Special Demonstration Programs-Model Demonstration Projects to Improve the Postsecondary and Employment Outcomes of Youth with Disabilities, 36676-36682 [07-3249]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 128 (Thursday, July 5, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36676-36682]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-3249]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Special Demonstration Programs--Model Demonstration Projects to 
Improve the Postsecondary and Employment Outcomes of Youth with 
Disabilities

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, 
Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of final priority and definitions.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 
Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) announces a final priority and 
definitions under the Special Demonstration Programs administered by 
the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA). The Assistant 
Secretary may use the priority and definitions for competitions in 
fiscal year (FY) 2007 and later years. We intend for the priority to 
support projects that demonstrate the use of promising practices in 
collaborative transition planning and service delivery to improve the 
postsecondary education and employment outcomes of youth with 
disabilities.

DATES: Effective Date: The priority and definitions are effective 
August 6, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edwin Powell, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 5038, Potomac Center Plaza, 
Washington, DC 20202-2800. Telephone: (202) 245-7505 or via Internet: 
Edwin.Powell@ed.gov.
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may 
call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an 
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer 
diskette) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of the Special Demonstration 
Programs is to provide financial assistance to projects that expand and 
improve the provision of vocational rehabilitation (VR) and other 
services for individuals with disabilities authorized under the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation Act).

[[Page 36677]]

    We published a notice of proposed priority and definitions (NPP) 
for this program in the Federal Register on February 15, 2007 (72 FR 
7427). The NPP included a background statement that described our 
rationale for the priority and definitions.
    More specifically, the background section of the NPP described the 
challenges that youth with disabilities face as they transition to 
adult life and how too many of these youth experience difficulties in 
achieving successful post-school outcomes. We explained the importance 
of the State VR programs in assisting youth with disabilities to 
prepare for education, training, and employment opportunities beyond 
high school. The NPP also included a discussion of the need for 
programs that build on collaborative State and local efforts and use 
promising practices to improve the postsecondary education and 
employment outcomes of youth with disabilities.
    This notice of final priority and definitions (NFP) contains 
several changes from the NPP. These changes are explained in the 
following section, Analysis of Comments and Changes.

