The Rehabilitation Act Amendments Of 1992 And Assistive Technology _________________________________________________________________ This article is reprinted from the A.T. Quarterly, Volume 4, Number 1(1993) "Our task is to think and act anew." - Abraham Lincoln. Much of this issue of the A.T. Quarterly is devoted to a discussion and exploration of the recently reauthorized Rehabilitation Act of 1973. While far from perfect, the newly reauthorized law represents a clear break from many past practices and requires state vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies to practice the kind of thinking and acting anew that Lincoln would have admired. The newly revamped law is premised on the following five simple but critical principles that: 1. Individuals with disabilities make up one of the most disadvantaged groups in society and still encounter daily discrimination in every facet of life. 2. Disability is a natural part of life and, in no way diminishes the right of individuals to live independently; make choices; contribute to society; and, pursue meaningful careers. 3. Increased employment of individuals with disabilities begins with increased access to needed training, supports and reasonable accommodations. 4. Individuals with disabilities should be afforded the tools to make informed choices and decisions; and, to achieve equality of opportunity, full inclusion and integration in society. 5. Individuals with even the most significant disabilities should be presumed capable of gainful employment and provided the needed supports to do so. It is this fifth principle, of course, that is meant to transform the way state V.R. agencies operate in our country. Up to now, an individual with a significant disability could be and often was found or presumed to be unemployable and, thus, ineligible for V.R. services solely on the basis of the severity of his/her disability. Now, this assumption has taken a 180 degree nose dive and has been stood on its head. For now the law tells people with disabilities and rehabilitation professionals alike, don't focus on the severity of the disability. Don't focus on the problem. Focus instead on the solutions. Focus on getting people the tools that they need: Assistive technology, personal assistance, literacy training, job supports and other reasonable accommodations, not just to get and stay employed but to pursue careers of their own choosing and design as well. Right now individuals with disabilities who have needed access to personal assistance, assistive technology and other essential job supports, are relatively few and far between. We are more the exception than we are the rule. Our task in the next few years is not to try to come up with a dozen or so more exceptions but rather, it is to change the rules of the game entirely! That's the intent behind the reauthorized Rehabilitation Act Of 1973. But a law's intent is only as good as we make it. ---------- Reauthorized Rehabilitation Act Increases Access To Assistive Technology By Christopher Button _________________________________________________________________ This article is reprinted from the A.T. Quarterly, Volume 4, Number 1 (1993) Public Law 102-569, the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992, became law on October 29, 1992. The 1992 amendments make several fundamental changes to the Rehabilitation Act Of 1973 and the way in which rehabilitation services will be provided to Americans with disabilities through the public rehabilitation program. Total funding for the programs under the Rehabilitation Act is over two billion dollars annually. The new law, built on the foundation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), recognizes competence and choice and affords individuals with disabilities access to the services and supports they need to live, work, and meaningfully participate in community life. This article will highlight some of the key changes in the reauthorized Act and discuss their likely impact on efforts to increase access to assistive technology devices and services nationwide. Background Following the passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act in 1990, many individuals with disabilities, their families, and advocates, turned their focus to the Rehabilitation Act Of 1973 as a major vehicle for achieving full participation in the social and economic mainstream of our nation. As a major pathway into competitive employment for Americans with disabilities, the rehabilitation system should open the doors to participation in that mainstream. However, particularly for persons with severe and multiple disabilities, this system has been viewed more as a gatekeeper than a pathway. In fact, it has frequently provided additional roadblocks to independence to people with disabilities attempting to negotiate its bureaucracy. Thus, citing great dissatisfaction with the existing system, the community sent a loud call to Congress to rewrite the Rehabilitation Act Of 1973 to: reflect values consistent with the 1990s; assure that its programs empower persons with disabilities with choice and assist them in finding and maintaining meaningful employment, and in promoting independence, productivity and full integration into the workforce and the community. For specific legal obligations, readers should consult the actual statuatory language. ADA: Laying the Framework for Public Policy Since enactment of the ADA in 1990, its principles and policies have become the standard by which public policy is viewed. The Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992 adds a new section which applies to the entire Act, laying out the findings, purpose and overall policy and intent of the Act. A similar section has been added specifically for the Title I state grant program [See Rehabilitation Act Amendments: Findings and Purposes]. These new provisions and their accompanying legislative history clearly tie the overall purpose of the Act generally and of the