[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 58 (Friday, March 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14582-14585]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-6787]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services--Special
Demonstration Programs--Model Demonstration Projects To Improve
Outcomes for Individuals Receiving Social Security Disability Insurance
(SSDI) Served by State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Agencies
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of proposed priority.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.235L.
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services proposes a priority under the Special
Demonstration Programs to fund a project to identify, develop, and
implement model demonstration projects to improve outcomes for
individuals receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)
served by State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) agencies. The Assistant
Secretary may use this priority for competitions in fiscal year (FY)
2010 and later years. We take this action to improve employment
outcomes for SSDI beneficiaries receiving services from State VR
agencies.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before April 26, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Address all comments about this notice to Thomas Finch, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 5147, Potomac
Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2800.
If you prefer to send your comments by e-mail, use the following
address: [email protected]. You must include the term ``SSDI
Demonstration'' in the subject line of your electronic message.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Finch. Telephone: (202) 245-
7343 or by e-mail: [email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the
Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 14583]]
Invitation To Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
this notice.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Order 12866 and its overall requirement of
reducing regulatory burden that might result from this proposed
priority. Please let us know of any further ways we could reduce
potential costs or increase potential benefits while preserving the
effective and efficient administration of the program.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about this notice in room 5052, Potomac Center Plaza (PCP),
550 12th Street, SW., Washington DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and
4:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, Monday through Friday of each week
except Federal holidays.
Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities in Reviewing the
Rulemaking Record: On request we will provide an appropriate
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the
public rulemaking record for this notice. If you want to schedule an
appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Purpose of Program: The purpose of this program is to expand and
improve the provision of rehabilitation and other services authorized
under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (the Rehabilitation
Act), or to support activities that increase the provision, extent,
availability, scope, and quality of rehabilitation services provided
under the Rehabilitation Act.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 773(b).
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 373.
Proposed Priority
This notice contains one proposed priority.
Model Demonstration Projects To Improve Outcomes for Individuals
Receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) Served by State
Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Agencies
Background
The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (the Rehabilitation
Act), authorizes the establishment of VR agencies in each State to
administer the State's Vocational Rehabilitation Services program.
These State VR agencies provide VR services to eligible individuals
with disabilities to assist them to prepare for, obtain, or retain
employment, preferably competitive employment. Under the VR program,
competitive employment means employment in the competitive labor market
that is performed in an integrated setting and for which the individual
is paid at or above the minimum wage but not less than the customary
wage and level of benefits paid by the employer for the same work to
individuals who are not disabled (see generally 34 CFR 361.5(b)(11)).
In this context, an integrated setting means employment in jobs that
are typically found in the community and in which individuals with
disabilities have the same opportunity to interact with others in the
course of their work that is available to any other person employed in
a comparable position (see generally 34 CFR 361.5(b)(33)(ii)).
The Social Security Administration (SSA) provides income support to
more than 10 million working age people with disabilities through its
Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security
Income (SSI) programs. Under the SSDI program, SSA provides benefits to
eligible individuals with a work history who have paid Social Security
taxes on their earnings and who cannot work because they have a medical
condition that is expected to last at least one year or result in
death. The SSI program is an income supplement program that provides
cash assistance for basic needs, such as food, clothing, and shelter,
to individuals who are 65 years of age or older or who are disabled and
who have little or no income. Individuals with disabilities may receive
assistance under both the SSDI and SSI programs. The Federal
government's cost of providing these benefits was almost $101 billion
in 2005 and the number of beneficiaries and cost of these programs are
expected to increase (GAO-07-332, March 30, 2007).
State VR agencies serve a significant number of SSA beneficiaries.
In FY 2008, approximately 28 percent of all individuals whose service
records were closed were SSA beneficiaries at the time that they
applied for VR services, over half of whom were SSDI beneficiaries.
Similarly, SSA beneficiaries represented nearly a quarter of those
individuals exiting the State VR program with an employment outcome in
FY 2008, over half of whom were SSDI beneficiaries (RSA-911 data).
Accordingly, SSA has a significant and ongoing interest in State VR
agencies' success in helping individuals with disabilities secure
employment.
The Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992 increased the role of VR
agencies in assisting SSA beneficiaries by requiring that individuals
with disabilities who receive SSDI or SSI benefits be considered
individuals with significant disabilities and be presumed to be
eligible for VR services under the State VR Services program (see
section 102(a)(3) of the Rehabilitation Act). State VR agencies' role
has increased even more since the passage of the Ticket to Work and
Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1998 (42 U.S.C. 1320b-19). Under the
Ticket to Work program, most SSDI beneficiaries and SSI recipients
between the ages of 18 and 64 are offered a ``ticket'' which they may
use to obtain VR services, employment services, and other support
services from an SSA employment network services provider. State VR
agencies can participate in the Ticket to Work program as an employment
network services provider or through a cost reimbursement program. As
of March 1, 2010, about 229,224 ticket-holders are working with a State
VR agency under the traditional cost reimbursement arrangement. In
addition, about 34 percent of the 40,328 tickets that have been
assigned have been assigned to State VR agencies as an employment
network and about 66 percent have been assigned to other employment
networks. The Web site http://www.socialsecurity.gov/work/tickettracker.html provides more details on the coordination effort
between State VR agencies and the Ticket to Work program. There are
also new opportunities for State VR agencies to partner with other VR
providers under options that became available under the new Ticket to
Work regulations that became effective July 21, 2008 (20 CFR part 411).