Analysis of Comments and Changes

    In response to our invitation in the NPP, 75 parties submitted 
comments on the proposed priority and definitions. An analysis of the 
comments and changes in the priority and definitions since publication 
of the NPP follows.
    Generally, we do not address technical and other minor changes and 
suggested changes the law does not authorize us to make under the 
applicable statutory authority.
    Comments: Two commenters stated that the language in the priority 
should address cultural concerns.
    Discussion: Without more detailed information from the commenters, 
we cannot respond specifically to their concerns. However, we note that 
under the Rehabilitation Act, VR services must be provided to eligible 
individuals with disabilities irrespective of an individual's ethnicity 
or race. An applicant under this priority may submit a proposal that 
speaks to the need for specific interventions or activities that 
address cultural concerns.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: Seven commenters suggested expanding the age range for 
individuals receiving transition services under this priority. Some 
commenters suggested we include children younger than 16 in the age 
range; others suggested we include young adults over the age of 22. 
Still other commenters suggested that the definition be consistent with 
their State's regulations or other Federal regulations. One commenter 
specifically recommended that the definition of youth with disabilities 
include language from the definition of child with a disability found 
in 34 CFR 300.8.
    Discussion: The regulations for Special Demonstration Programs in 
34 CFR 373.4 define youth or young adults with disabilities as 
individuals with disabilities who are between the ages of 16 and 26. 
However, we determined that this age range was overly inclusive for 
this priority. We therefore proposed that these projects should serve 
youth from the age of 16 through the age of 22 in order to focus on the 
majority of students receiving transition services under the 
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). We also determined 
that this age range would be the most relevant for providing transition 
services to youth receiving educational services under section 504 
plans and youth who have dropped out of school.
    The IDEA regulations require transition services to be included in 
the first individualized education program (IEP) to be in effect when 
the child turns 16, or younger if determined appropriate by the IEP 
Team (34 CFR 300.320(b)). We recognize that some States may have 
regulations that require transition services to be provided to youth 
under the age of 16. We also recognize that States have the option of 
providing transition services to youth with disabilities over the age 
of 22, if permitted by State regulations. Despite these considerations, 
we believe that it is important to designate a specific age range to 
ensure that all of these projects serve a comparable population, thus 
providing for consistency among the projects that will allow for valid 
comparisons among project results for evaluation purposes. Furthermore, 
we have not incorporated language from the definition of child with a 
disability in 34 CFR 300.8, as one commenter recommended, because this 
definition includes disability categories that apply to students with 
disabilities receiving special education services under the IDEA but 
which do not necessarily apply to other transition age youth (e.g., 
students under section 504 plans or youth who have dropped out of 
school).
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that the priority should not 
require the creation of a State interagency transition taskforce, 
because a new taskforce could duplicate the functions of other State 
entities, such as the State Rehabilitation Councils (SRCs).
    Discussion: Given the very specific functions of the State 
interagency transition taskforce and the requirement that the taskforce 
focus only on the transition of youth with disabilities, we think it is 
unlikely that many States have an existing entity that could serve 
these functions. However, the priority does not necessarily require the 
creation of a new taskforce. Accordingly, as long as the entity meets 
the definition of State interagency transition taskforce and can 
perform the specific functions outlined in the definition, the priority 
does not preclude an applicant from using an existing entity to 
facilitate interagency collaboration and coordination for the project.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: Four commenters suggested that youth with disabilities be 
included on the State interagency transition taskforce.
    Discussion: We do not find it necessary to require that 
transitioning youth with disabilities serve on the State interagency 
transition taskforce. Our proposed definition of State interagency 
transition taskforce stated, in part, that the taskforce must include 
``individuals to represent the perspectives of * * * transitioning 
youth with disabilities.'' A transitioning youth with a disability 
could certainly serve on the taskforce in this capacity. However, we 
believe that individuals other than transitioning youth with 
disabilities also could represent adequately the perspectives of these 
transitioning youth. Thus, it is appropriate to allow the applicant to 
determine who will represent this population.
    Changes: In order to clarify that youth with disabilities may, but 
are not required to, serve on the State interagency transition 
taskforce, we revised the definition of State interagency transition 
taskforce to explicitly include youth with disabilities among those who 
may serve on the taskforce.
    Comments: One commenter stated that the priority does not 
adequately refer to the important services provided by the private 
sector to transitioning youth with disabilities.
    Discussion: We are well aware of the contributions made by the 
private sector to improve the post-secondary and employment outcomes of 
youth with disabilities. For this reason, the State interagency 
transition taskforce must include among its members ``individuals to 
represent the perspectives of business and industry.'' We believe that 
requiring the taskforce to include this group of individuals addresses 
adequately the private sector's involvement in providing services to 
youth with disabilities.

[[Page 36678]]