state grant program specifically, to achieving the goals and objectives of the ADA. The law now recognizes that disability is a "natural part of the human experience" and "in no way diminishes the right" of individuals to live independently, enjoy self-determination, make choices, contribute to society, pursue meaningful careers, and enjoy full inclusion and integration in the economic, political, social, cultural, and educational mainstream of American society. These sections also clearly state that it is the policy of the United States of America that state rehabilitation programs shall be carried out in a manner consistent with the principles of presumed ability, integration and inclusion, full participation, meaningful and informed choice, and involvement of families and natural supports. More than just nice-sounding words, these statements of findings, purpose and policy create a value-based framework to focus all programs authorized through and funded under the Rehabilitation Act, and to drive value-based systemic change. Presumption of Ability As Congress entered this reauthorization, the existing rehabilitation system required evaluations of "rehabilitation potential" and determinations of "feasibility" for "employability." All too frequently such evaluations resulted in denial of eligibility to many individuals, particularly individuals with the most severe disabilities. Yet, with the explosion of advances in technology and with the advent of supports such as may be provided through supported employment, the notion of equating disability with inability to work is erroneous and outmoded. The reauthorized Act begins with a presumption of ability that people can achieve employment and other rehabilitation goals regardless of the severity of disability, if appropriate services and supports are made available. Indeed, the concept of employability has been replaced with one of "employment outcome." While at first glance the definition for employment outcome is similar to the previous concept of employability, when combined with other amendments related to access, the message is dramatically different. _________________________________________________________________ It shall be presumed that an individual can benefit in terms of an employment outcome from Vocational Rehabilitation Services...unless the designated state unit can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that such individual is incapable of benefiting from Vocational Rehabilitation Services in terms of an employment outcome. Section 123(c)(4)(A) of P.L. 102-569. [Emphases added] The statutory requirement will force several critical changes. First, the notion of feasibility for employment is removed. Not only are people presumed to have the capacity and potential for employment, but the rehabilitation agency must be able to demonstrate that no employment outcome would be possible in order to determine that a person with a disability is ineligible. This essentially shifts the burden of proof for accessing the system from the individual with a disability to the rehabilitation system, with the clear assumption that people with disabilities can work. As explained in the Senate Report: This provision implements the principle of "inclusion" enunciated in the ADA and the statement of policy governing this Act and Title I. The committee wishes to emphasize that the "clear and convincing standard" was included in the bill because it institutes the highest standard used in our civil system of law. The term "clear" means unequivocal. [Emphases added.] (Senate Report 102-357, p.37). In other words, people are presumed to be able to work, unless the VR agency can unequivocally demonstrate otherwise. Thus the need becomes not one of determining "feasibility" or "employability"; not one of proving that you can work. Instead, with the assumption that employment is achievable, energies, funds and other efforts can be directed toward identifying and providing the services and supports that are desired and needed in order to make employment a reality. This should, in turn, encourage State VR agencies to provide individuals with disabilities with increased access to the wide variety of assistive technology devices and services many need to gain and retain a job. Rehabilitation Technology In the 1986 reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Act, considerable emphasis was placed on the provision of technology to assist individuals with disabilities in entering and maintaining employment. Indeed, the 1986 amendments provided an exemption from the comparable services and benefits requirement for what was at that time referred to as "rehabilitation engineering." Since the 1986 amendments, the Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act 0f 1988 (P.L. 100-407) established the terminology of assistive technology services and assistive technology devices to refer to the broad array of services and devices, and these terms have become widely used in the field. Recognizing that the use of multiple terms can be confusing, Congress sought to clarify that, for the Rehabilitation Act, the term "rehabilitation technology" will be used to encompass other terminology. Report language states: The Committee recognizes that several terms are used in the field to connote activities related to technology design and utilization, including rehabilitation engineering, assistive technology devices, assistive technology services, and rehabilitation technology. The Committee decided to use the term "rehabilitation technology" to reflect all activities previously incorporated under the term "rehabilitation engineering" and clarifies that the term includes assistive technology devices and assistive technology services. (Senate Report 102-357, p.17). Assistive Technology and the State VR Plan In order to gain as much information as possible on the provision of rehabilitation technology, P.L. 102-569 adds four new state plan requirements in the area of