

NCD’s report, From Privileges to Rights: People Labeled with Psychiatric Disabilities Speak for

Themselves, which underscored the inappropriateness and harm of forced mental health

treatments. 

Because of these concerns and other issues regarding the "voluntary" participation of

individuals with cognitive or psychiatric disabilities in the mental health court system, NCD

strongly recommends that the U.S. Department of Justice and its attorney general consult with

people who are psychiatric survivors in the implementation of the law, including the

development of any regulations or guidelines.
36

3. The Pain Relief Promotion Act of 2000

The proposed bill (H.R. 2260, S. 1272) is intended to permit the use of controlled substances to

relieve pain or discomfort. It also authorizes the secretary of Health and Human Services to

award $5,000,000 in grants to health profession schools, hospices, and other sites to develop and

implement palliative care education and training; and authorizes the Agency for Healthcare

Research and Quality in the Department of Health and Human Services to collect and

disseminate protocols for palliative care. At the writing of this report, while the bill passed the

House in the 106th Congress, the Senate action remained in its Judiciary Committee, with at least

two hearings held over a two-year period. Concurrence leading to enactment of this legislation is

needed to ensure protection of people with disabilities who may be more vulnerable than other

people to the risks and dangers of assisted suicide under the guise of unregulated pain

management. NCD underscores that this legislation promotes the right to human dignity and life

for people with disabilities and has articulated its position in this regard in Assisted Suicide: A

Disability Perspective. 

NCD cautions the new administration and Congress to recognize the potential dangers of

crafting a federal law that promotes pain management and does not protect the human rights of

people with disabilities. NCD also urges the new Administration and Congress to recognize that 

it is often the discrimination, prejudice, and barriers that many people with disabilities

encounter, and the restrictions and lack of options that this society has imposed, rather than

their disabilities or their physical pain, that cause their lives to be unsatisfactory and painful.

Long-Term Services and Supports

"My Administration is committed to finding affordable ways to enable people who need longterm services and support to remain in the community if they choose and are able to do so. The

best way to continue progress toward this goal is for state governments, the Federal Government,

and the affected communities to work together to develop cost-effective ways to provide these
37

services. We must ensure that the quality of these services is excellent and that they are available

to persons with disabilities of all ages."

President William J. Clinton, statement on the Olmstead

decision, June 1999

In 1999, the Supreme Court affirmed ADA’s integration mandate under Title II in Olmstead v. L.

C., 119 S.Ct. 2176 (1999), by declaring unnecessary segregation and institutionalization of

people with disabilities a form of discrimination. The Court’s decision presented a challenge to

government and private entities across the country to create access to systems of cost-effective,

community-based services. The past year has seen a growing impetus toward systems change at

federal, state, and community levels to make possible a transition from institution-based to

community-based care for people with disabilities. 

The Clinton administration urged states to implement the Olmstead decision. The Department of

Health and Human Services (HHS) has offered grant and demonstration programs, as well as

technical assistance to states to develop plans for implementing Olmstead. The Social Security

Administration developed initiatives to ensure that people with disabilities who are returning to

their communities and seeking employment will retain essential supports.

Congress introduced several bills, including the Family Opportunity Act and the Older

Americans Act Amendments of 2000, to create more avenues for accessing community-based

supports necessary to meet the Olmstead mandate.

Finally, in areas where there has been little movement toward developing an Olmstead plan, both

complaints and lawsuits have been filed to compel state action.
38

1. Olmstead v. L. C.&One Year Later

Following the Eleventh Circuit Court’s Olmstead decision upholding the integration mandate of

ADA, HHS instructed state Medicaid directors in July 1998 to ensure that their Medicaid

programs complied with the mandate. In January 2000, following the Supreme Court’s Olmstead

decision, HHS Secretary Donna Shalala issued a letter to the governors of all 50 states, asking

them to work with their state Medicaid directors and other agency staff to develop "fiscally

responsible policies<to increase access to community-based services." Her letter was

accompanied by one letter from the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) urging the

States to (1) develop comprehensive, effective plans to strengthen community service systems

and (2) actively involve people with disabilities in the design, development, and implementation

of the plan. Initially, HCFA provided technical assistance materials for conducting the planning

process. As ongoing support, HCFA sent follow-up letters in the spring and in July with updates

on policy clarifications and reforms.

The response of the states has been mixed, according to a report of June 25, 2000, entitled

Olmstead Progress Report: Disability Advocates Assess State Implementation After One Year

prepared by the National Association of Protection and Advocacy Systems. This report presents

findings from survey data collected on 42 states and Puerto Rico. Among the findings reported

were these:

 Not one state has developed a plan that follows all the principles for plan development

recommended by HCFA.

 Most states have taken at least preliminary steps to develop Olmstead plans: 7 states have

executive orders or legislative resolutions requiring plans, 14 states have developed a

draft or completed a plan, 12 states have a task force to review current systems of support

for people with disabilities, and 9 states have declared they already comply and do not

need a separate plan.
39

 Many disability advocates believe that their states are holding back on fully

implementing Olmstead until pending court decisions are made in key cases and elections

are over.

 Few states have increased funding for community supports and services.

 States have provided consumers (people with disabilities) with only limited opportunities

for meaningful input into the planning process.

 State efforts have given limited attention to the needs of individuals with mental health

and physical disabilities, often focusing on individuals with developmental disabilities.

 Several states signed amicus briefs in the Garrett v. State of Alabama case, asking the

Supreme Court to overturn the constitutionality of ADA Title II. 

Some states have taken notable action toward implementing Olmstead through their official

commitments to include people with disabilities in all phases of planning and implementation, to

eliminate unnecessary institutionalization, and to promote consumer choice and selfdetermination.

NCD recommends that the administration take immediate action to promote the monitoring and 

implementation of the Olmstead decision among the states and use the bully pulpit of the White

House to communicate the expectations of the Olmstead decision whenever possible.

2. Administration Efforts to Support State Medicaid Programs

In October 2000, HHS announced the proposal of new rules of special significance to people

with disabilities who do not want to live in an institution. Current rules allow people in

institutions to qualify for Medicaid coverage at much higher income levels than if they lived in

their communities. The restriction on Medicaid supports has been a barrier for those who wish to

live on their own incomes in their communities but who need assistance. The new rule would

enable people to live in their own homes with enough income to meet basic living expenses,
40

while obtaining the support services needed to manage with their chronic illness or disability.

Under the proposed regulation, the Federal Government would spend an estimated $960 million

over the next five years. Within the same time frame, states would be required to spend a

matching amount.

3. Related Medicaid Legislation 

Introduced in the Senate in November 1999, S. 1935, the Medicaid Community Attendant

Services and Supports Act (MiCASSA), was referred to committee, where it remains.

MiCASSA, which proposes to amend Title XIX of the Social Security Act, would provide

coverage for community attendant services and supports under the Medicaid program. It would

also authorize appropriations for grants to help eligible states that have a Consumer Task Force 

develop long-term service systems to offer alternatives to eligible individuals about where they

receive certain types of Medicaid long-term services and supports. In November 2000, Senate

sponsors proposed that the Senate Appropriations Committee hold hearings on the bill.

As in its previous Progress Reports, NCD reiterates its strong recommendation that Congress

and the administration enact MiCASSA by the end of the 106th Congress to meet the needs and

desires of older Americans and citizens with disabilities to live in their own homes to the fullest

extent possible.

On the House side, H.R. 5601 (revised to H.R. 5612), the Medicare, Medicaid, and State Child

Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000, was

introduced on November 1, reviving an earlier version of the bill vetoed by President Clinton on

October 17, 2000. H.R. 5612 contains the improvements requested by the President. Its

provisions include improvements to Titles XVIII, XIX, and XXI of the Social Security Act to

enhance benefits and beneficiary protections in Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP. The bill

proposes to restore full home health care services for FY 2001 and to streamline approval of

waivers under Title XIX. The Family Opportunity Act (H.R. 4825), which became part of the
41

previous bill (H.R. 5612), would amend Title XVIII to allow families whose incomes are within

200 to 300 percent of the federal poverty level to purchase Medicaid to cover the medical needs

of their disabled children. A Senate bill parallel to H.R. 4825 has been introduced and referred to

the Senate Committee on Finance (S. 2274). 

NCD recommends that the new administration and Congress pass MiCASSA during the 107th

legislative session.

The Older Americans Act Amendments of 2000, signed into law in November 2000, authorizes a

National Family Caregiver Program providing $125 million in federal assistance to help families

care for family members through a multifaceted system of support services. The program will

extend support services to families caring for their older members at home, as well as older

people caring for their adult children with mental retardation and developmental disabilities. 

Youth

From a national perspective, the post-school outcomes for many of our youth and young adults

with disabilities remain dismal, despite a number of advances realized by youth and young adults

with disabilities through education, disability rights policy, the support of federal mandates, and

the funding of programs and initiatives intended to impact all youth. During FY 2000, a number

of national initiatives were undertaken to begin remedying this situation. These efforts laid a

foundation that requires further building in the form of effective systems at federal, state, and

local levels.