    Changes: None.
    Comments: Seven commenters suggested that the priority require more 
collaboration among the State VR agency or agencies, the State 
educational agency (SEA), local educational agencies (LEAs), and 
community stakeholders on the topic of transition.
    Discussion: We believe the priority, as proposed, already requires 
significant coordination and collaboration among the State VR agency, 
the SEA, LEAs, and community stakeholders. For instance, under the 
priority, the State interagency transition taskforce must implement a 
model transition program to be carried out at two sites in coordination 
with the applicable LEA or LEAs. The taskforce also must provide 
training and technical assistance to LEAs on planning and providing 
transition services to youth with disabilities. Additionally, the 
priority provides for local interagency teams to implement the VR 
service delivery models developed by the taskforce. We believe that 
these activities, as well as others outlined in the priority, are more 
than sufficient to ensure significant collaboration among local, State, 
and community stakeholders.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter stated that the priority does not address 
the role of partners specified in the Workforce Investment Act (WIA).
    Discussion: We recognize the valuable contributions that WIA 
partners and other entities providing services under WIA, such as State 
employment and training agencies, local one-stop workforce centers, and 
State and local workforce investment boards, can make in improving 
post-secondary education and employment outcomes for youth with 
disabilities. Accordingly, in the definition of State interagency 
transition taskforce, we proposed that the taskforce include 
representatives of the State VR agency; the State VR agency for the 
Blind, in a State where there is such an agency; and the State Labor 
and Employment/Workforce agency, three of the required partners under 
WIA. An applicant may include other WIA partners in addition to these 
required participants on its taskforce.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that SEAs and LEAs be excluded 
from the priority.
    Discussion: The purpose of the priority is to promote and 
strengthen collaboration among various partners at the State and local 
levels to improve post-school outcomes for youth with disabilities. We 
believe SEAs and LEAs are vital partners in facilitating successful 
transitions from school to post-school activities for youth with 
disabilities, and therefore, decline to make the changes requested.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that the priority include support 
for the cost of transportation.
    Discussion: The priority permits the provision of individualized VR 
services for youth with disabilities who are eligible for these 
services under 34 CFR 361.42. These individualized services may include 
providing transportation if it is needed by the youth to access 
necessary and appropriate transition services. In addition, the 
priority does not preclude an applicant from including in its proposed 
model transition program transportation or any other service that is 
allowable under the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) cost 
principles. Therefore, we believe the priority is broad enough to 
permit the use of funds for transportation services if needed by the 
individuals served by the project.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: Two commenters suggested that we require applicants to 
provide the following additional services under the priority: 
mentoring, assistive technology services, driver's education, services 
provided by parent training and information centers, summer programs, 
services to youth who are involved in the juvenile justice system, and 
intensive reading remediation programs.
    Discussion: We agree that the services identified by the commenters 
are important services in a transition program. The services that we 
identified in the priority, however, were not intended to be an 
exhaustive list of all services that could be provided under the 
priority. Rather, we expect that, through the State interagency 
transition taskforce, the grantee will identify the services to be 
delivered as part of the coordinated set of promising practices to be 
provided under paragraph 4(c) of the priority. Thus, while the priority 
does not preclude a grantee from providing any of the services 
identified by the commenters, we believe it is better left to an 
applicant and the State interagency transition taskforce to identify 
the particular services that would best address the needs in the State 
or local area that the project will serve. Therefore, we do not think 
it is necessary to require all grantees to provide the particular 
additional services suggested by the commenters.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that the priority require every 
middle school, high school, and college involved in the model 
demonstration project to have a transition counselor to work with youth 
with disabilities.
    Discussion: The priority does not preclude applicants from 
including transition counselors in their model demonstration projects. 
However, that approach may not be feasible in some instances because of 
staffing constraints and funding limitations. Therefore, we do not 
believe that we should require all applicants to adopt such an 
approach.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that the priority include a 
requirement to train personnel in institutions of higher education and 
personnel responsible for planning and providing services to youth with 
disabilities.
    Discussion: Applicants under the priority must provide training and 
technical assistance to LEAs and VR personnel. The priority does not 
preclude an applicant from proposing, as part of its model 
demonstration project, to train personnel in institutions of higher 
education or other personnel responsible for planning and providing 
services to youth with disabilities. However, we do not believe we 
should require each model demonstration project to train personnel in 
institutions of higher education or other personnel responsible for 
planning and providing services to youth with disabilities because 
training of those personnel may not be necessary to meet the specific 
needs in the State or local area(s) that the project will cover.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter requested that the priority require 
projects funded under the priority to cultivate community employment 
possibilities.
    Discussion: With regard to employment, the purpose of the priority 
is to improve employment outcomes for youth with disabilities. 
Employment outcomes may be improved through a variety of methods, 
including the use of activities that focus on cultivating community 
employment possibilities. In order to provide flexibility and promote 
creativity, we do not believe the priority should include a requirement 
to cultivate community employment possibilities.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: Two commenters suggested that the priority require 
projects to educate parents and students at an early age about 
transition services.
    Discussion: The priority requires projects to provide a coordinated 
set of promising practices, which must include, among other things, 
youth development activities and practices to enhance family 
involvement. Through these youth development activities and