the state VR plan. States will now be required to: * Describe how a broad range of rehabilitation technology services will be provided at each stage of the rehabilitation process. [Sec.101(a)(5)(C)(i)] * Describe how a broad range of such rehabilitation technology services will be provided on a statewide basis. [Sec.101(a)(5)(C)(ii)] * Describe the training that will be provided to vocational rehabilitation counselors, client assistance personnel, and other related services personnel. [Sec.101(a)(5)(C)(iii)] * Describe the manner in which assistive technology devices and services will be provided, or worksite assessments will be made as part of the assessment for determining eligibility and vocational rehabilitation needs of an individual. [Sec.101(a)(31)] Assistive Technology and The IWRP The technology needs of each VR client must be addressed in the Individualized Written Rehabilitation Program by including "a statement of the specific rehabilitation technology services to be provided to assist in the implementation of intermediate rehabilitation objectives and long-term rehabilitation goals" for the individual. Key report language states: The Committee expects that, in terms of rehabilitation echnology, the IWRP should provide for regular and periodic assessments to ensure that a match exists between the supports, the technology, and the current and changing needs of the individual who will be using the technology, as well as other people involved in the provision of services who require the information (Senate Report 102-357, p.39). Assistive Technology Exempt from Comparable Services and Benefits Requirements Rehabilitation technology remains exempt from the comparable services and benefits requirement. This means that the rehabilitation system must provide rehabilitation technology services and devices to individuals who require them to achieve their rehabilitation goals. Almost every other service under the scope of rehabilitation services in Section 103 of the Act is subject to the search for "similar benefits." This means that the rehabilitation system does not have to provide other services until every other possible funding source is exhausted _ a prospect that can be very lengthy and can significantly delay provision of services. Amendments to Increase Choice The revised Act includes numerous amendments designed to increase the choice and control of individuals with disabilities over rehabilitation services, both individually and systemically. The IWRP must be jointly developed, agreed upon, and signed by the individual with a disability and the counselor. The IWRP must be designed to achieve the employment objective of the individual, consistent with his or her unique strengths, priorities, abilities, and capabilities. It must include a statement, in the words of the individual, (or, if appropriate in the words of an authorized representative of the individual) describing how he or she was informed about and involved in choosing among alternative goals, objectives, services, entities providing services, and methods used to provide or procure such services. The IWRP must be provided in the native language or other mode of communication of the individual, or, if appropriate, of an authorized representative of the individual and must include information regarding related services and benefits provided pursuant to any federal, state or local program to enhance achieving rehabilitation goals. Finally, the individual must be provided a copy of the IWRP. "Choice Regulations" Section 105 of P.L. 102-569 amends Section 12 of the Act (Administration) to mandate that the Secretary promulgate regulations to enable individuals with disabilities to select rehabilitation services and service providers directly, consistent with the IWRP. The Secretary has 120 days, or approximately four months, to solicit public comment and develop these regulations. This is one of the most important amendments from the 1992 reauthorization. It provides the mechanism to empower individuals with disabilities to secure their own services, as long as those services are in the IWRP. The Department of Education will be seeking public comment on the content of "choice regulations." State Rehabilitation Advisory Council The reauthorized Act provides a means for individuals with disabilities and advocates to influence the organization and delivery of rehabilitation services in each state. This is done by mandating the creation of a State Rehabilitation Advisory Council in every state. The reauthorized law requires the new State Rehabilitation Advisory Council be in place in order for the state to receive Title I funding in October, 1993. With limited exceptions, council members will serve for not more than a three-year term, and will be appointed by the governor from nominations provided by individuals representing a broad range of disabilities and organizations representing such individuals. Membership must represent the following groups: Independent Living Centers; Parent Training Centers; community rehabilitation programs; business, industry and labor; disability advocacy groups; a Client Assistance Program representative; current or former applicants for, or recipients of, rehabilitation services and a Rehabilitation Counselor (ex-officio). The majority of the members of this new council must be individuals with disabilities and must not be employed by the state rehabilitation agency. The council will have numerous responsibilities related to the organization and delivery of rehabilitation services in the state, including: * reviewing and providing advice to the state agency on the state plan, particularly as it relates to eligibility for services (including order of selection provisions); * advising and assisting the state agency on the strategic plan; * analyzing consumer satisfaction with rehabilitation services; * preparing an annual report to the governor and the commissioner (available to the public) on the status of