1. Transition and Post-School Outcomes for Youth with Disabilities: Closing the Gaps to

Postsecondary Education and Employment

The Social Security Administration (SSA) and NCD released a joint report on November 1,

2000, that calls attention to persistent issues and problems documented in national post- school
42

studies. While postsecondary education participation showed slight improvement, more youth

with disabilities found themselves unable to gain employment and wound up permanently on

Social Security benefit rolls. The report also found that rates of graduation by earning regular

high school diplomas are 27 percent for youth who received special education and 75 percent for

those who received only general education. Youth with disabilities who had vocational or other

on-the-job training opportunities were less likely to stop work and return to Social Security

Disability Insurance (SSDI) dependency than were older disability insurance beneficiaries.

Young people from diverse cultural groups faced additional barriers such as lack of attention to

limited English proficiency, culturally inappropriate strategies or information, and insensitive

service providers. 

The report also identifies what has worked and what should work in light of promising new

federal legislation, unmet needs, and unserved populations, and presents recommendations for

national, state, and local community action. One of the best strategies for improving the quality

of school programs and post-school outcomes is, unfortunately, the least often used. Carrying out

IDEA transition services requirements and, where appropriate, the Rehabilitation Act provisions

for all who are determined to be eligible for services and supports enables students with

disabilities to move effectively from school to post-school independence and achievement.

NCD strongly recommends that the new administration and Congress support the need for an

overarching focus on open communication and deliberate collaboration across all federal

agencies, entities, and systems that need to be involved in preparing our nation’s young people

with disabilities for full participation in society. These efforts need to begin with dialogue among

the affected parties and should include youth with disabilities, adults with disabilities, and

people from the grassroots communities. Systemic collaboration must also include the broader

workforce development systems such as Job Corps, apprenticeship training programs, and

general equivalency degree (GED) programs.
43

NCD also urges that there be more effective monitoring and enforcement and public

accountability for transition and post-school outcomes. All agencies responsible for

administering federal laws and initiatives designed for all youth must be held accountable for

reporting how and to what extent they are increasing outreach and providing appropriate

supports or accommodations that will give young people with disabilities an equal opportunity to

benefit. 

2. Youth Leadership Network for Youth with Disabilities

The national Youth Leadership Network (YLN) is a five-year project involving the Department

of Education, the Social Security Administration, the Department of Labor the Department of

Health and Human Services, and the National Council on Disability. The project is researchoriented and designed to include annual leadership training for youth ages 16 through 24 with

disabilities. YLN conferences provide leadership training through discussions of ways young

people can help the federal agencies (1) determine and update the impact of barriers to successful

adult life, (2) identify what works and promising practices, and (3) highlight actions that should

be implemented at the national, state, and local levels that reflect the perspective of youth with

disabilities. 

NCD commends the involved agencies for their foresight and continuing sponsorship of this

conference initiative. NCD also commends the outreach efforts of the Department of Education,

Office of Special Education Programs, which included input meetings with policy and/or

program staff at each sponsoring agency. 

NCD encourages the new administration to support recommendations for improvement that will

result from the evaluation component of this youth leadership project. NCD will also continue to

encourage states and other entities that have not done so to emulate the success of the

Leadership Conference among youth with disabilities in their geographic areas.
44

3. Expanding Employment Opportunities for Young People with Disabilities Subcommittee

of Access to Employment and Lifelong Learning Committee (Presidential Task Force on

the Employment of Adults with Disabilities)

On October 25, 2000, to provide for improved access to employment and training for youth with

disabilities, the President amended Executive Order 13078 of March 13, 1998, by adding the

following subsection to section 2: "(h) To improve employment outcomes for persons with

disabilities by addressing, among other things, the education, transition, employment, health and

rehabilitation, and independent living issues affecting young people with disabilities, executive

departments and agencies shall coordinate and cooperate with the Task Force to: (1) strengthen

interagency research, demonstration, and training activities relating to young people with

disabilities; (2) create a public awareness campaign focused on access to equal opportunity for

young people with disabilities; (3) promote the views of young people with disabilities through

collaboration with the Youth Councils authorized under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998;

(4) increase access to and utilization of health insurance and health care for young people with

disabilities through the formalization of the Federal Healthy and Ready to Work Interagency

Council; (5) increase participation by young people with disabilities in postsecondary education

and training programs; and (6) create a nationally representative Youth Advisory Council, to be

funded and chaired by the Department of Labor, to advise the Task Force in conducting these and

other appropriate activities." 

NCD commends the President for recognizing the preemployment and employment issues and

needs of young people with disabilities and for making these a priority focus for federal

interagency attention through Executive Orders and directives. 

NCD encourages the new administration to support completion of the remaining components of

this Youth-to-Work Initiative and to ensure that strategies and evaluation are given serious

attention and support across federal agencies. NCD also encourages the administration to build

upon these first steps, including (1) placing high priority on administering agencies’ public

accountability for the education and employment outcomes of youth with disabilities and (2)
45

renewing efforts to remove any remaining barriers to appropriate health care, education, job

training, housing, transportation, employment, and, where needed, adaptations,

accommodations, and supports for long-term employment and career advancement. 

Employment

1. Creation of a Disability Office in the Department of Labor 

The Clinton administration supported establishing an Office of Disability Employment Policy

(ODEP) in the Department of Labor (DOL) and improving access for adults with disabilities to

employment services offered through the one-stop system. The President’s FY 2001 budget

included $20 million for ODEP. Under the leadership of an assistant secretary, ODEP’s mission

will be to dramatically increase the employment rate of people with disabilities by implementing

an aggressive strategy to eliminate barriers and create meaningful employment opportunities for

people with disabilities. This office will subsume the President’s Committee on Employment of

People with Disabilities in an effort to reduce duplication and enhance coordination of federal

employment programs for people with disabilities. The office will work within DOL to increase

the participation of people with disabilities in all its training programs, with a targeted emphasis

during its initial years on those serving youth. 

NCD commends the Clinton administration and the U.S. Congress for implementing a previous

NCD recommendation from the report Achieving Independence by creating and funding ODEP. 

NCD recommends that ODEP immediately support the development and timely implementation

of a measurement system that tracks and reports on the employment status of Americans with

disabilities, on at least an annual basis, over time. NCD also strongly recommends that ODEP

work to ensure that all Department of Labor units review their current research-funded grants

and contracts to ensure that federal funding is not provided to support the production of

research reports regarding employment of people with disabilities that rely exclusively on the
46

Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) and the Current Population Survey (CPS),

as well as other federal statistical efforts, that contain known statistical and other shortcomings.

2. Implementation of the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act 

The Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999 (TWWIIA) was produced

through the bipartisan efforts of the administration, Congress, and the disability community. On

December 17, 1999, the President signed this historic bill into law. This legislation will help

provide better health care options for people with disabilities who work. 

TWWIIA will improve employment opportunities by creating new options and incentives for

states to offer a Medicaid buy-in for workers with disabilities; extending Medicare coverage for

an additional 4 1⁄2 years for people on disability insurance who return to work; creating a $250

million Medicaid buy-in demonstration to help people whose disabilities have not yet progressed

so far that they cannot work; and enhancing employment-related services for people with

disabilities through the new Ticket to Work program. TWWIIA also creates a Work Incentive

Grant program to provide benefits planning and assistance, facilitate access to information about

work incentives, and better integrate services to people with disabilities who are working or

returning to work. 

Under TWWIIA, states receiving Medicaid Infrastructure Grants from the Health Care Financing

Administration (HCFA) will use the funds to remove barriers to employment for people with

disabilities by creating health systems change through the Medicaid program. The development

or enhancement of certain core Medicaid components in each state will enable people with

disabilities not only to work but to sustain adequate health coverage if they find they need to

relocate to another state for employment purposes. An adequate personal assistance services and

supports benefit and a Medicaid buy-in for employed people with disabilities are, therefore,

significant components of the TWWIIA. This grant program provides money to the states to

develop these core elements. Twenty-five states were awarded Medicaid Infrastructure Grants in
47

2000 during the first grant cycle. All 25 of these states plan to use a portion of their grant award

to study, implement, or improve a Medicaid Buy-in program. In addition, 19 of these states will

use a portion of their grant award to study or improve Medicaid services designed to support the

competitive employment of people with disabilities.

NCD recommends that the administration strongly encourage and support the participation of

all states in the grants demonstration program. In addition, NCD recommends that the

administration track and report to Congress on the status of the implementation of these

Olmstead initiatives.

3. Expanding Hiring by the Office of Personnel Management

On June 4, 1999, the President signed an Executive Order ensuring that individuals with

psychiatric disabilities are given the same hiring opportunities as people with significant physical

disabilities or mental retardation. On March 17, 2000, the Office of Personnel Management

(OPM) issued proposed regulations to create a new government-wide excepted appointing

authority for individuals with psychiatric disabilities. This authority will broaden the category of

people who may noncompetitively acquire competitive civil service status after two years of

successful service, providing individuals with psychiatric disabilities the same hiring

opportunities already offered to individuals with mental retardation and significant physical

disabilities. 

4. Interagency Strategies to Improve Employment of Adults with Disabilities 

The Social Security Administration, the Department of Health and Human Services, the

Department of Labor, and the Department of Education are all participating in interagency

demonstration projects to expand job opportunities for people with disabilities. For instance, ED

has awarded six systems-change grants to establish models of improved cooperation and
48

coordination between state vocational rehabilitation programs, public employment/employment

training programs, and other related programs. The grants will help reduce barriers to

employment and increase the capacity of states’ overall employment system to serve individuals

with disabilities. The focus of these systems change projects is to increase the employment rate

of individuals with disabilities who are currently receiving support through public programs. 