[[Page 36679]]

practices to enhance family involvement, we expect that grantees will 
provide information and other services to youth with disabilities and 
their parents so that they are well informed about the transition 
services available to them and thus able to make better decisions.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that we require applicants to 
propose in their applications a specific life skills curriculum that 
includes vocational preparation and training and community field trips.
    Discussion: Under the priority, applicants must provide, among 
other things, a description of promising practices they propose to 
provide, including youth development activities. The definition of 
youth development activities, in turn, specifically identifies training 
in life skills (e.g., independent living skills, self-advocacy, and 
conflict resolution) that an applicant may include in its model 
demonstration project. We do not believe it is appropriate to prescribe 
more specifically the types of youth development activities an 
applicant may propose; such decisions are best left to the applicant 
and the State interagency transition taskforce who can better assess 
the needs of the youth who will be served.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that the progress of a youth with 
disabilities be evaluated with a variety of assessments (e.g., work 
samples, behavioral observation, community-based or situational 
assessment, family questionnaires, etc.) conducted at various points in 
the program of services for that youth.
    Discussion: Assessment of a youth's progress, through means such as 
those described by the commenter, may be utilized at the discretion of 
the applicant. However, the outcome data that each grantee must 
collect, at a minimum, are specified in paragraph 4(d) of the priority. 
Therefore, the assessments the grantee chooses to use must ultimately 
focus on improving postsecondary education and employment outcomes for 
youth with disabilities.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that the priority require a Web-
based clearinghouse to compile and disseminate information about the 
results of projects funded under the priority.
    Discussion: OSERS currently funds several transition-related 
technical assistance and dissemination centers that serve as 
clearinghouses, including the National Dropout Prevention Center for 
Students with Disabilities, the National Secondary Transition Technical 
Assistance Center, and the National Dissemination Center for Children 
with Disabilities (NICHCY). Information on promising practices 
resulting from the model demonstration projects funded under the 
priority will be shared with these technical assistance centers; thus, 
these existing centers will be used to disseminate information stemming 
from projects funded under the priority. We believe this is a more 
efficient use of resources and, therefore, decline to make the change 
recommended by the commenter.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: Three commenters recommended that the priority require an 
evaluation plan that includes both formative and summative analyses.
    Discussion: Paragraph 4(d) of the priority requires applicants to 
provide an evaluation plan in their applications that includes, among 
other things, the data to be collected and how it will be analyzed. All 
grantees will necessarily conduct summative analyses of the data they 
collect to include in the final report they are required to submit to 
the Department. Grantees also may utilize formative analyses so that 
they can better assess the progress they are making with youth at 
various points during the period of the project. However, we do not 
believe it is necessary to require that all applicants conduct 
formative analyses, but instead, will leave this decision to the 
discretion of the applicant.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter asked that we clarify whether a third-party 
evaluation is required under the priority.
    Discussion: Paragraph 2(f) of the priority requires an applicant to 
demonstrate that the project for which it seeks funding will conduct an 
evaluation plan of the project's performance, including an evaluation 
of the effectiveness of the practices and strategies implemented by the 
project in achieving project goals, particularly post-school outcomes. 
This project evaluation does not need to be conducted by a third party. 
However, during the first year of these projects, we intend to work 
with grantees to ensure that the required evaluation data under 
paragraph 4(d) are collected uniformly to allow the Department to 
analyze project outcomes across models.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that all post-school outcome data 
be disaggregated and available to examine all categories of 
disabilities.
    Discussion: We recognize the importance of making certain that 
grantees can disaggregate data by disability. In order to be responsive 
to this concern, we have revised paragraph 4(d) of the priority to 
require applicants to use a consistent approach to collecting and 
reporting data that can be disaggregated by disability.
    Changes: Paragraph 4(d) of the priority has been changed to require 
that the evaluation plan include the collection of data about the 
disability or disabilities of a youth, consistent with the disability 
coding system used by State VR agencies.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that we require that the project 
findings be disseminated to the local community, including institutions 
of higher education, served by the LEA.
    Discussion: Paragraph 4(e) of the priority requires a plan for the 
systematic dissemination of project findings and knowledge gained that 
will assist State and local agencies in adapting or replicating the 
transition model carried out by the project. Applicants may propose to 
disseminate their findings in the manner suggested by the commenter. 
However, we do not believe there is a sufficient basis to require all 
grantees to disseminate project findings to specific groups.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: Three commenters recommended that the priority require 
applicants to base their projects on objective evidence of the specific 
needs in the State.
    Discussion: We recognize the importance of basing the project 
design on objective evidence regarding specific needs in the State. 
Objective evidence of State needs will be used as a selection criterion 
in reviewing applications submitted under the priority. Accordingly, we 
do not believe it is necessary to include this requirement in the 
priority.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that applicants be required to 
demonstrate that they are currently participating in research-based 
designs for best practices and have significant linkages to other 
transition-outcome improvement projects.
    Discussion: Restricting applicants to those currently participating 
in research-based designs and those that have significant linkages to 
other transition-outcome improvement projects may too severely restrict 
the applicant pool. In fact, through this priority, we hope to 
encourage the adoption of research-based designs and