Notwithstanding collaboration between SSA and the VR program,
recent studies have criticized the return to work efforts for SSA
beneficiaries. A GAO study found that while individuals increased their
earnings after receiving VR services, only a small proportion of that
group of individuals earned a sufficient amount that would enable them
to leave the SSA beneficiary rolls (Vocational Rehabilitation: Earnings
Increased for Many SSA Beneficiaries after Completing VR Services, but
Few Earned Enough to Leave SSA's Disability Rolls, GAO-07-332 March 30,
2007). The most recent GAO study (Vocational Rehabilitation: Improved
Information and Practices May Enhance State Agency Earnings Outcomes
for SSA Beneficiaries, GAO-07-521, May 23, 2007) reported that State
agency outcomes for SSA beneficiaries completing VR programs varied
widely
[[Page 14584]]
across different outcome measures. For example, according to SSA
earning records, there is wide variation among State VR agencies in the
amount of money that individuals with disabilities who achieved
employment outcomes earned during the first year after closure of the
VR service record.
This most recent study also found that some of the variance in
outcomes could be explained by factors such as State economic
conditions and the characteristics of the individuals receiving agency
services. However, GAO did find that a few State VR agency practices
appeared to yield positive earnings results and made the following
recommendation:
To improve the effectiveness of Education's program evaluation
efforts and ultimately the management of vocational rehabilitation
programs, the Secretary of Education should further promote agency
practices that show promise for helping more SSA disability
beneficiaries participate in the work force. Such a model should
seek to increase: (1) The percentage of VR staff who meet State
standards and certifications established under the Comprehensive
System of Personnel Development (CSPD), (2) partnership or
involvement with area business communities, and (3) collaboration
with other agencies that provide complementary services (Vocational
Rehabilitation: Improved Information and Practices May Enhance State
Agency Earnings Outcomes for SSA Beneficiaries, GAO-07-521, May 23,
2007).
We propose to address GAO's recommendation that the Department promote
promising practices by examining practices in State VR agencies and
other factors affecting the employment outcomes of SSDI beneficiaries.
The focus of this proposed priority is limited to individuals with
disabilities receiving SSDI benefits at the time of application to the
VR program, including those individuals receiving both SSDI and SSI,
because differences in program eligibility and other characteristics of
the SSDI and SSI programs and their recipients (work history, amount of
disability payment, work-related incentives/disincentives), would make
it difficult to analyze, interpret, and generalize the results.
There are a number of practices and other factors that may affect
the outcomes of SSDI beneficiaries that need to be examined at the
State or local level, for example, looking at the effect of partnering
with business or collaborating with other agencies that provide
complementary services, as suggested by GAO. Likewise, State VR
agencies commit varying levels of resources towards rehabilitation of
SSA beneficiaries, and these individual State decisions could also
explain differences in State VR agency performance. Finally, the
existence within States of different levels of extended services and
supports available from other agencies to assist individuals with
disabilities to maintain employment following the completion of the VR
program and case closure may also have a direct impact on job retention
and earnings levels.
One way to study these individual State differences is to identify
State VR agencies that are particularly successful in achieving
employment outcomes for SSDI beneficiaries at comparatively higher
wages and hours worked and to conduct in-depth case studies of those
agencies to identify practices that are associated with more and better
employment outcomes and can be replicated by other State VR agencies.
One source of data that may be used for this analysis is the RSA-
911. The RSA-911 is the primary individual service record level
database on which State VR agencies report information about individual
characteristics of, services provided to, and the employment outcomes
obtained by individuals served by the VR program. Examination of RSA-
911 information for FY 2008 shows that, as GAO reported, State VR
agencies differ considerably in both the number of SSDI beneficiaries
served and in the number and quality of the employment outcomes
obtained by SSDI beneficiaries. There are differences in relative
success rates (called employment outcome rates or rehabilitation rates
in VR nomenclature) and relative differences in emphasis on full- or
part-time work (as indicated by average hours worked per week). There
are also differences in gross weekly wages and in the percentage of
individuals who earn more than the substantial gainful activity (SGA)
level at closure (RSA analysis of RSA-911 data, FY 2008).
A preliminary review of four performance measures (employment
outcome rate, wages at case closure, hours worked, and percentage of
individuals earning an amount greater than SGA at closure) in the RSA-
911 data indicates that there are 10 State VR agencies that score in
the top 20 percent of all State VR agencies for at least three out of
the four performance measures. Although a more in-depth analysis of
recent RSA-911 data and other information may provide somewhat
different results, RSA has concluded from this preliminary review that
there is a pool of State VR agencies that are able to achieve more
employment outcomes involving full-time work and higher wages for SSDI
beneficiaries from which selections for a case study review could be
made.