In addition, SSA is working under cooperative agreements with 12 states to develop innovative

projects to help adults with disabilities reenter the workforce. This activity, the State Partnership

Initiative, is designed to help states develop innovative and integrated statewide programs of

services and supports for their residents with disabilities that will increase job opportunities and

decrease dependence on benefits, including Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and

Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Moreover, the President’s Committee on Employment of

People with Disabilities (PCEPD) has worked to coordinate a commitment by the U.S. Chamber

of Commerce, the Society of Human Resource Managers, and dozens of private sector

companies to support several initiatives to advance the employment of people with disabilities.

Initiatives include forming local and state employer-led groups to advocate for the employment

of people with disabilities, launching a nationwide campaign to advance the employment of

people with cognitive disabilities, and supporting PCEPD’s career exploration and employment

programs for youth with disabilities.

Welfare Reform

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) was enacted

in 1996 and fully implemented at the state level in the fall of 1997. This legislation replaced the

Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program with a new, capped Temporary

Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) block grant. PRWORA shifted the emphasis of welfare

reform activities from a "human capital" to a "work first" philosophy that encourages TANF
49

recipients to move into employment as soon as possible. Indeed, PRWORA prohibits states from

using TANF grant funds to provide assistance to a family that includes an adult who has received

TANF assistance for five years. PRWORA permits states to exempt up to 20 percent of their

average monthly TANF caseload from this lifetime limit for reasons of hardship. 

1. Parents with Disabilities and Parents Who Have Children with Disabilities

At the time of PRWORA enactment, 12.2 million people received AFDC. By August 1999, the

number of TANF recipients had declined to 7.3 million. Most of the people who remained on

TANF have been unable to secure jobs, let alone achieve economic self-sufficiency. Often

described as the "hardest to serve," these people (most are female and in their mid-twenties) face

multiple and complex barriers to steady employment. A substantial percentage of these TANF

parents have low education and skill levels. Over half of theme face formidable barriers because

of learning disabilities, mental retardation, and emotional or behavioral problems. 

Despite the "work first" philosophy of the new law, a National Governors Association (NGA)

analysis of studies in nine states shows that a substantial proportion (40% to 70%) of former

recipients who left the TANF program did so without a job. NGA concluded that most TANF

recipients entering the labor force have failed to become economically self-sufficient or to secure

employment or self-employment with good career development potential. Among TANF

recipients who did find work, most entered the low-wage labor market and were concentrated in

the lowest-wage occupations, where most earned between $5.50 and $7 per hour. Recent studies

have found that about half of these former TANF recipients were unemployed or only marginally

employed one year after leaving the program. Research further shows that most of these

recipients experience a long period of unemployment before becoming reemployed. For those

TANF recipients who do sustain employment, a key factor that appears to predict significant

career advancement is the development of basic skill levels and education beyond high school.

Congressional reauthorization of TANF is scheduled for 2001. Practitioners and state

policymakers are working hard to understand what it will take in the context of a "work first"
50

philosophy and time-limited assistance for the "hardest-to-serve" TANF recipients (particularly

those with special learning needs) to achieve sustained economic self-sufficiency. 

Although some states and communities are collaboratively working to help people with

disabilities prepare for and sustain employment, others have not done so. This situation results in

unintended barriers that cause adverse consequences such as decreased access to communitybased services for parents with disabilities, food and nutrition supports for their children, health

insurance, and quality health care. Greater emphasis on systemic collaboration among federal,

state, and local entities is needed on a national scale to remove barriers, make links, and combine

resources. Welfare, education, and workplace reforms need to be connected, especially for people

with disabilities who are or have been previously eligible for public assistance programs.

NCD encourages the administration to work with states to (1) help them establish a "livable

wage" as the long-term outcome goal of the welfare-to-work reform; (2) help them build an

inclusive education and workforce system that integrates work and learning; and (3) help them

explore and replicate community-based empowerment models that support successful welfare-towork approaches for people with disabilities. 

2. Federal Efforts: Access to Employment Committee and Lifelong Learning Committee

(Presidential Task Force on the Employment of Adults with Disabilities)

NCD’s 1999 Progress Report encouraged the President and administering agencies for programs

such as welfare-to-work to recognize the disability-related needs and supports that must be in

place to realize long-term employment goals. Inroads are attributed, in part, to single agency

efforts and cross-agency initiatives by subcommittees of the Access to Employment and Lifelong

Learning Committee of the Presidential Task Force on the Employment of Adults with

Disabilities. A guidebook to educate welfare agencies about an array of disabilities was prepared

by the Access Committee and disseminated at the Department of Labor’s October 2000 Welfareto-Work: Beyond 2000 conference. Other welfare-to-work activities included (1) participation
51

with the Office of Vocational and Adult Education, the Department of Health and Human

Services, and the National Institute for Literacy to train four states on learning disabilities and

TANF programs; (2) discussion of protection and advocacy ombudsmen for people with

disabilities in the TANF program; and (3) consideration of adopting the Workforce Investment

Act Section 188 nondiscrimination regulations for the TANF program.

NCD commends the coordinating agencies on taking these concrete actions to address identified

barriers to employment. NCD recommends that the new administration and Congress obtain

critical information on the results of these initial action steps and recognize that the strategies

that are effective in moving people from welfare to work may have important lessons for the

growing effort to move people from reliance on disability benefit programs to long-term

employment. 

Housing

In Achieving Independence, NCD made a number of recommendations regarding housing and the

Federal Government’s role. The following policy activities undertaken by the Federal

Government in 2000 relate to many of NCD’s recommendations from that report.

1. Increasing Housing Options

In the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD’s) recent Notices of Funding

Availability, the agency included bonus points for developers who build structures that include

"visitability" by people with disabilities. NCD supports this incentive.
52

2. Working for Fair Housing 

In response to the increase in reported cases of serious fair housing violations, HUD committed

to doubling the number of civil rights enforcement actions by the year 2000. NCD applauds this

commitment.

3. HUD Funding Available 

Congress directed HUD to make available over $90 million to fund new Section 8 vouchers

targeted to people with disabilities. Accordingly, on February 24, 2000, HUD announced the

availability of 9,000 Section 8 vouchers for people with disabilities. Public Housing Authorities

are eligible to apply for all the available vouchers, and nonprofit disability organizations are

eligible to apply for 1,800 of the vouchers made available through the Mainstream Program for

People with Disabilities. NCD endorses this commitment of resources.

4. HUD 2001 Budget 

HUD’s budget request for 2001 included a $9 million increase for the Section 811 Supportive

Housing for Persons with Disabilities Program, for a total appropriation of $210 million. In

addition, for the first time, HUD’s budget included a request for $20 million to fund Section 8

vouchers targeted to people with disabilities, in an effort to compensate for the huge loss of

affordable housing units for nonelderly people with disabilities as a result of many public

buildings being designated as "elderly only." NCD endorses this commitment of resources.

5. Home Ownership and Rental Housing

An October 26, 2000, informational release from HUD reports that "the percent of Americans

who own their own homes hit a record high 67.7 percent in the third quarter of 2000....There are

now 71.6 million homeowners in the United States....In addition to the historical national home

ownership rate, all-time high rates were set for minorities (48.2 percent), Hispanics (46.7

percent), central city residents (51.9 percent), households headed by females (53.3 percent),
53

households earning less than the median family income for the quarter (52.2 percent), and

married couples (61 percent)." HUD reported that it would raise its sights and look to increase

home ownership rates "in order to increase minority ownership to more than 50 percent."

During the past decade, housing problems confronting people with disabilities and people with

low incomes, particularly the lack of affordable and accessible housing, has reached crisis

proportions. According to HUD’s annual performance report for the year 2000, estimates of

home ownership indicate that only 2 percent of all people with disabilities are homeowners and

less than 5 percent of the 6.5 million people with disabilities living on SSI/SSDI are

homeowners. 

In 2000, with increasingly tight housing markets and the rising cost of rents, it was virtually

impossible for a low-income person with a disability to afford modest housing without

government assistance. Nationwide, the income of a person with a disability receiving SSI

benefits is only 24.4 percent of the average one-person income. At this income level, the person

must spend approximately 69 percent of his or her income to rent a modest one-bedroom

apartment. Not only have available resources declined, but access by people with disabilities to

existing affordable housing has been reduced as well. Unfortunately, many people with

disabilities live on limited or fixed incomes, and restrictive SSI and Medicaid regulations

prohibit them from accumulating enough savings to afford the downpayment, closing costs, and

long-term repair expenses associated with home ownership. These restrictions, along with

institutional barriers and the stigma of disability, have kept many financial institutions and

government housing officials from viewing home ownership as a viable option for people with

disabilities.

HUD released its report to Congress, entitled Rental Assistance&The Worsening Crisis, in March

2000. The report contains statistics regarding nonelderly disabled families who are experiencing 

housing problems such as overcrowding or a high rent burden (using more than half of their
54

incomes for rent). The report found that the number of nonelderly adults with disabilities in

families with worst-case housing needs was between 1.1 million and 1.4 million. 