[[Page 36680]]

promising transition practices in additional States and localities. 
However, we agree with the commenter that projects funded under the 
priority should link with other transition projects, if they do not 
already do so. Through ongoing technical assistance and information 
dissemination activities during the project period, we will advise 
grantees of new and existing transition-outcome improvement projects 
with which they may establish linkages.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: Two commenters suggested that the term ``internship'' be 
included in the definition of career preparatory and pre-employment 
experiences.
    Discussion: We did not intend the definition of career preparatory 
and pre-employment experiences to preclude internships as one of the 
training activities. To clarify our intent, we have revised the 
definition.
    Changes: The definition of career preparatory and pre-employment 
experiences has been revised to clarify that the list of experiences 
and activities included in the definition is not exhaustive.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that the list of definitions in 
the priority include: career planning, vocational preparation, and 
successful transition.
    Discussion: The terms ``career planning'' and ``vocational 
preparation'' are not used in this priority and therefore are not 
included in the list of definitions. Career planning and vocational 
preparation are strategies that the applicant may propose in providing 
career preparatory and pre-employment experiences and student-focused 
planning activities consistent with paragraph 4(d) of the priority. 
Regarding the suggestion to add the definition of successful transition 
to the list of definitions, the term may be defined differently for 
each student or project. Thus, adding a definition for successful 
transition to the list of definitions is not necessary or appropriate.
    Changes: None.
    Comments: One commenter recommended requiring each project to 
define employment for the sake of clarity because some projects 
consider sheltered work to be employment.
    Discussion: We believe that the definition of employment outcome in 
34 CFR part 373 addresses the issue raised by the commenter. Under the 
regulations, the term employment outcome has the same meaning as 
employment outcome in the State VR services program regulations in 34 
CFR 361.5(b)(16). That definition of employment outcome does not 
include sheltered work. Therefore, it is not necessary for an applicant 
to define employment. In order to clarify that applicants must use the 
definition of employment outcome found in 34 CFR 361.5(b)(16), a 
reference to this definition has been added in paragraph 2(b)(i) of the 
priority in which the individualized VR services that an applicant must 
provide are described.
    Changes: Paragraph 2(b)(i) of the priority has been revised to 
clarify that the individualized VR services that are provided are 
designed to achieve an employment outcome consistent with the 
definition in 34 CFR 361.5(b)(16).

