Promoting the Readiness of Minors in Supplemental Security Income (PROMISE) [CFDA 84.418P]

Over the past two decades, New York State (NYS) has been actively and collaboratively engaged in systems change across three primary domains: 1) to develop a comprehensive employment system to reduce barriers to work and improve employment outcomes of individuals with disabilities; 2) to enhance the post-school adult outcomes of youth with disabilities, by collaboratively advancing evidence-based secondary transition practices at the regional, school district and individual student levels; and, 3) to support the return-to-work efforts of individuals with disabilities who receive Social Security Administration (SSA) disability benefits under the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). These domains have been supported by numerous federal and state initiatives including: the US Department of Education’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services (OSERS)-sponsored Transition Systems Change grant; the SSA-sponsored State Partnership Initiative (NYWORKS); two Youth Transition Demonstrations (YTD); the Benefits Offset National Demonstration (BOND); and, three cycles of funding for the National Work Incentives Support Center (WISC); the US Department of Labor (DOL)-sponsored Work Incentive Grant, Disability Program Navigator Initiative, and Disability Employment Initiative; three rounds of funding from the Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) for Medicaid Infrastructure Grants (MIG, NY Makes Work Pay); the NYS Education Department (NYSED) sponsored Model Transition Program (MTP); and three multi-year cycles of the statewide Transition Coordination Site network. Most recently, NYS has sponsored the Statewide Transition Services Professional Development Support Center (PDSC); the NYS Developmental Disability Planning Council (DDPC)-sponsored Transition Technical Assistance Support Program (T-TASP), NYS Work Incentives Support Center (NYS WISC), and NYS Partners in Policy Making (PIP); the NYS Office of Mental Health (OMH)-sponsored Career Development Initiative; and others. The growing statewide and gubernatorial emphasis on employment for New Yorkers with disabilities developed over the past two decades stemming from these initiatives, supported by service innovations and shared vision across state agencies and employment stakeholders, establishes a strong foundation for implementing and sustaining a research demonstration to “Promote the Readiness of Minors in Supplemental Security Income” (PROMISE). The NYS PROMISE will build upon NYS’ past successes and significantly support NYS in removing systems, policy and practice barriers for transition-age youth who receive SSI and their families. The NYS OMH through the Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene (RFMH), with their management partners the New York Employment Support System (NYESS) Statewide Coordinating Council (SCC) and Cornell University Employment and Disability Institute, along with the proposed research demonstration site community, join the NYS Governor’s Office in designing and implementing a series of statewide strategic service interventions to support the transition and employment preparation of youth ages 14-16 who receive SSI

Skills for sustainable growth: summary of responses to a consultation on the future direction of skills strategy

Skills for Sustainable Growth: a consultation on the future direction of skills strategy ran for twelve weeks, from 22 July to 14 October 2010. It outlined the Government’s principles for the skills system and acknowledged that further education and skills would not be untouched by action to reduce the deficit. It therefore asked for views on how best to deliver the various elements of the strategy in a context of less public money and as a joint-enterprise with individuals, communities and employers

What works re-engaging young people who are not in education, employment or training (NEET)? Summary of evidence from the activity agreement pilots and the entry to learning pilots (Research report DFE-RR065)

"Activity Agreements were piloted in eight “high NEET” areas of England, covering around 50 local authority areas, to test ways of re-engaging 16 and 17 year olds who were NEET. The pilot ran initially between April 2006 and March 2008, and was extended for a further three years, testing its effectiveness on different groups young people, with an increasing focus on those falling into one of the recognised vulnerable groups. The Activity Agreement is a personally negotiated contract between the young person and their Personal Adviser/Keyworker." - Page 4

Students with Disabilities in Dutch VET: An Exploratory Study

[Excerpt] The inclusion of persons with disabilities in general programmes of vocational training has been called for by the ILO in international labour standards over many years, including standards relating to Human Resources Development and disability-related standards. This call is taken up strongly in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which calls on States Parties to take appropriate steps to enable persons with disabilities to have effective access to general tertiary education, vocational and life-long learning without discrimination and on an equal basis with others, and to ensure that reasonable accommodation is provided to that effect. While many countries have expressed commitment to this vision of inclusive vocational training, progress has been limited, even in countries which have adopted policies to promote, and there has been limited analysis of the factors hindering the effective implementation of such policies. It was thus appropriate for the ILO to undertake this exploratory study, to seek to pinpoint elements of policy and practice that might need to be addressed, if these policies on inclusion are to make a difference to persons with disabilities seeking to develop their skills with a view to obtaining decent jobs. The issues identified in this study will hopefully contribute to the wider policy debate, particularly on the matter of instructor preparation for disability inclusion and on the impact of funding arrangements. It will also hopefully stimulate further research to establish whether the patterns identified here are general patterns to be found and tackled elsewhere