NCD recommends that, through an Executive Order, the administration create an interagency

task force on home ownership and rental housing for people with disabilities. The task force

should include HUD, DOL, HHS, DOJ, SSA, and other relevant agencies. Congressional

representation would also be solicited from key committees. The overall charge of the task Force

would be to identify, secure, and target resources sufficient to realistically allow HUD to include

people with disabilities as an additional "minority group" that would benefit from HUD’s

targeted home ownership rate of 50 percent. The task force would also be responsible for

identifying and removing federal legislative, policy, and program barriers to home ownership

and affordable and accessible rental options for people with disabilities.

Transportation

1. Amendments to the Federal Aviation Act and the Air Carrier Access Act

In March 2000, Congress enacted the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for

the 21st Century (AIR-21), containing important changes to the Federal Aviation Act (FA Act)

and the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA). These changes strengthened the mandates of

nondiscrimination against air travelers with disabilities in both laws. Foreign air carriers

operating within the U.S. air transportation system now must follow the same rules of

nondiscrimination as domestic U.S. carriers (14 C.F.R. Part 382). One amendment calls on the

Secretary of Transportation to work with appropriate international organizations to establish

higher (international) air transportation standards for accommodating air travelers with

disabilities. 
55

NCD urges the secretary of Transportation to exercise leadership in bringing together

representatives of key international aviation organizations to reach agreement on international

standards of accommodation.

The new amendments require the secretary to investigate each complaint of an ACAA violation.

The penalty for violations, increased from $1,100 to $10,000 for each offense, may be levied for

each individual act of discrimination. In the 18 months after NCD issued its report on ACAA

enforcement in February 1999, the Department of Transportation (DOT) issued eight cease-anddesist orders against airlines for findings of ACAA discrimination and levied $130,000 in civil

penalties. While violations continue, this represents a significant increase in enforcement activity

over previous years.

AIR-21 also obliges the secretary of Transportation to publish disability-related complaint data

in a manner comparable to other consumer complaint data, regularly review all complaints

received by air carriers alleging discrimination on the basis of disability, and report annually to

Congress on the results of such review. To support greater compliance, the secretary is required

to work with the Department of Justice, the Architectural and Transportation Barriers

Compliance Board (Access Board), and NCD to develop a technical assistance plan and make

materials available to individuals and entities with rights and responsibilities under the law.

NCD urges the secretary to work collaboratively with the named organizations to develop a plan

with measurable objectives and timelines, and to engage in ongoing consultation with the

disability community regarding priority issues in compliance and enforcement.

In late summer 2000, the Office of the Inspector General initiated an air travel customer survey

to determine how well the airline industry has fulfilled its pledge to meet higher customer service

standards. The airlines voluntarily agreed to meet these standards in lieu of new regulations to

address the steady decline in quality of service. One part of the survey addressed air travelers
56

with disabilities and dealt primarily with ACAA compliance. Disability organizations posted

links to the DOT survey on their Web sites and encouraged their members to provide feedback.

The Inspector General issued a report with the survey results, identifying adequate and timely

assistance as particular problems to which the airlines must give special attention. The report

noted that over half the complaints DOT receives concern these issues. Among the report’s

recommendations was that airlines should consider establishing advisory councils, including

people with disabilities, to help address the needs of air travelers with disabilities and special

needs. 

NCD commends the Inspector General for this important initiative to determine the impact of

voluntary compliance policies and urges the Office of Consumer Protection to take prompt

follow-up action on the findings.

2. Accessibility of Over-the-Road (Intercity) Buses (OTRB)

The Department of Transportation, through the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21), has committed to OTRB accessibility by authorizing $14.3 million to support the

capital and training costs of ADA compliance to companies providing substantially or

exclusively intercity, fixed-route over-the-road bus service. Between FY 1999 and 2003, the

Rural Transportation Accessibility Initiative Program will make a total of $17.5 million available

only to OTRB companies that provide fixed route service. Between FY 2000 and FY 2003,

another $6.8 million will be available to OTRB companies that provide local commuter service,

charter, or tour services.

3. Action by the Department of Justice

The Department of Justice entered a settlement agreement with Greyhound last year that obliges

the intercity or OTRB service to put more accessible buses (equipped with operating lifts and

other boarding devices) with properly trained operators on the road. 
57

 Between April 20, 2000 and October 1, 2000, Greyhound agreed to have lift-equipped

bus service available between all its destinations, except under a very limited set of

conditions ("excusable circumstances"), with 48 hours’ advance notice. Boarding

assistance must be provided even when excusable circumstances exist.

 As of October 2000, all newly purchased or leased buses must be lift-equipped. 

 By October 28, 2012, all OTRBs must be lift-equipped. When Greyhound’s entire fleet is

lift-equipped, 48 hours’ notice will no longer be required.

Despite progress in the Greyhound case, persistent noncompliance perpetuates accessibility

problems in many communities. DOJ filed an amicus brief in James v. Peter Pan Transit

Management, Inc., a case in which the plaintiff charged that inaccessible service provided by

Peter Pan Transit denied her equal access to public transit in Raleigh, North Carolina. The DOJ

brief asserted that the public transit authority may be held liable under Title II for discrimination

by a private company providing bus service to the public under a contract with the transit

authority and urged that the plaintiff’s claim for damages not be dismissed. The U.S. District

Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina ruled to allow the lawsuit.

DOJ also intervened in a case brought by two wheelchair users who claim that they were denied

equal access to the public transit system in Steamboat Springs, Colorado. The lawsuit,

Richardson and Steele v. City of Steamboat Springs, Colorado, has been ongoing in the U.S.

District Court for the District of Colorado. DOJ’s brief supports plaintiffs’ claims by alleging

that the city purchased inaccessible used buses without first making the required good faith

efforts to purchase accessible buses, failed to repair inoperable wheelchair lifts or provide

alternative transportation while wheelchair lifts were inoperable, and did not adequately train bus

drivers in the operation of wheelchair lifts. 
58

NCD commends the litigation efforts of the Department of Justice, and urges it to initiate more

intensive collaboration with the Department of Transportation to identify cases of persistent

noncompliance with transportation accessibility for legal action.

Technology and Telecommunications

1. Information and Assistive Technology Initiatives 

The Clinton administration’s FY 2001 budget included $100 million (a $13.5 million increase)

for disability and technology research at the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation

Research (NIDRR). NIDRR will launch a technology initiative that includes $5 million for an

educational technology initiative to provide technical assistance and training to elementary and

secondary schools; $3.4 million for an employment initiative to carry out research, training, and

technical assistance to enhance the ability of individuals with disabilities to access and use

information and communication technology; and $5.1 million for a community independence

initiative to study how information and assistive technology can be used to enhance community

integration and participation by individuals with disabilities. The administration’s request also

includes $15 million to support grants that establish or maintain alternative loan financing

programs. Most people with disabilities do not have the private financial resources to purchase

the assistive technology they need. If approved, this increase would significantly enhance the

opportunities for individuals with disabilities to take advantage of assistive technology.

In addition, from June to September 2000, the administration focused intensely on the areas of

assistive technology and information technology. During this period, the Clinton administration

was particularly active in working to create digital opportunities for Americans with disabilities:

President Clinton issued one Executive Order and four Executive Memoranda. On July 25, the

President issued Executive Order 13164, which requires federal agencies to establish procedures

to facilitate the provision of reasonable accommodations. On the same day, he issued a

Memorandum that detailed a strategy for the development and transfer of assistive technology

and universal design. The next day, he issued a Memorandum that renewed the administration’s
59

commitment to ensure that federal programs are free from disability-based discrimination. Also

on July 26, the President issued a Memorandum emphasizing the federal commitment to

employing people with significant disabilities to fill federal agency jobs that can be performed at

alternative work sites, including the home. On September 21, the President directed the secretary

of Health and Human Services to convene an interagency Task Force on Health Care Coverage

of Assistive Technologies that includes the Departments of Health and Human Services, Justice,

Education, Labor, Veterans Affairs, and other agencies, as appropriate. The task force will study

the role that Medicare and Medicaid do and should play in the coverage of assistive technology

devices. The work of the task force is intended to provide a framework for future Medicare and

Medicaid coverage decisions that complement the administration’s overall efforts to promote

employment opportunities for people with disabilities. In his Memorandum, the President

directed the task force to conduct a study on the role of Medicare and Medicaid in covering

assistive technologies that encourage employment of individuals with disabilities. 

NCD strongly endorses and applauds the technology initiatives set forth by the Clinton

administration. NCD urges the Bush administration to foster research on the economic and

social impacts of assistive technology on the lives of people with disabilities of all ages.

2. Access Board and Section 508 

In March 1999, the Access Board proposed standards for federal electronic and information

technology that were available for public comment until May 30, 2000. The Board is developing

these standards under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act Amendment of 1998, which requires

access to the Federal Government’s electronic and information technology. The law applies to all

federal agencies when they develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic and information

technology. Federal agencies must ensure that this technology is accessible to employees and

members of the public with disabilities to the extent that doing so does not pose an "undue

burden." The standards cover various means for disseminating information, including

computers, software, and electronic office equipment in the federal sector. On July 13, 2000,
60

President Clinton signed into law a military appropriations bill that included an amendment to

Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. Under the new amendment, the effective date of Section

508's enforcement provisions are delayed to allow more time for compliance with the Board’s

final standards. As originally written, the enforcement provisions of Section 508 would have

taken effect August 7, 2000. This date was based on final standards being completed in February

2000, which would have allowed six months before enforcement provisions took effect. The

amended language revises the effective date of the enforcement provisions to six months from

publication of the Board’s final standards, consistent with the law’s intent. This action is

responsive to industry concerns about sufficient time for compliance with the new standards. The

final standards will be incorporated into the Federal Government’s procurement regulations. The

Access Board is also undertaking a project to develop technical assistance and training materials

on the new standards. Under Section 508 (and the Assistive Technology Act of 1998), the Board

is responsible for a technical assistance program and training of federal and state employees on

the 508 standards and access to electronic and information technology. With the help of an

outside contractor, the Board is developing training modules and technical assistance materials

on the upcoming final standards and Section 508. The Board plans to have these materials

developed so that they are available soon after the 508 standards are published. 