    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. When inviting applications we 
designate the priority as absolute, competitive preference, or 
invitational. 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 either (1) 
Awarding additional points, depending on how well or the extent to 
which the application meets the competitive priority (34 CFR 
75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting an application that meets the 
competitive 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 invitational 
priority. However, we do not give an application that meets the 
invitational priority a competitive or absolute preference over other 
applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).

Priority

Priority--Model Demonstration Projects to Improve the Postsecondary and 
Employment Outcomes of Youth with Disabilities

    This priority supports projects that demonstrate the use of 
promising practices of collaborative transition planning and service 
delivery in improving the postsecondary education and employment 
outcomes of youth with disabilities.
    In order to meet this priority, an applicant must--
    (1) Provide an assurance that the State has an interagency 
transition taskforce that provides input in the development of the 
application and that the interagency transition taskforce will--
    (a) Play an advisory role in the operation of the project;
    (b) Assist in the development of project goals;
    (c) Review project findings; and
    (d) Assist in the dissemination of project findings;
    (2) Demonstrate that the project for which it seeks funding will--
    (a) Implement a model transition program that is designed to 
improve post-school outcomes of students with disabilities through the 
use of local interagency transition teams and the implementation of a 
coordinated set of promising practices and strategies. The activities 
must be implemented at a minimum of two sites to be carried out in 
coordination with the applicable LEA or LEAs;
    (b) Provide transition services to youth with disabilities, 
including--
    (i) Individualized VR services to youth with disabilities who are 
eligible for such services consistent with 34 CFR 361.42 and designed 
to achieve an employment outcome as defined in 34 CFR 361.5(b)(16); and
    (ii) Services to groups of youth with disabilities, through methods 
such as workshops and seminars, to support the transition of such youth 
to post-school and employment outcomes;
    (c) Provide training and technical assistance to LEAs and State VR 
personnel responsible for planning and providing transition services to 
youth with disabilities;
    (d) Conduct outreach activities that assist in the identification 
of youth with disabilities who are in need of VR services;
    (e) Analyze and use the secondary education and post-school outcome 
data of youth with disabilities collected by the SEA and other relevant 
data to assist the project to improve transition services and post-
school outcomes;
    (f) Conduct an evaluation of the project's performance, including 
an evaluation of the effectiveness of the practices and strategies 
implemented by the project in achieving project goals, particularly 
post-school outcomes;
    (3) Provide evidence that the LEAs responsible for providing 
transition services to children with disabilities under the IDEA in the 
local sites proposed by the applicant will participate in carrying out 
project activities (e.g., letter of support); and
    (4) Provide a description of--
    (a) The State interagency transition taskforce members, including 
their roles and responsibilities with respect to transition planning 
and the provision of services;
    (b) The local interagency team members, including their roles and

[[Page 36681]]

responsibilities with respect to transition planning and the provision 
of services;
    (c) The coordinated set of promising practices that it proposes to 
provide, which, at a minimum, must include student-focused planning, 
career preparatory and pre-employment experiences, youth development 
activities, and practices to enhance family involvement;
    (d) The evaluation plan, including project goals, measurable 
objectives, and operational definitions and the data to be collected 
and how it will be analyzed. At a minimum these data must include: the 
disability or disabilities of the youth, reported consistent with the 
disability coding system used by State VR agencies; high school exit 
data (academic achievement and functional performance data, high school 
graduation outcomes, including type of diploma received); student's 
post-school goals; services provided; postsecondary education outcomes; 
employment outcomes (type of employment, wages and earnings, hours 
worked, weeks of employment); and public benefits received such as 
Supplemental Security Income and Social Security Disability Insurance; 
and
    (e) A plan for the systematic dissemination of project findings and 
knowledge gained that will assist State and local agencies in adapting 
or replicating the transition model carried out by the project.