rehabilitation programs operated within the state; * coordinating with other councils, such as the Statewide Independent Living Council, the State DD Council, and others; * performing other functions, consistent with the purpose of the revised Rehabilitation Act, that the council deems appropriate and necessary. The intent of this important council is to empower individuals with disabilities in each state to become involved in setting the policy agenda for rehabilitation services in their state. States must move quickly to appoint council members, since the revised state plan, due by October, 1993, must contain their input. Strategic Plan The amendments rewrite Section 120 of the Act, previously authorized (but unfunded) as Innovation and Expansion Grants. This section of the Title I program now becomes a major vehicle for systems change. Effective October 1, 1993, states must have in place a strategic plan for expanding and improving rehabilitation services. Receipt of funds for the Title I program is dependent on having this plan in place. The plan is to be developed "to achieve the purpose and policy of this Title" (previously described). The strategic plan must include, among other things, a statement of the mission, philosophy, values, and principles of the vocational rehabilitation program in the state; specific goals and objectives for expanding and improving the system for providing rehabilitation services; and specific multifaceted and systemic approaches for accomplishing the objectives. Broad examples of activities are provided for the use of funds under Part C, Section 123. The plan will be developed for a three year period and updated annually. Prior to developing the plan, the state agency is required to hold public forums and meet with and receive recommendations from the State Rehabilitation Advisory Council and the Statewide Independent Living Council. Legislative history for this provision indicates: The rationale for including these new strategic planning requirements is to ensure that each state develops a systematic, open, participatory process for identifying and articulating the future directions of vocational rehabilitation and supported employment services... (Senate Report 102-357, p.49). Individuals with disabilities, together with state systems change projects and other advocates for assistive technology, clearly need to take a lead role in this critical process. Section 508 The amendments update Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act dealing with electronic equipment accessibility. Originally added to the Act in 1986, existing law did not take into account technological changes that have occurred and that are likely to occur in the future. In addition, existing law focused on hardware, while the issues regarding electronic accessibility have shifted to software, interface systems and operating systems. The revised Section 508 now requires the General Services Administration of the U.S. Government to develop and establish guidelines for federal agencies for electronic and information technology accessibility designed to: ensure, regardless of the type of medium, that individuals with disabilities can produce information and data, and have access to information and data, comparable to the information and data and access, respectively, of individuals who are not individuals with disabilities. Such guidelines shall be revised, as necessary, to reflect technological advances or changes (Sec.508(a)). Key report language indicates that: ...the reference to electronic and information technology means any equipment, software, interface systems, operating systems, or interconnected system or subsystem of equipment used in the acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of data or information. Comparable access means that regardless of the type of interface between the user and the information processing resources being used, that individuals with disabilities can produce and have access to the same or equivalent information processing resources, with or without special peripherals, as individuals without disabilities (Senate Report 102-357, p.73). ---------- RSA Issues New Policy Directive On Assistive Technology By Michael W. Morris _________________________________________________________________ This article is reprinted from the A.T. Quarterly, Volume 1, Number 4, (1990) On November 16, 1990, Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) Commissioner Nell Carney, issues a policy directive and a technical assistance circular to state vocational rehabilitation agencies. This directive and circular, for the first time since the Amendments to the Rehabilitation Act were passed by Congress in 1986, set a clear direction for expanded access and availability of rehabilitation technology services and devices. The 1986 Amendments to the Rehabilitation Act placed a new emphasis on the provision of rehabilitation technology services. The intent of the Amendments was to recognize the critical role assistive technology could play in determining initial eligibility for rehabilitation services and expanding job placement possibilities. United Cerebral Palsy Associations, Inc. (UCPA), working closely with Commissioner Nell Carney and her staff, reached an agreement that a policy memo to the field would provide needed leadership and new emphasis on the application of assistive technology to expand employment and independent living opportunities for individuals with disabilities. The publication of these policy memos from Commissioner Carney is a major victory for individuals with disabilities nationwide. Commissioner Carney's leadership in authoring this policy directive will place new critical pressure on each state's rehabilitation agency to take seriously the mandate of access to assistive technology. Advocacy in individual states will be necessary to ensure more effective implementation of these technology amendments. THE NEW RSA POLICY DIRECTIVE: a) Defines