NCD supports this critical work and encourages the Access Board, the General Services

Administration, and the administration to publish the final Section 508 standards in a timely

fashion.

3. General Services Administration (GSA) 

GSA launched the Federal Information Technology Accessibility Initiative to help federal

agencies provide access to electronic and information technology and to meet the requirements of

Section 508. This program will coordinate the Federal Government’s efforts to comply with the
61

law through outreach, training, and information sharing. GSA issued a memo on May 22 to all

federal chief information officers requesting that each agency name an information technology

(IT) access coordinator and team to ensure compliance with Section 508. GSA will work with

designated IT access coordinators to provide assistance and support and is organizing seminars

and workshops targeted to the coordinators, IT professionals, procurement officers, and

webmasters. GSA highlighted access to agency Web sites as a priority in this effort and set a

target date of July 26, 2000 (the 10th anniversary of ADA), for agencies to make their principal

Web sites and Web pages accessible. None of the agencies’ Web sites met this deadline.

Although the Section 508 standards proposed by the Board are not yet finalized, GSA has

indicated that the sections covering Web access will serve as interim guidance in making existing

sites and pages accessible.

NCD recommends that GSA provide opportunity for and rely on direct consumer feedback

throughout its implementation of Section 508, particularly as it relates to matters of

accessibility. NCD also recommends that GSA ensure that validated accessibility tools be

created, adopted, or adapted for Web site accessibility purposes as well as for other technology

purposes immediately after the Access Board’s publication of Section 508 standards. In addition,

NCD urges Congress to take whatever steps are necessary to amend the Congressional

Accountability Act so that the Government Printing Office (which maintains 30 federal agency

Web sites) does not remain exempt from federal accessibility laws and regulations, including

Section 508, as they pertain to Web sites.

4. Web-Based Education Commission

The commission is a congressionally established panel tasked to investigate the educational

promise of the World Wide Web. The commission focuses on the development and use of Webbased content and learning strategies to improve achievement at the K%12 and postsecondary

levels. Its mission is to recommend actions to help ensure that all learners have full and equal
62

access to the capabilities of the World Wide Web, and to ensure that online content and learning

strategies are affordable and meet the highest standards of educational quality. The commission

recommends to the President and Congress policies for helping education leaders at all levels

incorporate Web-based learning strategies to improve education and achievement. The

commission will conduct a thorough study of the critical pedagogical and policy issues affecting

the development and use of Web-based content and learning strategies to improve achievement at

the K-12 and post-secondary levels. The Commission will review the need for changes in

applicable regulatory authority and quality assurance processes, including standards and

accreditation. It will also review programs to support equality in both the availability of training

and access to the Web that are required to promote individualized learning. During 2000, through

a series of public hearings, the commission conducted an investigation of the key issues that

surround the wide-scale use of the Internet for learning, including the necessity for ensuring that

all learners have full and equal access to the capabilities of the Web. In December 2000, the

commission issued a report of its findings from two years worth of hearings and e-testimony. 

NCD acknowledges the work of the commission, especially its focus on the policy issue of

"access and equity." NCD strongly encourages Congress to use the commission’s report for the

next few years as a roadmap to guide congressional activity in key areas such as distance

learning, technology development and transfer, internet and Web-oriented research, and ecommerce, to name just a few issues.

5. Department of Justice 

On April 18, 2000, the attorney general of the United States announced the release of a new

Department of Justice report, Information Technology and People with Disabilities: The Current

State of Federal Accessibility, detailing the extent to which all federal agency electronic and

information technology is accessible to, and usable by, people with disabilities. 
63

NCD commends DOJ and all participating federal agencies for providing the nation, for the first

time, with a picture of the status of accessible electronic and information technology (EIT). NCD

encourages DOJ and all federal agencies to work together to improve and enhance the depth

and breadth of EIT accessibility for all American citizens in the coming years.

6. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the E-Rate 

FCC’s Schools and Libraries Division (SLD) and Universal Service Administrative Company

continued to provide affordable access to telecommunications services for eligible schools and

libraries in the United States. The program is funded at up to $2.25 billion annually. The level of

discounts schools and libraries are eligible to receive depends on economic need and location

(rural or urban); once approved, they apply their discounts to telecommunications services,

internet access and internal connections, then pay the difference out of their own budgets. The

Universal Service Fund for Schools and Libraries, popularly known as the "e-rate," provides all

public and private schools and libraries with access to affordable telecommunications and

advanced technologies through the e-rate, which is the discounted rate schools and libraries pay

for telecommunications services, Internet access, and internal connections. Discounts are based

on the number of students eligible for the National Free Lunch Program. Schools and libraries in

low-income urban communities and rural areas qualify for the highest discounts. 

Unfortunately, for the first three years of operation, e-rate discounts valued at about $6 billion

have been awarded to schools and libraries without any explicit assurances that accessibility to

the telecommunications services and programs funded with e-rate monies is provided for people

with disabilities. NCD’s recent meetings with FCC staff have resulted in the inclusion of a

generic accessibility notice in hard-copy and electronic e-rate applications. Retroactive

application of accessibility standards to schools and libraries funded the past three years is

needed. 
64

NCD recommends that the FCC revise its e-rate application form and Web site to include the

specific requirement and assurance from schools and libraries that they will adhere to federal

accessibility mandates. In addition, FCC and DOJ should ensure that recipients of federal funds

under the e-rate program for the past three years comply with federal accessibility mandates.

International Issues

1. Priorities in the International and Foreign Policy Arena

In April 2000, NCD sponsored a two-day meeting of members of its Foreign Policy Team and

International Watch (IW), a federal advisory committee convened to provide input and guidance

to NCD on international disability rights issues. Interested observers also attended. The purpose

of the meeting was to determine the top priority issues for NCD and its network of international

disability policy experts over the next several years. The meeting began with two roundtable

discussions in which federal agency officials provided brief overviews of their agencies’

initiatives in the international arena and commented on work that remains to implement a policy

of full inclusion. Following the roundtables, IW members identified five priorities for action to

advance disability inclusion in foreign/ international policy:

 Strengthen U.S. State Department policies and improve practices related to inclusion of

people with disabilities, particularly in overseas operations and foreign assistance

programs.

 Urge Congress to pass an amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act similar to the Percy

Amendment that legislated the inclusion of women in foreign assistance projects aimed at

strengthening national economies. A parallel amendment for people with disabilities

would make resources available to create opportunities for participation in local

economies and the achievement of economic self-sufficiency.

 Apply and enforce existing international laws, conventions, and standards to promote the

human rights of people with disabilities worldwide.
65

 Hold an international congress on developing an agenda for a convention on the human

rights of people with disabilities.

 Urge U.S. government agencies and nongovernmental organizations to develop working

partnerships aimed at articulating, advancing, and coordinating inclusion activities within

and across public agencies and private organizations.

Cognizant of the fact that NCD may not be the appropriate leader for these initiatives, IW

members requested that NCD promote the issues and help identify other organizations that can

lead or partner in an effort to achieve these objectives.

To illustrate the collaborative efforts of U.S. agencies, representatives from the Social Security

Administration and the Department of Education spoke about an international project cosponsored by the two agencies to improve the lives of women with disabilities through

leadership development and employment readiness. The international trainings, geared to young

and emerging women leaders in the disability community, focused on advocacy and leadership

skills.

2. Department of State

On March 16, 2000, the Department of State’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor

sponsored a symposium on people with disabilities who are living in institutions worldwide and

the routine human rights abuses they suffer. The executive director of Mental Disability Rights

International presented documentation of long-standing patterns of human rights abuses in

several countries. He asked the associate administrator for the bureau to take steps to ensure

accurate and consistent documentation of violations against people with disabilities in the

Department of State’s annual report to Congress on human rights practices. The associate

administrator responded with a memo sent to all U.S. missions in early September 2000, calling

on them to expand their reporting practices to include human rights abuses in institutions for
66

people with disabilities. The associate administrator’s office also funded the development of a

training video geared to U.S. human rights investigators for distribution to U.S. missions

worldwide. 

The implementation of inclusive policies in the Department of State has advanced slowly, with

problem areas in implementing Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act. One example is the

Department’s internal policy requiring an applicant with a disability to provide a "letter of basic

eligibility" from his or her state vocational rehabilitation agency or the Department of Veterans

Affairs. If selected for a position, a person with a disability is required to submit a "letter of

certification" stating that he or she can perform the duties of the position with or without

reasonable accommodation. This policy is not in conformance with Section 501, which applies

the same nondiscrimination standards in Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act to federal

employers. 

NCD strongly recommends that the Department of State closely examine all its personnel

policies in light of the legal standards of nondiscrimination in Title I of ADA. NCD urges the

Department to take immediate action to modify its policies as necessary to eliminate all

discriminatory barriers.