Definitions

    (1) Career preparatory and pre-employment experiences means 
experiences and activities to help students become prepared for a 
successful future in postsecondary education or employment including, 
but not limited to: instruction in learning and study strategies; 
career education activities that assist the student to form and develop 
career aspirations and to make informed choices about careers; 
structured work experiences such as job shadowing, volunteer and 
community service, and on-the-job training experiences; and employment 
skills instruction such as work-related behaviors and skills training, 
job seeking skills, and occupation-specific vocational skill training.
    (2) State interagency transition taskforce means a group of 
individuals who meet on a regular basis to facilitate interagency 
collaboration and the coordination of practices and services to improve 
the transition of students with disabilities from secondary education 
to postsecondary education and employment, such as identifying and 
addressing systemic transition barriers; facilitating the coordination 
of transition policies, practices, and services within the State; 
providing technical assistance; and disseminating information on 
promising practices.
    (a) The group must, at a minimum, include one or more 
representatives of the State VR agency (including, where applicable, 
the State VR agency for the Blind), SEA, State Labor and Employment/
Workforce agency, Social Security Administration, State developmental 
disabilities agency, and the State mental health agency. The group also 
must include individuals to represent the perspectives of business and 
industry and transitioning youth with disabilities.
    (b) The group also may include representatives from other relevant 
entities such as the State Rehabilitation Council (if applicable in the 
State), State Independent Living Council, State Developmental 
Disabilities and Mental Health Planning Councils, postsecondary 
educational institutions, and transition service providers, youth with 
disabilities, parents of transitioning youth with a disability, and 
other stakeholders.
    (3) Student-focused planning means activities designed to 
facilitate student participation, self-evaluation and self-
determination, including goal setting and decision making within the 
planning process. Examples of such activities include the 
identification of student interests and preferences; use of 
educational, career and psychological assessments in the development of 
postsecondary education, training, and vocational goals; career, 
vocational counseling, and guidance; VR participation at IEP meetings; 
joint IEP and individualized plan for employment (IPE) planning 
meetings; and timely referrals to adult service providers.
    (4) Transition services, as defined in section (7)(37) of the 
Rehabilitation Act, means a coordinated set of activities for a 
student, designed within an outcome-oriented process, that promotes 
movement from school to post-school activities, including postsecondary 
education, vocational training, and integrated employment (including 
supported employment), continuing and adult education, adult services, 
independent living, or community participation. The coordinated set of 
activities must be based upon the individual student's needs, taking 
into account the student's preferences and interests, and shall include 
instruction, community experiences, the development of employment and 
other post-school adult living objectives, and, when appropriate, 
acquisition of daily living skills and functional vocational 
evaluation.
    (5) Youth development activities means activities that help 
students control and direct their own lives based on informed decisions 
and become self-sufficient and productive members of society, such as 
learning to communicate their disability-related work support and 
accommodation needs and learning to find, request, and secure 
appropriate supports and reasonable accommodations in education, 
training, and employment settings. Examples of youth development 
activities include: mentoring opportunities, training in life skills 
such as independent living skills, self-advocacy, and conflict 
resolution; exposure to personal leadership and youth development 
activities; and exposure to post-program supports.
    (6) Youth with disabilities means an individual with a disability 
as defined in paragraph (b) of the definition of individual with a 
disability in 34 CFR 373.4 who is no younger than age 16 and no older 
than age 22.

Executive Order 12866

    This NFP has been reviewed in accordance with Executive Order 
12866. Under the terms of the Executive order, we have assessed the 
potential costs and benefits of this regulatory action.
    The potential costs associated with the NFP 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 NFP we have determined that the benefits of 
the priority and related definitions 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.
    Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 373.

Electronic Access to This Document

    You may view this document, as well as all other Department of 
Education

[[Page 36682]]

documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable 
Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site: https://
www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.
    To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available 
free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S. 
Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in 
the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.

    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: https://www.gpoaccess.gov/
nara/.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 84.235U Special 
Demonstration Programs)

    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 773(b).

    Dated: June 28, 2007.
John H. Hager,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 07-3249 Filed 7-3-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P