rehabilitation technology as including "a range of services and devices which can supplement and enhance individual functions." It also includes "services which impact the environment through environmental changes such as job redesign or worksite modifications;" b) States the importance of applying rehabilitation technology services when making determinations of eligibility and indicates that "This is particularly important for those individuals whose disability conditions are of a severity that otherwise might lead to a finding of ineligibility;" c) Makes clear that the application of assistive technology is equally important for those individuals who are: i) in extended evaluation to determine rehabilitation potential; ii) receiving services under an Individualized Written Rehabilitation Program (IWRP) if such services are appropriate; iii) undergoing annual review when the case was closed as being "too severe;" iv) undergoing annual review and re-evaluation when their case is in extended employment in rehabilitation facilities; or v) receiving post-employment services; d) Mandates that the provision of rehabilitation technology services is not conditioned on a determination that comparable services and benefits are not available under any other programs. This means that state vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies are payor of first resort rather than payor of last resort. This exemption from the comparable benefits test should minimize waiting or delays in accessing assistive technology services or devices; and e) Requires each state VR agency to provide, as an attachment to their three year state plan a description of how rehabilitation technology services will be provided to assist an increasing number of individuals with disabilities. According to RSA, this written policy must address the need at any time in the rehabilitation process, including during: * Eligibility determination; * Evaluation of rehabilitation potential; * Extended evaluation; * Services provided under an IWRP; * Annual reviews of ineligibility decisions; * Annual reviews of extended employment in rehabilitation facilities; and * Post employment services. In order for Commissioner Carney's actions to make a difference, individuals with disabilities, advocates, and professionals must work together at the federal, state and local levels with their vocational rehabilitation agencies. Efforts must be undertaken to see that new policies are established regarding determination of eligibility to the rehabilitation process and VR practices must also change to fully incorporate AT services. For a copy of the policy directive and technical assistance circular, please feel free to contact the RESNA TA office. The issuance of the new RSA policy directives closely follows the release of an August 10th policy letter from Dr. Judy Schrag, Director, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) that clarifies the right of a child with a disability to assistive technology devices and services under P.L. 94-142, the federal mandate for a free appropriate public education. For further details see the fall issue of A.T. Quarterly. ---------- Federal Policies That Clarify Right To Technology In Special Education, Vocational Rehabilitation By Patricia M. Beattie This article is reprinted from the A.T. Quarterly, Volume 4, Number 3 (1993) Over the past few years, most major legislation which impacts individuals with disabilities has been strengthened to include technology-related services. Unfortunately, experience across the country has shown that although a federal/state program MAY pay for assistive technology devices or services, it also MAY NOT. Following is a list of concerns which staff of the RESNA Technical Assistance Project is most often asked to respond to. School officials say they just don't have the money to purchase the device... A school district cannot unilaterally rule out purchase of assistive technology. According to a letter addressed to a Maryland advocate, Ms. Susan Goodman, a school district MUST see that devices or services are provided IF it is required for the student to benefit from an Individualized Education Program (IEP), in other words, to receive a "free and appropriate public education." A student's need for assistive technology should be considered on a case-by-case basis. School officials say there's no place for assistive technology on the IEP... The federal letter of interpretation states that if the student needs the technology/services to receive the appropriate, free education to which he/she is entitled, that the assistive technology may be "special education" itself, a "related service" or "auxiliary aids" to facilitate placement in a setting with non-disabled classmates. Use of the technology, training for parents or teachers, etc., all should be incorporated into short or long-term educational goal statements, as necessary for the child's special education program. The therapist confides to me that school officials won't permit inclusion of assistive technology needs in the evaluation report... Parents may obtain an independent evaluation, at the school district's expense, while pursuing "due process," appealing a disputed individualized education program plan. Ask school officials for a copy of the "due process" procedures. The school won't let students take equipment home... In a letter of interpretation from the federal Office of Special Education Programs, it was stated that assistive technology equipment can be taken home at night, on weekends or over the summer_if use in other settings is included in the IEP. Furthermore, this federal letter states that a school system may have to provide a SECOND device for use at home, if transport is impractical. Therefore, it is important that IEP goals are written clearly. Our local principal agreed to provide technology, but the school board said "no"... The U.S. Department of Education has said that a school board cannot overrule