DEI stands for diversity, equity, and inclusion, a social movement for promoting fair treatment and full participation in education and employment. Our comments are focused on how DEI might be interpreted and implemented in the context of special education’s primary legal guide, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). We concentrate on the meanings of diversity, equity, and inclusion as they apply to policies regarding the education of individuals with disabilities. We argue that policies related to DEI deserve careful scrutiny as they apply to special education. Hewing to the notion of disability as a particular kind of diversity defined by the IDEA is essential to achieving an appropriate and equitable education and the most meaningful type of inclusion for children with disabilities.

The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act requires state vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies to expand their employment-related transition services to youth with disabilities and coordinate service delivery with schools in new ways. Research has highlighted how states have begun to respond to the transition-focused mandates of WIOA, including the extent to which states have incorporated research-based transition recommendations (RBTRs) within their plans for WIOA implementation. However, research is missing that investigates possible relationships between state-level characteristics and the quality of transition service implementation. We conducted a multivariate linear regression analysis to investigate the extent to which state demographics, services and training/professional development, transition policies, and VR funding predicted the extent to which states included RBTRs in their WIOA implementation plans. We included 48 states and the District of Columbia ( n = 49) in our analysis. Our findings indicate states with higher VR budgets per state gross domestic product and states that begin transition planning for youth with disabilities before age 16 were more likely to incorporate RBTRs into their WIOA implementation plans. States operating under VR order of selection included significantly fewer RBTRs in their plans. Implications for future research, policy, and practice are discussed.

In this article, we examine the relationship between self-reported opioid use and employment outcomes among Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) applicants who applied to SSDI in 2009. We use a machine learning method to identify opioids recorded in text fields on SSDI applications. Studying outcomes for 4 years after the Social Security Administration (SSA) determined the application outcome, we find a negative and statistically significant association between self-reported opioid use at application and post-determination employment-related outcomes. Notably, opioid use at the time of application was associated with a 3% point decline in the likelihood of employment in the first 4 years after determination and represents a 7.5% decline relative to the mean employment rate for the period. Results from a reduced-form model estimating the relationship between local opioid prescribing patterns and employment outcomes suggest that a 10% increase in the local opioid prescribing rate is associated with employment that is, at most, 0.3% points lower, which is similar to the documented association among the broader U.S. population. However, the potential implications for SSDI applicants are particularly notable because opioid use is about 50% higher among SSDI applicants.

Benefit programs like Social Security Income (SSI) and Medicaid impose strict asset limits for eligibility, which create a substantial disincentive to save. Due to structural and systemic barriers, households with a member who has a disability (HMDs) are more likely to have low financial security. Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) accounts, which are excluded from SSI and Medicaid asset tests up to a certain amount, seek to increase savings among HMDs. However, ABLE account take-up has been low, with less than 2% of eligible households participating. This article examines awareness levels of ABLE accounts and how the account structure itself may deter uptake. First, using national survey data of low-income tax filers, we find low awareness of ABLE accounts among low- and moderate-income (LMI) adults living in HMDs, which generally did not significantly differ across demographic and financial characteristics. Second, we test how annual fees and minimum account balance requirements affected self-reported likelihood of saving in an ABLE-type account. The results showed that annual fees significantly reduced the likelihood of saving but minimum balance requirements did not. This work has implications for policymakers, practitioners, and industry professionals interested in increasing savings without risking benefits eligibility for people with disabilities.

In the last reauthorization of the U.S. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), families of individuals with disabilities provided less than 4% of the public comments. Given that families are equal partners in the decision-making process for students with disabilities, it is critical to understand their suggestions for IDEA. To this end, we analyzed the testimonials of 65 families of individuals with disabilities. Specifically, after completing a civic engagement program, participants provided video, audio, and/or written testimonials focused on their suggestions for the next IDEA reauthorization. Participants suggested strengthening existing IDEA provisions, increasing federal funding of special education, addressing personnel issues in special education, improving accountability, and increasing family knowledge and empowerment. Participants’ suggestions were further analyzed by examining patterns within the data; families of children with (vs. without) autism were significantly more likely to request that the next IDEA reauthorization increases knowledge and empowerment. Implications for future research and policy are discussed.

Given the critical shortage of community providers and a growing aging population of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, siblings are expected to provide caregiving for their brothers and sisters with intellectual and developmental disabilities. However, family support and disability policies often do not acknowledge siblings as caregivers who need support, and thus, do not include siblings’ voices. In this study, we conducted a national, web-based survey to examine the perspectives of 611 siblings of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Specifically, we examined their perceptions toward family support and disability policy as well as their knowledge and relevance of such legislation. Overall, siblings were not well-informed with relevant family support and disability policies. Furthermore, the knowledge of policies was only associated with their feelings of connectedness to the disability community. Based on these findings, it seems necessary that siblings are included in future efforts to shape family support and disability policy.

Child applications and awards for U.S. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) fell sharply at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Cumulative applications from April to September 2020 were about 30% lower than applications over the same period in 2019 with substantial variation in rates of decline across local areas. In this article, we explore the factors correlated with the change in applications and awards across localities at the beginning of the pandemic. Our findings point to three particularly important factors influencing the magnitude of the change in applications and awards: (a) the restriction of in-person services in all Social Security Administration field offices in March 2020, (b) the pandemic’s disruptions to social and service networks through which people may learn about SSI, and (c) new economic stabilization policies, such as economic impact payments and supplemental unemployment insurance payments. These results highlight the substantial local variation in SSI participation. This variation is especially important in considering general issues around access to SSI, particularly for policies that aim to improve SSI access through outreach. Our findings underscore the importance of local networks in creating program awareness at local levels, and that they might be fruitful avenues for further outreach efforts.

U.S. federal special education policies require state departments of education to collect data to measure progress in attaining state performance plan goals, with Indicators 13 and 14 measuring the Individualized Education Program (IEP) transition process and post-high school student outcomes. Research suggests that higher transition indicator scores result in better post-school outcomes, but no research has yet demonstrated the impact transition education practices have upon indicator scores. This study identified transition education practices that impacted one state’s transition Indicators 13 (transition IEP process compliance scores) and 14 (post-high school outcomes). Eighty-three secondary special educators from 36 districts identified the extent their students engaged in various evidence-based transition practices. Hierarchical cluster analysis identified five transition education themes. Multivariate analysis of variance revealed few statistically significant results and several meaningful effect sizes indicating specific transition education practices that impacted Indicator 14 outcomes. Districts with students actively involved in IEP meetings had higher Indicator 13 scores and 14 outcomes. Districts with high to moderate number of students with paid jobs and money management experience had higher Indicator 14 outcomes. Districts that taught students to set postsecondary goals had higher Indicator 14 outcomes. Other results are described and policy implications discussed.

In the interest of providing inclusive education for students with disabilities within higher education and vocational formation, it is imperative that we examine how disability is understood by the actors involved. This research examines the definition of disability as it moves from an inclusive policy in México into practice at the macro, meso, and micro levels of implementation. Two key policy documents, one from the United Nations and one from México, were examined for how they define disability. Interviews, in which participants were asked to define disability, were conducted with government workers in key entities, program directors, and students with disabilities. The definitions from both documents and the interviews were categorized by specific constructs used in disability research including the social model, the medical model, the adaptability approach, and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. A salient finding is that the construct of disability used within policies does not permeate to the actors involved in practice. To develop a clear understanding of this construct and in the interest of cohesion across implementation, a conversation between all actors would be beneficial.