3. United States Agency for International Development

In February 2000, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) released its

second annual report on the implementation of the USAID disability policy first announced in

1998. The report looked at the policy recommendations from 1998 to assess to what extent they

had been implemented in 1999. The following are some of the report’s findings:
67

 There has been some increase (estimated at less than 50%) in the number of disability

plans in place at U.S. missions overseas.

 Even fewer missions have established conversational contact with a single local disability

advocacy group.

 The increase in mission activities that include people with disabilities has been slight.

 The inclusion of disability in agencywide training had not occurred when the report was

released in February, though plans to develop a multipurpose diversity training module

during FY 2000 had been initiated.

The report stated that overall efforts to promote USAID’s disability policy "have been disjointed

and minimally effective despite some areas of internal support." Finally, the report recommended

 establishing a lead organization for shepherding policy implementation;

 increasing program support for the lead agency to carry out inclusion activities;

 exploring potential funding mechanisms to promote the policy; and

 incorporating language to application guidelines for bureau funds that encourages

programs that benefit and include people with disabilities.

NCD strongly encourages USAID to move forward with the recommendations from the second

annual report, particularly as they relate to directing funds toward those programs that

explicitly include and benefit people with disabilities.

4. United Nations

The United Nations (UN) held a special session of the General Assembly June 5%9, 2000, in New

York City as a follow-up to the Fourth World Conference on Women held in Beijing in

September 1995. The member governments in attendance reaffirmed their commitments to the

Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action adopted at the Fourth World Conference to reduce
68

the gap in equality between men and women that results in higher infant mortality rates and

higher levels of malnutrition. The members also adopted additional actions and initiatives for

implementing both documents. Disability advocates criticized the action platform for the

inadequate attention given to the added burden of disadvantage, discrimination, lack of power,

and denial of the right to make decisions over their own lives experienced by women with

disabilities as a result of their disabilities. Their message, however, was incorporated into the

Beijing+5 final report, which states, "Girls and women of all ages with any form of disability are

generally among the more vulnerable and marginalized of society. There is therefore need to take

into account and to address their concerns in all policy making and programming. Special

measures are needed at all levels to integrate them into the mainstream of development."

The special rapporteur of the UN Commission for Social Development presented his final report

to the commission on monitoring the implementation of the Standard Rules on the Equalization

of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities. He reports that even among the most advanced

countries, the rules have not been fully implemented, but have been widely accepted as the main

disability policy guidelines for governments and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) alike.

While most countries have not started using the rules, survey results show 85 percent of

governments that provided information believe the rules have led to a rethinking of policies.

The special rapporteur noted that in the area of development cooperation, no serious effort was

identified within the UN or in intergovernmental institutions to integrate disability measures into

their mainstream activities for development cooperation. The same situation was found at

international financial institutions such as the World Bank, regional development banks, and

others. The special rapporteur pointed to the great risk that this lack of commitment will once

again lead to disability measures being left out or marginalized in UN development programs. 

The disappointingly slow advance of disability rights and quality of life for people with

disabilities internationally has contributed to a groundswell of support for an international
69

convention on the human rights of people with disabilities. Groups around the globe are

engaging in dialogue and strategizing to promote a UN convention. At the March 2000 World

NGO Summit on Disability in Beijing, China, the main international disability NGOs concluded

that to date, neither the international and regional instruments, nor the International Bill of Rights

had a significant impact on improving the lives of people with disabilities. The NGO Summit

Beijing Declaration called for an international convention with binding force to protect and

promote the rights of people with disabilities. Such an instrument would reinforce the moral

authority of the Standard Rules. Another major dialogue on the convention took place in August

2000 at the Rehabilitation International XIX World Congress in Rio de Janeiro. 

NCD strongly urges the UN to continue the work of the special rapporteur to influence the

development of awareness, positive response, and a sense of urgency in ending the

discrimination against and low visibility of people with disabilities. 
70
71

Conclusion

This year, the Federal Government and states must implement a number of new and effective

strategies to ensure that the overwhelming majority of the next generation of people with

disabilities participates in the prosperity of work. Public policy and legislation must no longer

force anyone into mere survival on income maintenance programs.

This year we must work to restore civil rights as a national priority for America. This restoration

must occur in deeds, not just in words.

This year we must provide a continuum of long-term care services to ensure that nursing home or

other institutional care is not the "default" solution" Access and adequate support to live where

they choose is fundamental to people with disabilities in exercising their civil, political, social,

religious, and cultural rights in society.

This year we must ensure that the new world economy&an economy already defined by

technology&is also defined as an economy with the ability to unlock the potential of people with

disabilities. Worldwide accessible technology is imperative.

This document reflects the large and small steps that have been taken during the past 12 months

to ensure that people with disabilities enjoy the full benefits of American citizenship and

prosperity. Within these pages are the incremental events, program endeavors, legislative

proposals, and policy actions that comprise a somewhat random agenda for civil and human

rights and access to society for people with disabilities.
72

The new administration and Congress will need to create a comprehensive and farsighted set of

opportunities to reinvigorate federal enforcement of disability, civil, and human rights laws so

that more Americans with disabilities and their families can realize the dream of equal access to

full participation in American society. The new administration must commit the necessary

leadership and resources to enforce our civil and human rights laws to ensure that protections in

law are protections in fact. NCD has laid out a roadmap for the new administration through its

civil rights monitoring project reports.

Let the new administration and Congress mark a realignment of commitment from government,

private sectors, and society to support the enormous energy of the grassroots movement for civil

and human rights and access to society for individuals with disabilities.
73

PART II

Major Activities Summary&Fiscal Year 2000

The Federal Reports Elimination and Sunset Act of 1995 (S. 790), among other things,

eliminated many unnecessary annual reports to the Federal Government, including NCD’s annual

report on its activities and accomplishments. That information is now combined with NCD’s

statutorily mandated National Disability Policy: A Progress Report to provide a more accurate

picture of NCD’s disability policy activities.

The National Council on Disability is a leader in the development and analysis of disability civil

rights policy that affects 54 million Americans with disabilities and their families. With a budget

authorization of $2,390,880, NCD conducted a number of activities in FY 2000. Those activities

promoted policies, programs, practices, and procedures that guarantee equal opportunity for all

individuals with disabilities, regardless of the nature or severity of the disability, from all cultural

backgrounds. They also helped individuals with disabilities realize the promise of the Americans

with Disabilities Act (ADA) by empowering them to achieve economic self-sufficiency,

independent living, inclusion, and integration into all aspects of society.

In FY 2000, NCD reviewed and evaluated new and emerging policy issues that affect people

with disabilities. NCD continued to identify the overall needs and concerns of people with

disabilities by conducting hearings, forums, and conferences throughout the country and by

responding to literally thousands of telephone, e-mail, and written inquiries on ADA and other

disability civil rights issues.

NCD continued its Disability Civil Rights Monitoring Project with the release of three

independent analyses of federal enforcement of disability civil rights laws.
74

This series grew out of NCD’s 1996 national policy summit, attended by more than 300

disability community leaders from diverse backgrounds, who called on NCD to work with

federal agencies to develop strategies for greater enforcement of existing disability civil rights

laws. On March 18, 1999, NCD produced its first report, Enforcing the Civil Rights of Air

Travelers with Disabilities. The second report, Back to School on Civil Rights, on the

enforcement of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, was issued on January 25, 2000.

The third report, Promises to Keep: A Decade of Federal Enforcement of the Americans with

Disabilities Act, was released on June 27, 2000. The enforcement reports to follow in this series

will be on the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

In FY 2000, NCD also released several other reports, including Implementation of the National

Voter Registration Act by State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies; From Privileges to Rights:

People with Psychiatric Disabilities Speak for Themselves; National Disability Policy: A

Progress Report; and Federal Barriers to Assistive Technology. NCD established a Youth

Advisory Committee; convened NCD Think Tank 2000: Coalitions for Advancing the Civil and

Human Rights of People with Disabilities from Diverse Cultures; held a civil rights retreat;

celebrated the 10th anniversary of ADA; and conducted community briefings across the country.
75

Activities for FY 2000

NCD conducted multiple activities in FY 2000 that significantly increased consumer input on

public policy issues affecting people with disabilities and provided information on NCD’s daily

operations. A summary of those activities follows:

NCD Releases Report on Voter Registration

October 1, 1999, Washington, DC

NCD released its report Implementation of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) by State

Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies. This report, which is the first to monitor NVRA, found that

implementation of this law by states is inconsistent and poorly coordinated.

NVRA was enacted 1993 to make it easier for all people to register to vote. Section 7 of NVRA

specifies that each state will designate, as voter registration agencies, all offices in the state that

provide state-funded programs primarily engaged in providing services to persons with

disabilities. One of the largest agencies serving people with disabilities in a state is the vocational

rehabilitation agency. 

National Disability Employment Awareness Month

October 19, 1999, Washington, DC

The White House Office of Public Liaison, NCD, and the President’s Committee on

Employment of People with Disabilities co-hosted a commemoration of National Disability

Employment Awareness Month by recognizing the musical and artistic talents of Americans with

disabilities.
76

Air Carrier Access

November 16%17, 2000, Washington, DC

NCD participated in a symposium for airline personnel on meeting the needs of passengers with

disabilities. An NCD representative addressed compliance and enforcement of the Air Carrier

Access Act and discussed NCD’s report Enforcing the Civil Rights of Air Travelers with

Disabilities: Recommendations for the Department of Transportation and the President.