a decision made by a local school IEP team. The IEP team should include parents and/or an advocate, as well as appropriate professionals qualified to assess a student's educational needs and authorized to commit the resources of the school system. The school says I must first try to get private insurance or Medicaid to pay for the equipment before they will consider it... While there is an advantage of an individual owning a device when using insurance funding for equipment, the school cannot require you to use public or private insurance to pay for equipment or services included on an IEP to facilitate the student's participation in the educational program (This is because of the potential cost to the parent from using up a lifetime cap on a particular benefit). School systems may become Medicaid service providers and seek reimbursement for medically necessary services provided to a Medicaid-eligible student (A copy of this federal policy on Medicaid and special education is included in the appendix of the RESNA Press publication, Assistive Technology and the Individualized Education Program). Who should pay for technology, training or other services included on a 16-year-old student's Transition Plan? A representative of the state vocational rehabilitation agency should be included in the development of a Transition Plan. Vocational rehabilitation may provide services to an individual as young as age 14, as long as the service is deemed necessary for determination of eligibility, participation in training or attainment of interim or employment goals. My vocational rehabilitation counselor said there is no money left in his/her case services allocation for the year... Although allocating funds on a regional or individual counselor basis may be convenient, a state's entire allocation is available to any counselor for provision of services to an individual client or applicant. Vocational Rehabilitation is making me run around and get a denial from every other potential source of funding before considering providing the technology I need... The 1992 amendments of the Rehabilitation Act excludes rehabilitation technology from the requirement to use "similar benefits" if there would be an undue delay in provision of the service or equipment. Note: This exemption from the requirement to use similar benefits also applies in the Title VII Independent Living programs. When I finished school, I went to work in a sheltered workshop. I'd like to get a "real job," but I've been told I'm "too severely disabled"... You are entitled for reconsideration under new, much less strict, eligibility criteria. Rehabilitation technology or other supported employment or vocational rehabilitation services may now make an employment outcome possible for you. In addition, you are eligible every year for a review to determine potential for transition into a job in the community. Where can I find advocacy assistance to get the technology and services I need? You may contact your state assistive technology project. To find out if your state has a project, contact RESNA. Among the advocacy resources to which you may be referred are the Client Assistance Program (vocational rehabilitation issues) or the Protection and Advocacy agency (individuals with developmental disabilities). The two special education policy interpretation letters and the federal policy on Medicaid and special education are included in the publication Assistive Technology and the Individual Education Program, available from RESNA Press. One last word of advice: Remember that various federal/state programs have different purposes. Therefore, if you are looking to a "medical program," you will need to justify the need in "medical necessity" terms. If you are trying to get the technology for use in school and for homework, then incorporate its use in the educational goals. Similarly, if the technology is needed to prepare for the world of work, then relate its use to vocational training independence and productivity outcomes. (Editor's Note: Patricia Beattie, former Project Associate, now works as the Director, Legislative Affairs, National Industries for the Blind). ---------- Rehabilitation Act Amendments Findings; and Purposes; Entire Act _________________________________________________________________ This article is reprinted from the A.T. Quarterly, Volume 4, Number 1 (1993) SEC. 2. (a) FINDINGS. Congress finds that- "(1) millions of Americans have one or more physical or mental disabilities and the number of Americans with such disabilities is increasing; "(2) individuals with disabilities constitute one of the most disadvantaged groups in society; "(3) disability is a natural part of the human experience and in no way diminishes the right of individuals to- "(A) live independently; "(B) enjoy self-determination; "(C) make choices; "(D) contribute to society; "(E) pursue meaningful careers; and "(F) enjoy full inclusion and integration in the economic, political, social, cultural, and educational mainstream of American society; "(4) increased employment of individuals with disabilities can be achieved through the provision of individualized training, independent living services, educational and support services, and meaningful opportunities for employment in integrated work settings through the provision of reasonable accommodations; "(5) individuals with disabilities continually encounter various forms of discrimination in such critical areas as employment, housing, public accommodations, education, transportation, communication, recreation, institutionalization, health services, voting, and public services; and "(6) the goals of the Nation properly include the goal of providing individuals with disabilities with the tools necessary to- "(A) make informed choices and decisions and "(B) achieve equality of opportunity, full inclusion and integration in society, employment, independent living, and economic and social self-sufficiency, for such