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, 14582-14585 [2010-6787]
Download as PDF
14582
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 58 / Friday, March 26, 2010 / Notices
EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM:
Department minimize the burden of this
collection on the respondents, including
through the use of information
technology.
None.
[FR Doc. 2010–6688 Filed 3–25–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
Dated: March 22, 2010.
James Hyler,
Acting Director, Information Collection
Clearance Division, Regulatory Information
Management Services, Office of Management.
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Notice of Proposed Information
Collection Requests
AGENCY:
Department of Education.
The Acting Director,
Information Collection Clearance
Division, Regulatory Information
Management Services, Office of
Management, invites comments on the
proposed information collection
requests as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before May 25,
2010.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires
that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) provide interested
Federal agencies and the public an early
opportunity to comment on information
collection requests. OMB may amend or
waive the requirement for public
consultation to the extent that public
participation in the approval process
would defeat the purpose of the
information collection, violate State or
Federal law, or substantially interfere
with any agency’s ability to perform its
statutory obligations. The Acting
Director, Information Collection
Clearance Division, Regulatory
Information Management Services,
Office of Management, publishes that
notice containing proposed information
collection requests prior to submission
of these requests to OMB. Each
proposed information collection,
grouped by office, contains the
following: (1) Type of review requested,
e.g., new, revision, extension, existing
or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary
of the collection; (4) Description of the
need for, and proposed use of, the
information; (5) Respondents and
frequency of collection; and (6)
Reporting and/or Recordkeeping
burden. OMB invites public comment.
The Department of Education is
especially interested in public comment
addressing the following issues: (1) Is
this collection necessary to the proper
functions of the Department; (2) will
this information be processed and used
in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate
of burden accurate; (4) how might the
Department enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (5) how might the
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 Mar 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
Office of Elementary and Secondary
Education
Type of Review: New.
Title: Striving Readers Comprehensive
Literacy State Formula Grant
Application.
Frequency: Annually.
Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal
Gov’t.
Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour
Burden:
Responses: 52
Burden Hours: 5,200
Abstract: The Striving Readers
Comprehensive Literacy program is
authorized as part of the FY 2010
Consolidated Appropriations Act (Pub.
L. No. 111–117) under the Title I
demonstration authority (Part E, Section
1502 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA). The FY 2010
Appropriations Act provides $250
million under Section 1502 of the ESEA
for a comprehensive literacy
development and education program to
advance literacy skills for students from
birth through grade 12. The Act reserves
$10 million for formula grants to assist
States in creating or maintaining a State
Literacy Team with expertise in literacy
development and education for children
from birth through grade 12 and to assist
States in developing a comprehensive
literacy plan. This request includes
information collection activities covered
under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA). The activities consist of: (1) A
new application for an SEA to submit to
the Department to apply for FY 2010
funds under the 2010 Appropriations
Act.
Requests for copies of the proposed
information collection request may be
accessed from https://edicsweb.ed.gov,
by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending
Collections’’ link and by clicking on link
number 4262. When you access the
information collection, click on
‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view.
Written requests for information should
be addressed to U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537.
Requests may also be electronically
mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed
to 202–401–0920. Please specify the
complete title of the information
collection when making your request.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Comments regarding burden and/or
the collection activity requirements
should be electronically mailed to
ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Individuals who
use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–
800–877–8339.
[FR Doc. 2010–6750 Filed 3–25–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
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:
tom.finch@ed.gov. 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: tom.finch@ed.gov.
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:
E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM
26MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 58 / Friday, March 26, 2010 / Notices
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.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 Mar 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14583
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 ticketholders 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
https://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
E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM
26MRN1
14584
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 58 / Friday, March 26, 2010 / Notices
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:
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 Mar 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 highperforming 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.
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
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.
E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM
26MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 58 / Friday, March 26, 2010 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 Mar 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14585
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: https://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: https://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
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
National Institute on Disability and
Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR)—
Disability and Rehabilitation Research
Projects and Centers Program—
Rehabilitation Research and Training
Centers (RRTCs)—Employment
Outcomes for Individuals Who Are
Blind or Visually Impaired
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice of proposed priority.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA) Number: 84.133B–6.
E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM
26MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 58 (Friday, March 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14582-14585]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing 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: tom.finch@ed.gov. 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: tom.finch@ed.gov.
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 https://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: https://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: https://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/.
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