Presidential Task Force on Employment of Adults with Disabilities

December 8, 1999, Chicago, IL

NCD participated in a town hall meeting of the Presidential Task Force on Employment of

Adults with Disabilities. The task force is chaired by the Secretary of Labor. NCD is a member

of the task force.

Interregional Seminar and Symposium

December 13%17, 1999, Hong Kong, China

NCD was represented at the Interregional Seminar and Symposium on International Norms and

Standards Relating to Disability, which was hosted by the Hong Kong Equal Opportunities

Commission and the University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law, in cooperation with the United

Nations. Fifty-four participants attended from 11 countries. 

International Watch

December 15, 1999, Washington, DC

March 15, 2000, Washington, DC

NCD conducted a meeting of its International Watch advisory committee. The purpose of

International Watch is to share information on international disability issues and to advise NCD’s
77

Foreign Policy Team on developing policy proposals that advocate for a foreign policy that is

consistent with the values and goals of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

April 6%7, 2000, Washington, DC

NCD held an International Watch advisory committee meeting at the Washington Marriott Hotel

in Washington, DC. On the first day of the meeting, representatives from 11 federal agencies

shared information about their agencies’ international disability policy implementation during

three roundtable sessions. Each roundtable was followed by a question and answer session from

21 members of NCD’s International Watch and Foreign Policy Team, as well as 14 official

observers. Agency representatives brought to light significant new information about some of

their agencies’ activities. All agreed that a tremendous amount of work remains to be done to

fully implement disability inclusion policy in each agency’s operations, both domestic and

overseas.

The second day focused on forging an action agenda based on the input and discussion from the

first day. Four work groups were established to develop action plans relating to Department of

State initiatives, interagency coordination and other agency actions, legislative priorities, and a

United Nations convention.

NCD Releases Report on People Labeled with Psychiatric Disabilities

January 20, 2000, Orlando, FL

NCD released its report From Privileges to Rights: People with Psychiatric Disabilities Speak

for Themselves, at the National Association of Protection and Advocacy Systems’ Winter

Conference 2000 in Orlando, Florida. NCD board member Rae Unzicker presented the report on

behalf of NCD. The report is based on NCD’s 1998 hearing in Albany, New York, where NCD

heard testimony from mental health professionals, lawyers, advocates, and relatives of people

with psychiatric disabilities and from people with psychiatric disabilities themselves. They
78

described in graphic detail how people with psychiatric disabilities have been beaten, shocked,

isolated, incarcerated, raped, deprived of food and bathroom privileges, and physically and

psychologically abused in institutions and in their communities. This testimony resulted in a

number of recommendations for change in the way people with psychiatric disabilities are

treated. The most important is the elimination of coercion. From Privileges to Rights calls on the

President and Congress to address the many problems faced by people with psychiatric

disabilities and to ensure that these people are fully and substantively involved in making policy

changes that will enable them to claim their full citizenship rights. 

NCD Releases IDEA Report

January 25, 2000, Washington, DC

Parents, students, and disability advocates braved a blizzard to participate in NCD’s January 25

news conference highlighting the release of its report Back to School on Civil Rights. The report

confirms what parents and children with disabilities have repeatedly told NCD: that

noncompliance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has persisted in

some states over many years, placing enormous burdens on children and families. NCD also

found that too many parents of children with disabilities continue to spend endless resources to

overcome obstacles to their children’s basic right to an appropriate education, often at the

expense of their personal lives, their careers, and their families’ financial security.

Back to School on Civil Rights is the second in NCD’s "Unequal Protection Under Law" series of

independent analyses of federal civil rights enforcement for Americans with disabilities. The first

in the series was NCD’s report of March 18, 1999, Enforcing the Civil Rights of Air Travelers

with Disabilities: Recommendations for the Department of Transportation and the President.
79

President’s Committee on Mental Retardation

February 22%23, 2000, New York, NY

NCD participated in the President’s Committee on Mental Retardation Conference on Poverty

and Disability: A Call to Action, addressing Native American issues and childhood and child

development practices.

Community Outreach

February 28, 2000, Orlando, FL

NCD conducted a community briefing on critical issues for people with disabilities on February

28 in Orlando, Florida. During the briefing, NCD presented information on its "Unequal

Protection Under Law" series of independent analyses of federal civil rights enforcement for

Americans with disabilities., including Back to School on Civil Rights; Lift Every Voice:

Modernizing Disability Policies and Programs to Serve a Diverse Nation; and From Privileges

to Rights: People Labeled with Psychiatric Disabilities Speak for Themselves. 

NCD Fellowship

March 1, 2000, Washington, DC

In 1999, NCD established the National Disability Fellowship Program in Washington, DC, to

identify and develop new leaders with disabilities to enhance NCD’s policy capacity. NCD

announced the second one-year appointment, which will begin on January 8, 2001. The focus of

the program is to provide experience, training, and contacts to qualified individuals with

disabilities. 
80

NCD Co-sponsors White House Initiative

May 1, 2000, Washington, DC

NCD co-sponsored the White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders

Heritage Month Celebration. On June 7, 1999, President Clinton signed Executive Order 13125,

which seeks to improve the quality of life for Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders by

increasing their participation in federal programs where they may be underserved. To implement

the Executive Order, the President established an advisory commission and a federal interagency

working group. NCD is a proud member of the working group.

Psychiatric Survivors Meet with the Vice President

May 2, 2000, Washington, DC

A national coalition representing people with psychiatric disabilities met in the White House

with Lisa Brown, general counsel to Vice President Gore, and Trooper Sanders, senior policy

advisor to Mrs. Gore, to convey the civil rights aspect of "mental health"&the necessity to

eliminate the devastating discrimination suffered by people with psychiatric disabilities and

psychiatric survivors. The group urged the vice president and Mrs. Gore to take a public stand

against involuntary confinement, abuse, coercion, forced treatment, and discrimination of any

kind. During the meeting, NCD presented an overview of its report From Privileges to Rights: 

People Labeled with Psychiatric Disabilities Speak for Themselves. Recommendations in this

report emphasize the basic principle that people with psychiatric disabilities are, first and

foremost, citizens who have the right to expect that they will be treated according to the

principles of law that apply to all other citizens. All laws and policies that restrict the rights of

people with psychiatric disabilities simply because of their disabilities are inharmonious with

basic principles of law and justice, as well as with such landmark civil rights laws as ADA.
81

NCD Releases Disability Progress Report

May 15, 2000, Washington, DC

NCD released its report National Disability Policy: A Progress Report, which found that despite

the enactment of laws and Federal Government regulations designed to enable people to engage

more fully in our nation’s economy, far too many people with disabilities continue to face

daunting obstacles. While the national unemployment rate is the lowest it has been for over a

quarter of a century, that rate remains above 70 percent for people with disabilities. In addition, a

majority of the nation’s six million students with disabilities are not receiving special education

and related services in regular education environments.

Think Tank 2000

May 18%20, 2000, Arlington, VA

NCD hosted a civil rights strategy session&NCD Think Tank 2000: Coalitions for Advancing

the Civil and Human Rights of People with Disabilities from Diverse Cultures&designed to

develop a strategic plan to combat the myriad challenges faced by Americans with disabilities

from culturally diverse backgrounds.

Speakers included acting Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Bill Lann Lee; Chair of the

Congressional Black Caucus James E. Clyburn; Representative Major R. Owens; and Executive

Director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Wade Henderson. Participants included

leaders from diverse cultures, a broad coalition of people representing grassroots disability rights

and traditional civil and human rights groups, and members of Congress and administration

officials. 
82

Presidential Task Force on Employment of Adults with Disabilities

May 24, 2000, Hartford, CT

NCD participated in a town hall meeting of the Presidential Task Force on Employment of

Adults with Disabilities. The purpose was to address expanding employment opportunities for

people with psychiatric disabilities. NCD is a member of the task force, which is chaired by the

secretary of Labor.

Community Briefing

May 24, 2000, San Juan, PR

NCD conducted a community briefing to gather input on findings and recommendations from

reports in its Unequal Protection Under Law series. 

NCD Releases Report on Technology

May 31, 2000, Washington, DC

In its report Federal Policy Barriers to Assistive Technology, NCD found that federal policies

constitute a barrier to individuals with disabilities who wish to learn about, obtain, and use

assistive technology (AT) devices and services, such as telecommunications equipment and

services for the deaf and computer software for adults and students who are blind. These barriers

translate into poor quality of life for people who cannot get the AT they need. 

Zero Tolerance and School Discipline

June 15%16, 2000, Washington, DC

NCD participated in summit entitled Opportunities Suspended: The Devastating Consequences

of Zero Tolerance and School Discipline Policies. An NCD representative discussed NCD’s
83

report Back to School on Civil Rights. The event was co-sponsored by the Civil Rights Project at

Harvard University, the Advancement Project, and the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition.

NCD Releases ADA Report

June 27, 2000, Washington, DC

NCD released its new report Promises to Keep: A Decade of Federal Enforcement of the

Americans with Disabilities Act at a standing-room-only news conference in Washington, DC.