individuals. "(b) PURPOSE. The purposes of this Act are - "(1) to empower individuals with disabilities to maximize employment, economic self-sufficiency, independence, and inclusion and integration into society, through- "(A) comprehensive and coordinated state-of-the-art programs of vocational rehabilitation; "(B) independent living centers and services; "(C) research; "(D) training; "(E) demonstration projects; and "(F) the guarantee of equal opportunity; and "(2) to ensure that the Federal Government plays a leadership role in promoting the employment of individuals with disabilities, especially individuals with severe disabilities, and in assisting States and providers of services in fulfilling the aspirations of such individuals with disabilities for meaningful and gainful employment and independent living. REHABILITATION ACT AMENDMENTS Findings & Purposes, Title I SEC. 121. ... "(a)(1) Congress finds that- "(A) work- "(i) is a valued activity, both for individuals and society; and "(ii) fulfills the need of an individual to be productive, promotes independence, enhances self-esteem, and allows for participation in the mainstream of life in America; "(B) as a group, individuals with disabilities experience staggering levels of unemployment and poverty; "(C) individuals with disabilities, including individuals with the most severe disabilities, have demonstrated their ability to achieve gainful employment in integrated settings if appropriate services and supports are provided; "(D) reasons for the significant number of individuals with disabilities not working or working at a level not commensurate with their abilities and capabilities, include_ "(i) discrimination; "(ii) lack of accessible and available transportation; "(iii) fear of losing health coverage under the Medicare and Medicaid programs under titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq. and 1396 et seq.) or fear of losing existing private health insurance; and "(iv) lack of education, training, and supports to meet job qualification standards necessary to enter or retain or advance in employment; "(E) enforcement of Title V and of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.) holds the promise of ending discrimination for individuals with disabilities; and "(F) the provision of vocational rehabilitation services can enable individuals with disabilities, including individuals with the most severe disabilities, to pursue meaningful careers by securing gainful employment commensurate with their abilities and capabilities. "(2) The purpose of this Title is to assist States in operating a comprehensive, coordinated, effective, efficient, and accountable program of vocational rehabilitation that is designed to assess, plan, develop, and provide vocational rehabilitation services for individuals with disabilities, consistent with their strengths, resources, priorities, concerns, abilities, and capabilities, so that such individuals may prepare for and engage in gainful employment. "(3) It is the policy of the United States that such a program shall be carried out in a manner consistent with the following principles: "(A) Individuals with disabilities, including individuals with the most severe disabilities, are generally presumed to be capable of engaging in gainful employment and the provision of individualized vocational rehabilitation services can improve their ability to become gainfully employed. "(B) Individuals with disabilities must be provided the opportunities to obtain gainful employment in integrated settings. "(C) Individuals with disabilities must be active participants in their own rehabilitation programs, including making meaningful and informed choices about the selection of their vocational goals and objectives and the vocational rehabilitation services they receive. "(D) Families and natural supports can play an important role in the success of a vocational rehabilitation program, if the individual with a disability requests, desires, or needs such supports. "(E) Qualified vocational rehabilitation counselors, other qualified rehabilitation personnel, and other qualified personnel facilitate the accomplishment of the employment goals and objectives of an individual. "(F) Individuals with disabilities and their advocates are full partners in the vocational rehabilitation program and must be involved on a regular basis and in a meaningful manner with respect to policy development and implementation. "(G) Accountability measures must facilitate and not impede the accomplishment of the goals and objectives of the program, including providing vocational rehabilitation services to, among others, individuals with the most severe disabilities." [Emphases added] Policy of the United States ENTIRE REHABILITATION ACT It is the policy of the United States that all programs, projects, and activities receiving assistance under this Act shall be carried out in a manner consistent with the principles of -- "(1) respect for individual dignity, personal responsibility, self-determination, and pursuit of meaningful careers, based on informed choice, of individuals with disabilities; "(2) respect for the privacy, rights, and equal access (including the use of accessible formats), of the individuals; "(3) inclusion, integration, and full participation of the individuals; "(4) support for the involvement of a parent, a family member, a guardian, an advocate, or an authorized representative if an individual with a disability requests, desires, or needs such support; and "(5) support for individual and systemic advocacy and community involvement. _________________________________________________________________ The A.T. Quarterly was a newsletter developed by the RESNA TA Project under a contract with the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), U.S. Department of Education (ED). The content, however, does not necessarily reflect the position or policy of NIDRR/ED and no official endorsement of the material should be inferred