This proposed priority is envisioned as a cooperative agreement
with significant interaction and collaboration between RSA and the
grantee. There are several distinct activities involved in this
research activity. These include: further analysis of existing RSA data
and other relevant data to identify high-performing State VR agencies;
investigation of practices within these agencies using rigorous case
study methodology; analysis of the case study findings; and design,
implementation, and evaluation of a demonstration project based on the
findings from the case studies.
Some of the preliminary work for this data analysis has been
completed, as discussed previously in this notice. Before a grant is
made under this priority, RSA staff will conduct a more thorough
analysis of State VR agency performance related to serving SSDI
beneficiaries to determine whether there are State VR agencies that
consistently appear to perform better than others across multiple
measures. In conducting this analysis, RSA will likely use other
databases in conjunction with the RSA-911. The analysis will refine the
criteria for measuring high performance and will be the basis for
identifying States that meet the identified criteria. RSA will share
the results of this analysis with the grantee during the discussion of
the selection of the high-performing State VR agencies to be examined
further through the case studies.\1\ It is recommended that applicants
assume that there will be three case studies on the premise that
further analysis will reduce the pool of State VR agencies that show
consistent positive outcomes for SSDI beneficiaries and that only some
of those State VR agencies will agree to participate in the study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ State VR agencies that serve individuals who are blind or
visually impaired will be excluded from this study for two reasons:
individuals who are blind or visually impaired have significantly
different benefits under the SSDI program, the most important of
which is the allowance of a higher level of earnings before meeting
the SGA requirement; and most of these agencies serve relatively few
individuals, making analysis more difficult. Likewise, VR programs
in the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern Marianas and
the territories of Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands are
excluded from this study for reasons of small numbers served, cost
considerations, and significant differences in availability and
organization of other resources for individuals with disabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of the case studies of State VR agencies that
demonstrate sustained success with SSDI beneficiaries is to determine
possible factors contributing to that success. High-performing agencies
will be asked
[[Page 14585]]
by RSA to participate in these in-depth case studies to determine
factors or variables that are related to high performance as defined
for this project. The factors or variables may be decisions or
activities that are under the control of the State VR agency, or they
may be characteristics of the external State environment. Information
from the case study analysis will be used in the design of an
intervention model by the successful grantee that will serve as the
basis for the demonstration projects to be carried out and evaluated by
the grantee under this priority.
Proposed Priority
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services proposes a priority under the Special Demonstration Programs
to fund a project to identify, develop, and implement model
demonstration projects to improve outcomes for individuals receiving
Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) who are served by State
vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies. Under this priority, the
project must be designed to contribute to the following outcomes:
Identify through in-depth case study of selected State VR
agencies factors that account for the relatively better qualitative and
quantitative results of these agencies in achieving employment outcomes
at or above substantial gainful activity (SGA) for SSDI beneficiaries.
Determine whether there are a sufficient number of factors
related to the better employment outcome results that are within the
control of the State VR agency, and if so, develop an intervention
model incorporating those factors that can be replicated in other State
VR agencies and that can be evaluated in terms of the model's impact
after implementation.
Implement and evaluate the intervention model in at least
three State VR agencies, selected by the Rehabilitation Services
Administration (RSA) based on information provided by the grantee, that
are willing to implement the model. One criterion for selecting these
State VR agencies is that SSDI beneficiaries whom they serve have an
employment outcome rate at or below the rate for other State VR
agencies.
If the model demonstration projects show an improved
employment rate for SSDI beneficiaries, complete the development of the
intervention model incorporating information acquired through the model
demonstration projects, recommend any strategies needed for
implementation of the model by other State VR agencies, and disseminate
the findings of this demonstration project to State VR agencies.
Types of Priorities
When inviting applications for a competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute,
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Final Priority
We will announce the final priority in a notice in the Federal
Register. We will determine the final priority after considering
responses to this notice and other information available to the
Department. This notice does not preclude us from proposing additional
priorities, requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject
to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use this priority, we invite applications through
a notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Order 12866: This notice has been reviewed in accordance
with Executive Order 12866. Under the terms of the order, we have
assessed the potential costs and benefits of this proposed regulatory
action.
The potential costs associated with this proposed regulatory action
are those resulting from statutory requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for administering this program effectively and
efficiently.
In assessing the potential costs and benefits--both quantitative
and qualitative--of this proposed regulatory action, we have determined
that the benefits of the proposed priority justify the costs.
Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the
objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental
partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies
on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination
and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print,
audiotape, or computer diskette) by contacting the Grants and Contracts
Services Team, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC 20202-2550. Telephone: (202) 245-7363.
If you use a TDD, call the FRS, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
Electronic Access to This Document: You can view this document, as
well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal
Register, in the text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the
Internet at the following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister. To
use PDF you must have the Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free
at this site.
Note: The official version of this document is the document
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal
Regulations is available on GPO Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html.
Dated: March 23, 2010.
Alexa Posny,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2010-6787 Filed 3-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P