NCD concluded that chronic underfunding and understaffing of responsible agencies, undue

caution, and the absence of a coherent strategy have undermined federal enforcement of ADA in

its first decade. The primary speakers were Marca Bristo, chairperson, NCD; Gina McDonald,

member, NCD; Wade Henderson, executive director, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights;

Andrew J. Imparato, president and chief executive officer, American Association of People with

Disabilities; and Jennifer Jones, chairperson, Youth Leadership Council. 

In a tremendous show of support, several disability stakeholders and national leaders also sat at

the dais and helped answer questions from the media. They included Yoshiko Dart, for Justin

Dart and Justice For All; Curt Decker, executive director, National Association of Protection and

Advocacy Systems; Paul Marchand, co-chair, Education Task Force, Consortium for Citizens

with Disabilities; Patty McGill Smith, executive director, National Parent Network on

Disabilities; and Courtland Townes III, chair, Legislative Committee, National Council on

Independent Living. Bob Kafka, national organizer for ADAPT, and Pat Wright, director of

governmental affairs, Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, were unable to participate

because of pressing family matters.
84

NCD Civil Rights Retreat

June 27%29, 2000, Washington, DC

NCD convened a Civil Rights Retreat to collaborate on a national enforcement agenda for

disability civil rights over the next 10 years. The participants represented a broad array of

expertise in the areas of civil and human rights, disability advocacy, and the status of people with

disabilities from diverse cultural backgrounds. This two-and-a-half-day retreat addressed issues

of inclusion, empowerment, and access to equal opportunity. The goal of the retreat was to forge

a disability civil rights agenda articulated in a consensus document that could then be taken to

grassroots communities around the country for their feedback in late 2000. 

ADA 10th Anniversary

July 25, 2000, Washington, DC

NCD celebrated the 10th anniversary of ADA at a special luncheon honoring the Leadership

Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR) for the pivotal role it played in the passage of ADA. During

the luncheon, LCCR was presented with NCD’s newly established Justin Dart Freedom Award.

LCCR executive director Wade Henderson accepted the award. Representative Major R. Owens

(D-NY) was the keynote speaker, while Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Representative James

Clyburn (D-SC), chair of the Congressional Black Caucus made special congratulatory remarks.

Youth Advisory Committee

July 25, 2000, Washington, DC

NCD conducted a meeting of its newly established Youth Advisory Committee to provide input

into NCD activities consistent with the values and goals of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
85

International Watch

August 15, 2000, Washington, DC

NCD conducted a meeting of its International Watch advisory committee. The purpose of

International Watch is to share information on international disability issues and to advise NCD’s

Foreign Policy Team as it develops policy proposals that advocate for a foreign policy that is

consistent with the values and goals of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Community Briefings

After a a disability civil rights agenda was formulated into a consensus document at the Civil

Rights Retreat, NCD took the document to grassroots communities around the country for their

feedback. 

August 14, 2000, New York, NY

August 16, 2000, Atlanta, GA

August 30, 2000, Houston, TX

September 6, 2000, Denver, CO

September 7, 2000, Anchorage, AK

September 8, 2000, Philadelphia, PA

September 13, 2000, Los Angeles, CA

September 15, 2000, Miami, FL

September 19, 2000, Boston, MA

September 21, 2000, Portland, OR

September 27, 2000, Rapid City, SD

September 28, 2000, Chicago, IL

September 29, 2000, Kansas City, MO
86

Congressional Testimony

In FY 2000, NCD provided formal testimony to Congress on four occasions:

 February 17, 2000, testimony submitted for the record of the U.S. House of

Representatives:

NCD submitted written testimony to the House Committee on the Judiciary,

Subcommittee on the Constitution, addressing the applicability of the Americans

with Disabilities Act to private Internet sites.

 March 25, 2000, testimony submitted for the record of the U.S. Senate:

NCD submitted written testimony to the Senate Committee on Appropriations,

Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related

Agencies regarding its FY 2001 budget request.

 March 30, 2000, before the U.S. House of Representatives:

NCD testified before the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on

Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, regarding its FY 2001 budget

request.

 September 14, 2000, testimony submitted for the record of the U.S. Senate:

NCD submitted e-testimony to the Web-based Education Commission, addressing

equal access to education for individuals with disabilities of all ages, including

matters that prevent students’ access to information technology that includes the

Internet and World Wide Web.

Information Dissemination

Information dissemination reached a record high for NCD, as it responded to thousands of

telephone calls, e-mail messages, and letters from concerned people and organizations about
87

disability issues. In addition, NCD published its monthly newsletter, NCD Bulletin, which

reaches more than 12,000 people and organizations. All NCD publications are available in

alternative formats, such as braille, large print, and audiocassette. This information is also

available at NCD’s award-winning Web site (www.ncd.gov), which receives more than one

million hits per year.

Also, on August 11, 2000, the President signed Executive Order 13166, which improves access

to services for persons with limited English proficiency. This Executive Order was a result of a

recommendation in Lift Every Voice. Information on NCD’s Web site is also available in

Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Tagalog, and Korean. The NCD Web site also offers a translation

function that removes language barriers across the World Wide Web. It translates to and from

English, French, German, Italian, Portugese, and Russian. 

NCD Quarterly Meetings

As required by Section 400(3)(c) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, NCD met on

four occasions during FY 2000:

November 15%16, 1999; Baltimore, MD

February 28%March 1, 2000; Orlando, FL

May 22%24, 2000; San Juan, PR

August 7%9, 2000; Washington, DC 
88
89

APPENDIX 

Mission of the National Council on Disability

Overview and Purpose

The National Council on Disability (NCD) is an independent federal agency with 15 members

appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. The overall

purpose of NCD is to promote policies, programs, practices, and procedures that guarantee equal

opportunity for all individuals with disabilities, regardless of the nature or significance of the

disability; and to empower individuals with disabilities to achieve economic self-sufficiency,

independent living, and inclusion and integration into all aspects of society.

Specific Duties

The current statutory mandate of NCD includes the following:

 Reviewing and evaluating, on a continuing basis, policies, programs, practices, and

procedures concerning individuals with disabilities conducted or assisted by federal

departments and agencies, including programs established or assisted under the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, or under the Developmental Disabilities

Assistance and Bill of Rights Act; as well as all statutes and regulations pertaining to

federal programs that assist such individuals with disabilities, in order to assess the

effectiveness of such policies, programs, practices, procedures, statutes, and regulations

in meeting the needs of individuals with disabilities.

 Reviewing and evaluating, on a continuing basis, new and emerging disability policy

issues affecting individuals with disabilities at the federal, state, and local levels and in

the private sector, including the need for and coordination of adult services, access to

personal assistance services, school reform efforts and the impact of such efforts on

individuals with disabilities, access to health care, and policies that act as disincentives

for individuals to seek and retain employment.
90

 Making recommendations to the President, Congress, the secretary of Education, the

director of the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, and other

officials of federal agencies about ways to better promote equal opportunity, economic

self-sufficiency, independent living, and inclusion and integration into all aspects of

society for Americans with disabilities.

 Providing Congress, on a continuing basis, with advice, recommendations, legislative

proposals, and any additional information that NCD or Congress deems appropriate.

 Gathering information about the implementation, effectiveness, and impact of the

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.).

 Advising the President, Congress, the commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services

Administration, the assistant secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services

within the Department of Education, and the director of the National Institute on

Disability and Rehabilitation and Research on the development of the programs to be

carried out under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.

 Providing advice to the commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration with

respect to the policies and conduct of the administration.

 Making recommendations to the director of the National Institute on Disability and

Rehabilitation Research on ways to improve research, service, administration, and the

collection, dissemination, and implementation of research findings affecting persons with

disabilities.

 Providing advice regarding priorities for the activities of the Interagency Disability

Coordinating Council and reviewing the recommendations of this council for legislative

and administrative changes to ensure that such recommendations are consistent with

NCD’s purpose of promoting the full integration, independence, and productivity of

individuals with disabilities.

 Preparing and submitting to the president and Congress an annual report titled National

Disability Policy: A Progress Report.
91

International

In 1995, NCD was designated by the Department of State to be the U.S. government’s official

contact point for disability issues. Specifically, NCD interacts with the special rapporteur of the

United Nations Commission for Social Development on disability matters.

Consumers Served and Current Activities

While many government agencies deal with issues and programs affecting people with

disabilities, NCD is the only federal agency charged with addressing, analyzing, and making

recommendations on issues of public policy that affect people with disabilities regardless of age,

disability type, perceived employment potential, economic need, specific functional ability,

veteran status, or other individual circumstance. NCD recognizes its unique opportunity to

facilitate independent living, community integration, and employment opportunities for people

with disabilities by ensuring an informed and coordinated approach to addressing the concerns of

people with disabilities and eliminating barriers to their active participation in community and

family life.

NCD plays a major role in developing disability policy in America. In fact, it was NCD that

originally proposed what eventually became the Americans with Disabilities Act. NCD’s present

list of key issues includes improving personal assistance services, promoting health care reform,

including students with disabilities in high-quality programs in typical neighborhood schools,

promoting equal employment and community housing opportunities, monitoring the

implementation of ADA, improving assistive technology, and ensuring that those persons with

disabilities who are members of diverse cultures fully participate in society.

Statutory History

NCD was initially established in 1978 as an advisory board within the Department of Education

(Public Law 95-602). The Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1984 (Public Law 98-221)

transformed NCD into an independent agency.